I found the information I was looking for. in the US, 50 million roses sold in 1990; 18 million for 2010. Of those, 6 and a half million were Knock Out. Scary stuff.

That's interesting, although Knock Outs are not really known here (although I saw them appear in a few catalogues this year). Generally though there is a feeling that overall choices are quite limited to what a few big growers offer, DA, Kordes, Tantau, Interplant (here) and a few others. Some specialist add selection of more known OGRS and a few less known moderns, but at least the later tend to show up for a year and then disappear. It is a pity though, as I have a few of those less known moderns on a wish list, but getting them is pretty much chanceless, as when the batch gets sold out, it won't ever show up again.

Then again it is an effect of globalization, less variety in everything. I wonder though how much the general catalogue/online shop sales add to that decline, as it certainly does not help, when people buy plants for their pretty flower shot and then discover that a plant won't thrive in their garden. I looked through a few recent plant spams here, and most roses they offer are HTs that are really really crap performing here, they never will grow in the garden without excessive care. The flower shots are pretty, but I can imagine that after trying a few times, a person won't ever buy a rose.

It is a bit of a scam really, but then again if they sold only trusted sturdy plants they probably would not have earned much more, as an ordinary gardener just would buy the plants he/she needs and won't come back for more (now it still might when the plants fail). Consumer society mentality and marketing works like that at times, I remember once my friend, who is a clothing designer, was complaining that they had to switch to the cheaper materials, because the retailers were complaining that their things were too good quality - they want stuff that gets worn down in a season, so they can get new revenue from the new sales...

Forgive me, but I am getting a little tired of the phrase "If you only have three roses". I DO only have three roses, having had to move into an apartment and downsize. It doesn't mean that I do not have as much interest in the older roses as ever. I volunteer at the Sacramento Historic Rose Garden, where we work on many of the roses discussed on this forum, and I enjoy looking up those roses on HMF (where I am a premium member, feeling that it is a valuable reference resource), and comparing the way our roses look with the roses pictured from other areas and climates. I also enjoy reading about the many roses discussed on the forum that I could never hope to grow no matter the size of my "garden", due to living in the wrong climate for them. And, finally, my three roses mean as much to me as the many roses of a large garden mean to its owner. Hope I'm not starting a terrible tiff here, but I just got a little tired of it...

Laura

Laura, in quite a few ways, you have the best of all possible worlds! You can go play in the roses when you WANT to, then leave them and go home when you're ready. You don't have the increased water bill to support numerous plants; it isn't over powering to maintain your three; and you don't have fields of them outside your windows calling your name for attention! I honestly have sometimes felt this would be wonderful. It's like being an uncle or an aunt...you get to LEAVE the kids when you're tired and want to NOT have to deal with them! Yes, I know, it doesn't feel like it, but having the Cemetery to GO to, then be able to leave it behind and go home sounds pretty danged good sometimes! I know they're blessed to have your less diluted and often more energetic attention. I love that place. Thank you! Kim

Forgive me, but I am getting a little tired of the phrase "If you only have three roses".

I meant the more general lack of interest in more than three, rather than the actual number. A person can have the same Knock Out multiplied 100 times, or Iceberg, but for them it is just pink/white rose. That's what I see a lot in the garden here, if people plant roses, it is usually a few random ones, they do not have any particular interest in them and they do not really need to, as the roses are just a random part of the garden.

Of course, if the situation does not permit it, you can be interested in roses and not have huge number of them. But that is not really an ordinary gardener habit really, as it goes a step further than just having a garden. If the situation changed, you probably would like to have more, but them would not, they would stick to only a few in any case, preferably those they can pick up at local garden store and that's what they will ever want. :)

This has always been something I could NEVER understand !!!
Once blooming roses with no bush shots. One month in bloom and 11 months with ????? hello.......All my my pics uploaded to HMF. are bush shots......

