View Full Version : phrag. caudatum var sanderae
Adam April 24th, 2007, 09:49 PM Here's my phrag caudatum var. sanderae ('Bountiful' AM/AOS x 'Green Goddess') for your judging pleasure.
petal length: 18 inches
stem length: 18 inches
top petal length: 5 1/2 inches
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p261/Adam498/Phragcaudatum008.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p261/Adam498/Phragcaudatum010.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p261/Adam498/Phragcaudatum009.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p261/Adam498/Phragcaudatum007.jpg
http://i130.photobucket.com/albums/p261/Adam498/Phragcaudatum005.jpg
Well, whatdya think? I can't take much credit for the flower formation, I bought it in bud. But I still love it like my own. This is a first bloom seedling. Hopefully the stem will be taller next time... The petals are hanging below the rim of the pot and I fear they will quit growing once they've hit bottom. The flower may still be stretching a bit, it's only been open for 3 or 4 days. Thanks, and be critical, please!!
Nynaeve April 24th, 2007, 10:02 PM Everyone knows I don't do phrags, but I do love these long petaled varieties. I believe the awarded ones are usually much bigger specimen plants and they usually have 2 or more spikes blooming at the same time. The synespal in your photo looks a little twisted. Also one thing I learned from my orchid society is when staking plants the stake should never be taller than the bloom for presentation...maybe you already knew this, but just fyi in case you didn't. :D I personally don't always follow that rule at home, I just stick whatever stake is available and handy.
Color looks good, I don't see any breaks.
RickL April 24th, 2007, 10:19 PM I don't think its fair to judge a 1st time bloomer.
You have a very nice flower, but its got a ways to go to be an awardable plant.
Its a good idea to research past awards on WildCatt or some of the other awards database software systems out there. It really puts things into perspective when you see what people have been growing and showing for the last 50 or more years.
Paphraguy April 24th, 2007, 10:25 PM It is still a young plant, so the flowering should improve as it ages. To me, the pouch looks a little too narrow or maybe it is the angle the photo was taken. Other than that, it looks good to me.
smartie2000 April 25th, 2007, 01:05 AM I agree.
It's a looker!
I would also expect an award one to have a higher bloom count, but your plant is still young
goldenrose April 25th, 2007, 01:51 AM I'll take it for a 1st bloom!
Paphi April 25th, 2007, 08:25 AM very beautyfull:heart: i like big petols
Tom Velardi April 25th, 2007, 08:27 AM Yes, the broken record...LOOK AT THOSE PETALS!
budsbud April 25th, 2007, 11:20 AM I love it! It's beautiful!
paphjoint April 25th, 2007, 01:53 PM Very nice Adam!!
The vm is almost there
hjohn April 25th, 2007, 02:10 PM As some have mentioned its young but still is a nice looking flower.:cool:
John
Paphy57 April 25th, 2007, 04:46 PM HOLY TOLEDO!
Cute & Beautiful! I love it! :thumbsup:
Adam April 25th, 2007, 06:20 PM Thanks for the replies. I know, it's a first bloomer... I didn't expect an award, I just wanted to see how picky y'all were when judging and what some of the requirements are for phrags, especially caudatums. The petals are longer today, they grew another inch, so now they're longer than the stem. I'll post another pic when the other bud opens fully for your viewing pleasure. It started opening today!
Slipperguy April 25th, 2007, 07:46 PM Nice long petals...looks good to me.
Paphy57 April 25th, 2007, 08:29 PM I wish they had a besseae or a kovachii with long petals! I would buy them!
cbarry May 3rd, 2007, 01:02 PM I wish they had a besseae or a kovachii with long petals! I would buy them!
Orchids Limited has a kovachii hybrid with (hopefully) long petals -
Phrag. wallisii 'Rapunzel' x kovachii 'Goliath'
http://www.orchidweb.com/detail.aspx?ID=1234
Carolyn
scooby5757 May 3rd, 2007, 03:55 PM :offtopic:Jason, have you bloomed any of your hybrids yet?
Paphy57 May 3rd, 2007, 09:05 PM I might buy one......
If they weren't 225.00 dollars!
|
|