Nazanine, "Admmad, the major problem here is that you are not talking about pure yellow roses" You are making the assumption that when Akheadbanger used the term 'yellow' that 'pure yellow' was meant. That is inappropriate. One cannot know that any yellow flower is pure yellow unless one examines the flower for all its pigments. One would have to show that there were no other pigments present in any concentration in such a flower with any absorption at any other wavelengths other than those that are labelled 'yellow'. I consider that the human eye is inadequate to label a flower colour as being pure. The examples you are giving are all either red / pink or red /pink with yellow, or yellow with red pink. In these of course there are anthocyanins, either masked or not. A masked pigment is not visible, by definition. Therefore, when an anthocyanin is masked because it is at very low concentration by a carotenoid at high concentration it is not visible as pink or any other shade. You are making the assumption that a rose that can make anthocyanins will show at least some red colouration all the time. I am not making that assumption. It clearly is not reasonable to assume that the human eye can identify all concentrations of one pigment included with another or that plants that obviously have different concentrations of red pigment cannot have low enough concentrations that are not visible to the human eye. In my personal experience, with other plant species, cultivars that show varying amounts of red over yellow pigments are clearly able to produce flowers that show no visible red at some times. Please re-read the quote regarding the colour of 'Masquerade' - the statement made is 'completely yellow'. The changing flower colour (Akheadbanger's) was yellow (of some sort that is unknown in exact shade and cannot be assumed to be 'pure yellow') at some point it then had a red pigment develop on its petal edges. That is the flower had both red and yellow in it just as the 'Masquerade' type flower was 'completely yellow' and then had both red and yellow in it. I am talking about PURE yellow, plain yellow with no other colours than yellow You are but it is unreasonable to make as narrow an assumption for Akheadbanger. We do not know that Akheadbanger's classification of flower colours is narrow or broad, that is, if an individual classifies flower colours as being white or yellow or orange or red or purple where would the intermediate mixtures be classified by that individual? You are also making the assumption that a yellow flowered rose that has the ability to develop red colouration will always show red colouration under all circumstances and at all times. That such flowers show different degrees of red colouration from being described as 'completely yellow' to being 'cherry-red' clearly indicates that the amount of red varies widely - but you appear to disallow the possibility that under some conditions there is no visible red in some such flowers (as in 'completely yellow'). It would appear that by your definition of 'yellow' a plant that produced a continuous range of red pigment concentrations had to always produce enough red pigment so that it would be visible to the human eye and therefore the flower colour would never be adequately described as 'yellow'. As an example, let's say if the red pigment concentration had to be 3% (of the yellow pigment concentration) to be visible in a yellow flower by your definition of yellow-flowered roses such a plant could not produce less than 3% (or the amount that makes the pigment visible to the human eye) red pigment under any circumstances. I do not make such an assumption. I assume that there may be cultivars that are capable of producing concentrations of red pigment below the human threshold of recognition as red pigment (say 0.01% as an example) which can then under other circumstances increase the production of the red pigment to visible concentrations The yellows contained no anthocyanins. Your definitition of the term yellow is unreasonably narrow and limited. Examine the table in the article. Yellow-blends contain anthocyanins. You are making the assumption that all yellows that contain anthocyanins show the anthocyanins. You are not considering the possibility that a yellow with less anthocyanin present than a yellow-blend such that it would not show any red in some circumstances would under the appropriate circumstances show red pigment (just as Masquerade does) and have been classified as a 'yellow-blend'. You are not considering the possibility that the methods used in that particular article could not detect very low levels of anthocyanins in all cultivars. You are not considering the possibility that the yellow cultivars chosen to be examined did not include a yellow that would then shade to red (perhaps because such a cultivar would have been automatically placed in the yellow-blend category) or just by chance. Another point, there are protocols for extracting anthocyanins Of course there are very sophisticated ones, but that does not mean that simple procedures cannot also provide acceptable results. You can not just put a tissue in warm water and expect the anthocyanins to be expelled from cells because . Actually you can, I have and they do. This website describes extracting anthocyanins from red cabbage with boiling water http://chemistry.about.com/library/weekly/aa012803a.htm One does not need to use boiling water, water from a hot water faucet does work with flower petals. Boiling water destroys the tissue structure, depending on the temperature of the water used the petal structure can survive the treatment and still extract some of the anthocyanin pigment. If is was this simple there would'nt be so many red-coloured flowers in the tropics. My apologies, but I did not mean to imply that warm water was rainwater warm. The temperature of the water needs to be high enough that it breaks down some of the epidermal cellular structure (but if you want to save the petal structure not so hot that the petal turns to mush). The presence of kaempferol and quercetin does not necessarily mean that red pigments are present You are misinterpreting my statements related to the presence of kaempferol and quercetin. You made the statement "So since the plant is not supposed to have reds, and under no circumstance are anthocyanins produced in tissue where the pathway is non existant, for me at least, anthocyanins are not involved." Since the presence of kaempferol and quercetin in all rose colour classes indicates that the pathway is indeed present in all rose colour classes then your statement regarding the non-existence of the pathway is not relevant. Akheadbanger, under your narrow definition of the term yellow and your wide definition of the term red, both as used by Akheadbanger you consider that the red colouration is likely to be a carotenoid pigment. From the analogy of rose cultivars such as Masquerade and Charleston (which has been shown to have carotenoids when yellow and anthocyanins when red Phytochemistry 12:1783-1786, 1973) I consider that Akheadbanger's flower may have much lower concentrations of anthocyanins than those two examples such that in certain conditions the flower can be described as yellow because of its carotenoids and under other conditions it can show red tinges because of increased anthocyanins. Since it is known that specific roses can have high carotenoid and low anthocyanin pigments sometimes and then produce more anthocyanins at other times I consider that sort of explanation more probable.