now we just have to get the message across to rose vendors. I know catalogue space is always limited but how many of us get hard copy catalogues from every nursery - we generally buy either in person or online and it is here, surely, on the web, where sellers could begin to address the issue of wider, more inclusive images. I went through my (not very large) rose collection and realised that nearly all of them were ordered after seeing either the actual plant or an image of the rose situated in a garden. Leontine Gervaise, I have already mentioned but R.Moyesii and R.Nutkana plena where first seen by me as gorgeous photos in Mirian Oslers garden. The nutkana was growing up a rather tatty rustic pole and moyesii was looming over a swathe of perovskia in autumn (I bought that rose for the hips and shape). And so it goes. Hardly any of us are going to place our plants in a pot, isolated, as a naked specimen. We are going to fit them in the larger schemes of our gardens. These images are what tempt us to open our purses, especially after we have already bought the first half-dozen or so. I shall be e.mailing my favourite nurseries (Beales, Trevor Whites, Pococks) and suggesting just that. And, as for the decline in rose sales, this is exactly where sellers could leap in by showing the rose-buying public exactly how versatile, useful and downright gorgeous roses can be. We are often stuck in design limbo, growing them in the same old way, with the same old companions while other plants and fashions are riding the horticultural interest wave - look at tropicals for example. I will absolutely guarantee that these great ensetes, tetrapanax, caladiums are advertised by showing us lush, leafy views rather than a solitary blossom of the odd dahlia. This is because they are ensemble plants. Rose sellers MUST raise their game (Kim, those statistics are also reflected here in the UK and you are right, it is frightening). We are all super keen to have new ideas thrown at us and rose growing has moved on beyond some country house cliche. I grow mine hard and wild, in grasses and fruit trees. They are loosley pruned and allowed to behave badly. We (my grown up (ahem) children and uncomplaining sweetheart)like to mix and match, tucking a few lettuce here, a group of pinks there. Roses are grown in the vegetable beds - vegetables are grown in the flower borders. It looks pretty good in summer (I like to let people believe it was all planned. I have friends who also grow roses, but in very different ways. For sure, the cottage-garden look is always popular (although I think it looks a bit ridiculous in a 1930s semi) and the british public never tire of the stately home idea but really! Most of us do not have gaffs in the country and acres of space - we have tiny urban patches and the rose growing industry needs to recognise this and point up the terrific opportunities to use vertical space with obelisks, pillars, arches and the many fabulous climbers and ramblers available. The rose industry is in danger of stagnating and their attitude to treating roses as solitary divas has backfired. Maybe we should actually bombard these nurseries and sellers with pics of our own gardens to remind them of where these roses are going and how they can be used. Advertising never creates trends, no matter how much they would like to feel they are in the vanguard of public tastes. What they do is respond - to us, the public, by taking what is already being done and appropriating it, making extremes acceptable and so on. This is how popular culture works - not from the top but from the bottom up.

I think they could post more photos ONLINE, but I don't think they could afford to post more photos in their print catalog.

Even online, they probably have to pay a photographer and a webdesigner to work with the photos, etc. But it would be cheaper than a print publication being twice the size. I mean, Austin already relegates several of their varieties to a short half-a-paragraph blurb with no picture, haven't you seen this?

But, I don't really know what's the point of having all these pictures online on the dealer website, when most of us just search google, HMF or GW anyway to see more pictures. I suppose there's a decent number of people who DON'T know about those sources though and only go to the website...?
I would think actually that a fair a mount of people only get the print catalog and don't surf much online. But... again, I don't really think that rose venders can afford to print a twice-the-size catalog.

and honestly, what rose catalog are we talking about here? because most of the vendors that -we- buy from don't even have print catalogs. Jackson and Perkins going out of business... the only other one I can think of is Weeks and David Austin. Vintage, RV, ARE, etc, don't have print catalogs.

Campanula, thank you! I think I have just fallen in love! LOL! You are saying what I have ranted for a very long time! Tell your favorite sources what they need to be providing to move their wares. Show them how to do it then support them to keep them around. When shopping for a variety, I do check out the vendor's site in hopes they will have an illustrative example of what the rose CAN do. Too often it's simply either a glamour shot or "image coming soon". Yep, I know how difficult it is for many to photograph everything they catalog and how expensive it is to maintain a web site containing those images and information. I also realize many of our most relied upon sources are literally "mom and pop" establishments with insufficient hands to accomplish it all. Far too many are one person operations and I marvel at what ONE person can accomplish!

Fire up your keyboards and let them know you care they are here. Suggest the change in the style of photographs needed to move their plants. Offer them examples of what sold YOU on the roses and see where it leads. Education is what changes situations; from educating the public that these aren't the fussy, "diva" exhibition plants requiring chemical addiction and a support staff to keep them going to a simple change in how to illustrate what can be done with their products to the producers. More individuals need to be educated that roses are suitable for many, many more situations than they are currently being used in now. Part of it will come with changes to the roses themselves, from greater health, smaller plant size, increased bloom production, reduction of prickles, wider color range to examples of how easily they can be combined with other materials.

I love your description of your garden, campanula! YOU are a "collector" and we are doomed to never have the type of gardens you describe as desirable because our interests run too far and wide for a "meer mortal" to possess without huge bank accounts to support our habits and interests.

Elemire - Thank you. That was a kind and illuminating response. Sorry I did a little rant yesterday - I must have been feeling a little over-sensitive.

Roseseek - Thanks - you are absolutely right! When I'm honest with myself, I know that if I really had a big garden full of all those roses that I love, I would NOT be happy, because all the time and energy (especially the energy!) spent on the garden would have to be taken away from the other pursuits in my life - pursuits that I love as much as, if not more than, roses.

Everyone - apologies for going off-topic!

Laura

Let's look at the reasons for the decline in rose sales. I'm gonna put my money on the fact that roses are more of a luxury than a necessity. And Americans are feeling the pinch of the economy and responding by cutting out luxury items, particularly those that will mean ongoing costs to maintain.
I don't think revamped photographs are going to increase rose sales appreciably. Not when most can be viewed at HMF. Small nurseries that carry rare/hard-to-find roses aren't going to have the resources, $$$ or manpower to revamp their cataloges. And it's hard to get a whole bush shot that will promote sales, so I figure they will stick with the face shots.
I hope that we can keep the nurseries we have left while we wait out this economic slump.

Greybird, yes, you are right. "Luxuries" are being sacrificed. Two and three job incomes, diminishing time, space, energy, money all contribute to the decline in sales. "Hobby time" is for many, non existent. When there IS spare time, it is spent on things which aren't seen as laborious, expensive, etc., but which provide escape and leisure.

But, in addition to the above, those who promote their regimen of over feeding, spraying, over grooming to maintain the "runway rose" look have also helped put dampers on roses as landscape and leisure plants. From a walk-in nursery perspective, I have long seen that trend occurring and all it takes is walking someone up to 50 canned Iceberg in full flower and educating them that you can literally hedge clipper them here in SoCal to maintain that performance to help stop it. Give us many more maintenance free roses like that one is here, for other climates and those will, at least, continue to be grown.

True, no one can afford to recreate catalogs, but those who do cater to more severe climates CAN offer images of what the plant can look like in those climates and promote them for the glorious landscape specimen they CAN be there.

I for one do not think that the almighty crisis is also to blame here. It is convenient explanation, but I think the real reason is that gardening in general changed. For one, the younger generation mostly grew up on the concrete and lacks motivation to do anything in the garden that involves effort. I have friends of my age (between 30 and 40), who tiled their gardens recently, because they "did not want to water plants", who converted them into lawn, because "that's more space for the children to play", who cut down whole orchard even, because it "was annoying to gather apples from the grass".

Gardening in general requires effort and often hard labor. Exactly the things that contemporary society is not particularly fond off. There are money about, but they get rather spent on the fancy gadgets, shoes or whatever else luxuries, that do not require you to touch dirt (think of all the germs and health scares!). And that's basically the core of the problem.

I don't know if this is an off-the-wall idea but it just occurred to me: What if those of us who have gardens that look rather pretty at certain times of the year, or even parts of such a garden, submitted pictures to nurseries we use frequently for them to post on-line? This shouldn't cost the nurseries anything and they could feature groups of genuine private gardens that would show potential customers that they could have something similar, and that it's not just a pie in the sky dream. We could even write short descriptions about our gardens, what area we garden in, what roses do well for us, etc. Does anyone think this might be a good idea?

Ingrid

The nurseries ALWAYS want your pictures or their roses. I have given many photos to various nurseries, quite regularly. Mostly I do it when I see one of those "picture coming soon" notices on a rose I happen to grow and it reminds me a picture is needed. RVR and Eurodesert most recently.