Sid, here are some good instructions on posting from Photobucket: sluice from the Trees forum explains how to upload from Photobucket more detailed instructions from the Hosta forum how to change the width of a photo; how to give a link a name === To post a photo, you can also (I think) simply add this before the photo's url: (img src=" and this after the photo's url: " /) EXCEPT THAT: instead of the parentheses I used at the beginning and end, use the "less than" symbol (at the beginning) and the "greater than" symbol (at the end). You can find those two symbols above the comma and period. [If I use those symbols in the examples, the site thinks I'm trying to post a photo and nothing appears except a broken-image symbol, so I used the parentheses instead.] It is necessary to skip the spaces as I did in the examples. === Links are more complicated than posting photos. There is a practice area (not very well advertised); it's called the Test Forum: http://forums.gardenweb.com/forums/test/ It's listed in the first column of the forum-list page as simply "Test." It can also be accessed via the "Forum Help Page" which is linked in red immediately below the end of the first column. I'm a librarian, so I'm addicted to saving useful links. And they sent me to a lot of training to know where to find things. And then they put me on a committee....

Could I trouble those of you with these lovely Revitalize pulls for pictures from a little further back, in context with surrounding cabinets? One of my issues is sizing; most of my drawers are 30 - 36" wide so I have to consider paying up for long ones or putting pairs on each drawer. I was sure I wanted Candler but the linked picture of them installed, and the feel in my hand, has caused me to re-evaluate. They seem "thick" looking, and when I used them at the model they were also less comfortable than Revitalize. When I opened drawers with Revitalize, my hand naturally fell so that my thumb was on the angled part - do you use them that way IRL? Here is a link that might be useful: not a fan of this look!

Lorraine's answer above is exactly right. A couple things I'd add: a 60" freestanding tub will likely be larger than a tub that will fit into a 60" frame with deck, so you should consider how important the overall length of your tub space is to you. You also need to consider that an undermount or framed tub will require carpentry and finishes that a freestanding tub would not and add those to your budget. I wouldn't add glass to an acrylic freestanding tub even if your fixture supply store tells you it's alright, but I'm sure there are solid freestanding tubs that could support the weight of the glass. I'm confused, though, about the glass at just one of the short ends. Is this for aesthetics? I don't think it would help at all if you're trying to do a shower/tub setup.