Often times, a free rose will then just somehow show up on your doorstep as a thank you.

Love it, Ingrid! "I" would definitely find that interesting and very enjoyable on nursery sites. Thanks! Kim

Ingrid, the American Clematis Society's website does that very thing. If you look on their homepage, half way down on the right hand side there are thumb nails you can click on titled "Recent Photo Albums". If you click on one of the thumb nails, you can see the photos that were contributed by that person; in addition, this also opens a bar on the right listing additional photo albums submitted by various people.

It is nice to see people's photo albums this way, but I have no idea how much work it would involve for nurseries to add a feature like this to their website.

Kathy

Here is a link that might be useful: American Clematis Society

Yes, Ingrid, I think that is a terrific idea - and not just rose nurseries but garden centres too. I think there are a number of things which have contributed to the decline in rose buying. Certainly, people will cut down on spending in an economic downturn but it tends not to be the little treats: Costa coffee and Starbucks are all reporting increased sales because while people will put off buying a new car, they will not forgo the small expenditures which make their day a bit more enjoyable. At least here in the UK, gardening has never been more popular. Rose-growing does still suffer from unfortunate connotations of requiring intense management but 'grow your own' is absolutley HUGE here. Plug plants for vegetables sell out as soon as they go on the shelves. I don't imagine for one second david Austin is feeling the pinch, either. Nope, I think there is an overall lack of awareness rather than a basic idleness. One thing many nurseries overlook is their possession of knowledge. I know a couple of women who have set up as garden coaches because people DO want to get involved in their gardens more than ever. What these women are selling is a concept - we won't do it for you, we will do it with you. A few nurseries run courses too. The idea that they want your plants to fail so they are readily replaced is nasty and cynical - in fact, they always sell more to satisfied customers who will return over and over.
I, for one, feel less gloomy about the prospects of the rose trade faltering - I actually think the recession is an opportunity. When times are hard, people tend towards nostalgia and a sentimental reworking of earlier, simpler times. What could be more benign, timeless and untouched by economic vagaries than the idea of sitting under a rose bower? Gathering heps in hedgrows? The immense success of David Austin, derives in part, from his lush marketing campaign and willingness to promote roses which can be large, unruly shrubs which sit comfortably in many different garden settings, instead of stiff little specimens which look uncomfortable unless they are grown as singular specimens. Fashions change and growers must tap into these trends but we, as gardeners and consumers, can encourage them in their efforts by reminding them what products we want and how we are using them. Hmmm, better get practising with a camera.

...we are doomed to never have the type of gardens you describe as desirable...

I hope that isn't true. I, for one, will try for as long as I can draw breath to achieve my own personal 'desire'.

For me, 'maintenance free' is anathema. What ever in life that is genuinely worth having has ever been 'maintenance free'?

I know I'm old fashioned, and my sort of gardening may be old fashioned, passe, stuffy . . . and I am sure Kim's way is the future. I have no quarrel with him, and I hope he will allow me to pursue my own vision - which doesn't involve any roses with the future qualities he lauds - in my little piece of this Earth with gentleness and friendship.

Best wishes
Jon

Absolutely, Jon! I have my own pot ghetto collection. I also have a handful of clients who bless me by making their gardens mine. Some are more tailored, others are "wilder", fitting the tastes of their inhabitants. My "ghetto" is slowly but slowly getting planted as level ground is created, water made available to the spaces and protection from the squirrels, gophers and rabbits is created.

I enjoy visiting others' gardens, seeing through others' eyes, enjoying YOUR vision. If everyone gardened they way I do, grew the same plants, same rose varieites I grow, why would I want to see other gardens? Thankfully, we all have our own style, vision, tastes and preferences. Unless it requires dumping toxins into our environment or wasting copious water, I have no quarrel with anyone's style or taste. I learn from everyone and incorporate ideas I like into what I do for others and myself. "Old fashioned" isn't necessarily a bad thing! Kim

Jon, never say your sort of gardening is old-fashioned, stuffy or passe. What I see in your garden is a better, more beautiful version of the natural world at its best, with the loveliest plants that nature (with a little help from hybridizers!) can provide. It's a beautiful dream world that we can actually bring into reality around our homes, a shelter and buffer against the vagaries of the outside world. What is stuffy about that? To me it's more of a necessity. My garden may never be as exquisite as yours but the rationale behind it is much the same, as is the pleasure and peace I derive from it. We will need this kind of garden more and more in the future, to keep us connected to the variety and randomness of nature. Fortunately no one can tell us how to construct our gardens and that control that we have is also a very healthy thing in a world in which we often have so little control otherwise.

Ingrid

Ingrid, you OBVIOUSLY don't garden in a Home Owners Association! LOL! Kim

The idea that they want your plants to fail so they are readily replaced is nasty and cynical - in fact, they always sell more to satisfied customers who will return over and over.

It is, but to be honest, some corporations, including big gardening ones, ignore at times more than just mere prospects of the plant in the garden. If buying something from most evil dictator is acceptable for them to save a few cents on costs, ignoring the garden conditions is kind off a small thing compared.

I get a periodic spam of a couple of companies that sell all sorts of plants online - mostly because I buy bulbs from them at times, as those usually are very good quality. The extra plants they carry, roses included, however are something that never makes it in the garden. You know the typical, squish the bareroot in a box with a pretty print and hope it shows some greenery in spring. It fuels the impulse buys really, and even though most of the time you know that it probably will be a lost buy, at times they get you anyways, because it is either cheap, or you need some extra to make the min order, or the picture is too pretty.

It fuels also the stereotype of roses being fussy - well of course, Osiria, Imperatrice Farah, Blue Nile, that's not going to make it even in my garden probably (ok Osiria did not die, but a spindly 20 cm twig with 2 blooms is not exactly a lush rose bush) , but that was a rose selection in the last spam I checked. The photos sell them anyways, but I really do not think that the people selecting them for sale are that clueless not to know how those plants will perform in the gardens. They also keep carrying the same epic pictures ones over and over, so I think it is deliberate sale based on pretty faces than any garden merit.

Interestingly enough, a lot of specialist growers here are not really obsessed with the glamor shots at all, sometimes it even looks like someone just took a pic with a cell phone. :D

Kim, you're right, and it has always been my goal NEVER to buy a house where you pay a monthly extra fee so that someone can tell you what to do and what not to do. I have a friend who has a HOA and the neighbors on either side of her were allowed to plant Astroturf in their front yard! I kid you not, it's there for all to see. So very low maintenance and such a nice green color. I was speechless.

Ingrid

Rose sales have dropped off because the public has lost interest. The recent reduction in numbers and selections at independent outlets I frequent here is as stark as the figures posted.

It's very difficult to maintain interest working two and three jobs; wondering how to pay steadily increasing utility bills and taxes; watching your resources and energy erode and struggling to provide insurance and the next meal on the table. Unfortunately, what used to be the "middle class" is facing this increasingly every day as those not as fortunate have forever.

Kim, you're right, and it has always been my goal NEVER to buy a house where you pay a monthly extra fee so that someone can tell you what to do and what not to do. I have a friend who has a HOA and the neighbors on either side of her were allowed to plant Astroturf in their front yard! I kid you not, it's there for all to see. So very low maintenance and such a nice green color. I was speechless.

Ingrid

I like what Connie at Hartwood Roses has done on her web site: included links to the HMF page for each of her roses. There you can find all the pics you'll need - maybe even some full bush shots.

James

Awww, James, thanks for the compliment. I did that on my web site for exactly the reason we've all been discussing here. When I order roses, I inevitably have the vendor web site open in one window, and HMF open in another. I know I'm not the only one who does this, so I put a link to the HMF page right there on my web site to make research easier for my customers. (As soon as the roses get busy and sell more of themselves, they should have enough in their bank account to become an HMF sponsor ... a commercial sponsorship costs more than a personal sponsorships, and the roses have propane to pay for at the moment.

Eventually, I plan to redesign the pages on my web site to have multiple photos of each of the roses I have for sale. For now, I have one Portrait Shot to show the flower form and color, with the HMF link for back-up.

One of my goals, as I get the garden whipped into shape for a summer wedding here, is to see how many wide-angle photos I can get of as many of my roses as possible. The Ramblers on the Rambler Fence are fairly easy to capture (glad the photo of Leontine Gervais got you going, campanula dear ... it is one of my top-10 favorite roses, and I salivate over it every year. Anyone who wants to grow a rambler should consider this one (and Alberic Barbier and Aviateur Bleriot, for that matter ... evil grin.) Many of my other roses are either too small to be of use or too crowded to get anything but a shot that looks like a rose jungle. Every year I make a bit of progress toward my goal, and I expect that 2011 will follow this pattern.

Another reason I think for all the close-ups is a lot of people get excited when they see that first full sized bloom of that new-to-them rose that they can't help but take photos and put them on HMF and other places. The young rose plant as a whole isn't very photogenic. :-)

James

Yet another reason for close-ups over distance shots - the distance shots often include more than one type...

Awakening Climber... And Parade, and Dublin Bay...

{{gwi:329133}}

Just Awakening:

{{gwi:329135}}

Good example! And, a beautiful shot of Awakening. If it would look half that good here, I would really want it. Your garden is beautiful, BTW. Thank you! Kim

I'm very much in agreement with the See The Bush camp versus See The Bloom. I'm a gardener. I want plants with good form. All forms can be good if they're properly used, but without the knowledge of the form the usage is experimental and of course there may not be a good use for a particular form or forms in a given garden. Sufficient unto the garden is the frustration therein without compounding it with a lack of basic knowledge. On the other hand, so many of the hybrid teas grow more like they belong in rows on a florist's farm than in a garden. I'd really like to see photographic proof of hybrid tea exceptions to my last statement. I think the popularity of the OGRs, the Austin roses, and the increasingly ubiquitous Knockouts is due precisely to their fullness of form as much as their other qualities.
I think politics are to blame as well as other factors mentioned here. The politics of the show bench. When societies judge and reward blossoms only, what can we truly expect? I say societies, plural, because this is a pervasive judging practice.
I don't agree that the photos would only be valid for the zone where they were photographed. Height and health might vary but not the form which is genetically encoded.
How do we get garden setting photos to be the norm?

sandandsun wrote:
"How do we get garden setting photos to be the norm?"

Easy. Those who want full bush shots need to start posting full bush shots more frequently and in greater numbers than the flower only camp. You and I buy roses for the full organism. I maintain the vast majority who buy roses do so primarily for the "pretty face". I see it every day. I read it on line. I deal with it with clients. "I want this or that because it is SO PRETTY". Um hum, BUT, it is a DAWG and I don't want to have to spray it to keep it alive. Education. Until the majority who buy the things do so because they are GOOD, healthy and attractive PLANTS instead of a pretty flower, nothing is going to materially change. Post more full plant shots and you'll help accomplish that.

On the gallery (which unfortunately many of you never seem to visit) I've often posted shots of various parts of my garden, which of course include many bush shots. I don't necessarily name all the roses, but will be more than happy to supply names if anyone is interested. Other members have taken great bush shots of roses in public gardens, and these are also on the gallery. If we want that kind of information we need to use all the resources at hand, and the gallery is only a click away.

Ingrid

You need to check out Vintage Gardens. I don't know if their print catalog (which I treasure as one of my finest rose books) is still in print or not, but their website is up online. They show very accurate drawings of the form of all their roses. Now the sizes may vary according to your local climate, as they state clearly, but the shape of the plant should be consistent.

As I've read this thread, I have been thinking of my own gardening experiences with roses. I can remember the years when I was seduced by the rose porn in catalogs. Then the period where I went to every rose specialty nursery I could find asking all kinds of questions and getting answers that sounded right at the time, but really never gave true information about how a given rose would perform in my garden. As I learned more about roses in general, I discovered that most people working in nurseries selling roses didn't really know much about roses ... Kim is the exception.

The guy that owns the only nursery up here thinks he knows it all. HA ! None of us knows it all. And his advice actually will help produce weak plants. He's got the book learnin' but not the experience with growing lots of different kinds of roses in this climate.

When I couldn't get good information from the people who actually sold the roses, before there were so many sites on the net, I started working on HMF. I needed to know more and what better way to learn? (Of course, I had Kim in the background helping me to learn about what I was learning ... lol.)

Yes, the bush shots are valuable, but I NEED to know where the rose is grown, what climate and more. Otherwise, for me, it doesn't tell me enough. I might as well be looking at the pretty flower photos.

For example, I grow a rose hybridized by Kim, "Lynnie". My plant is taller and wider than he had ever seen it in Socal. Knowing that about one rose, tells me that even tho' I see the bush shot, it's not going to help me decide whether a plant will do well for me in my Nocal garden or how to site it.

I have discovered that I cannot have companion plants located in my rose beds. I am a klutz and step on them ! So for me, I demand ... and yes that's the correct word .. a good plant. I need more than a pretty bloom. The plant as a whole must hold it's own in the rose bed.

Ingrid... you can post photos of your garden on HMF on your garden page and that will help others see how you have utilized the plants in your garden.

It's the COMMENTS I find most valuable on HMF. I can look at the pretty faces every day, but when I open the rose page, I want to see lots of comments about how the plant perfoms in different climates.

I often find myself wishing more people would post the COMMENTS than several shots of the rose.

I started growing roses in "rose heaven" and am now growing roses in a rose-climate-challenged garden. Talk about hard labor ... digging rose holes in my garden takes two days. This means, that if I am going to add a rose to this garden, I want to know everything I can about the plant to justify that hard labor.

Smiles,
Lyn

>Vintage, RV, ARE, etc, don't have print catalogs.

ARE does have a catalog, and they apparently aren't charging for it any longer. With the catalog, you do still need to go online to see about the current year's availability. At times when I have the ARE catalog handy, it saves a good bit of time over having to look things up online, and the comparisons are immediate. But their pictures are the same (or perhaps just mainly the same, I forget) as the ones you can see online. Nowadays you can request a catalog from ARE's main website by scrolling down the page on the left to the "Request catalog" button.

The Vintage catalog does have some pictures, but far fewer than what you can see online. Still, the Vintage catalog is very, very valuable as a reading resource. They aren't giving it away, but it's well worth paying for, and there are a few sections at the back that might not be available online, or at least are not easily findable. It's a basic, basic resource, and much more convenient than trying to handle as many roses as I often am looking up by going online for each and every one of them.

Rogue Valley has a ton of full bush shots online, and Janet's personal comments add a good bit of information there too. If they ever get all that wealth of information into a complete catalog, I'd guess they'd have to charge a good bit for it.

Best wishes,
Mary

Here is a link that might be useful: Vintage Gardens Complete Catalogue of Antique and Extraordinary Roses

I saw a HILARIOUS example of what can happen when you only look at pictures of the blooms last night. I was looking at a gardening catalog (which shall remain nameless), and what to my wondering eyes did appear under the "hybrid teas" section of their rose offerings than close up shots of a few blooms of CECILE BRUNNER! Of course, those teeny tiny blooms do have HT form, and they looked great in the pictures. From the pictures you could not tell that they were only 1/2 - 1 inch in size - they looked as if they could have been 4-5 inches across!

I have always been firmly in the "see the bush" camp. I grow rose bushes in my garden along with many other types of plants - I do not farm roses to get the individual blooms. I realize that many people do, and that is fine for them. To me, that seems like trying to grow the largest pumpkin or whatever for the State Fair.

Jackie

Yeah, Cecile Brunner pics are the most misleading ever!

Re comments on HMF though: I also find them useful, but also as usually what happens in that sort of sites, is that true or self proclaimed gurus tend to steal the show too much, which often makes a simple gardener just go "oh nevermind that, let them have their expert talk".

It also is looking at things through different glasses really and while there is no dominant group of people who would be just gardeners, there won't be that much of comments, as you need numbers to get many comments on each rose.

Roseseek:
Thank you. I tried to hide my emotions on the subject. I must admit I admire your raw ones.
From your experience commercially, we shouldn't hold out much hope for change. My experience is that The Majority are innocently inexperienced and often isolated buyers hoping to transform their ordinary into a little piece of heaven with a rose. And in their trusting innocence, they assume that DAWGs wouldn't be on the market. And so blame themselves for failure. Their suffering far exceeds our own, I believe when they get those DAWGs. From strangers, I hear "I've tried, but I can't grow anything but Knock Outs." I know that they COULD if only.... We've lost many additional rose gardens that way as well as aspiring rosarians. And that knowledge is painful to me because as a gardener aware of the joy gardening brings me, I believe the world would be a finer place if those seeking that joy could more readily attain it. I'm certain that they are settling for the Knock Outs by the not so subtle frustration expressed in their statement, and frustration does not bring joy.
I hope more bush photographs will be contributed.

Campanula:
Thank you for stirring the soul.

Ingrid:
Thank you. Given your nudge, I clicked to the Galleries only to find that I couldn't easily find anything. Why aren't galleries associated with forums? Sure, I know that garden shots you mentioned could be related to many forums. Still.

Rosefolly:
Thank you. I've visited Vintage Gardens web site at least a few times. Those graphic form illustrations in combination with the Victorian garden visitors is undeniably helpful. Yet not what we'd hope.

CarolinaMary:
Thank you, I'm excited to see that ton of full bush shots at Rogue Valley!

Jackie:
Thank you. A great example of another down side to bloom only shots, but at least C. Brunner isn't a DAWG. And I agree the annual prospect of a blue ribbon versus a full season's pleasure is no contest.

You're welcome sandandsun. There really isn't any policing done though the stated mission of the AARS was to prevent substandard roses from being introduced here. Stop laughing! LOL!

Unfortunately, there is nothing common about common sense. We've become so far removed from the soil many, MANY people just haven't a clue. No clue at all. From the person (who shall remain genderless) who complained to me about a very well respected local nursery whose bare roots were all junk because they all died. NO ONE TOLD the person to remove them from the body bags before planting. Argh! To those who love the flowers on the package so they purchase the body bag for $2 at the market and plant Blaze in the middle of their ten inch wide strip in front of their garage wall. Look around, you will see it all. Very often, as long as it is "pretty and pink" and smells good, or at least the package says it does, it will sell. Mark it low enough and anything will sell, even the fully leafed out, bud on stem, beginning to wilt body bags on a dark shelf in a dime store. Amazing.

You're read on these forums recently the questions about which roses will grow with virtually no sun. Which large flowered ones will grow in ten inch pots on a window sill, etc. Scary stuff. "Common sense" for anyone who has actually dug holes, but fewer and fewer are actually digging holes and even fewer pay attention to anything put in them. I live outside Los Angeles where it is "endless summer". Everything must be ever green and ever flowering. Fewer and fewer understand that winter is when things shut down, including US, and wall to wall color isn't realistic to expect twelve months of the year, unless you change the garden every season.

sandandsun, I was talking about the gallery that is associated with the Antique Rose forum. If you look above the posts on the first page you'll see a small word "Gallery". Click on that and you're there. Quite a few people in the past haven't been aware there is an antique rose gallery since the word gallery is so unobtrusive. The regular rose forum also has a gallery. When you click on the rose forum you'll see another heading for Rose Gallery. They usually have modern roses but sometimes you'll see Austins (which of course are modern) or even some of the old roses.

Ingrid

From strangers, I hear "I've tried, but I can't grow anything but Knock Outs." I know that they COULD if only....

I would not be too sure about that. We got a bit of nice weather here and it is interesting to see how people prune their roses, or rather, how they, most of the time, create fails in progress. Like close by somebody has 3 old bushes of Charles Austin, really trouble free rose in this climate, yet I think this year the person finally murdered one of those by just wrong pruning. Another one is going to kill climbing Morsdag, as he/she cut off all the normal canes and left mostly dead wood stumps. Then again, someone else has a row of some HTs and a mass planting of iceberg, prunes them back almost to the ground each year, fertilizes, sprays and has lovely rose garden, although they may be not the most easy roses to grow.

Thing is, it is difficult to put rose growing in a nutshell, as you need to do quite some judgment calls, especially when pruning and bad pruning can kill a plant very easily. There are not that a lot of roses who would grow in any non amended soil, won't mind experimental fertilizing and random pruning (including leftover stumps from cutting too high above the bud eye and pruning too low or not pruning at all), survive even in non full sun, and on top of that, who would bloom continuously, have healthy foliage, be fragrant and preferably even last in a vase.

Then again, there is plenty of information now, with the internet and all, but if the rose is only another flower in the garden, it either survives all that, either people move further to the other plant. Rose people do not know that a lot about every "companion" plant, for the non rose people roses are actually "companion" plants, nothing more than that.

Elemire.......

I almost agree with you, but now that I have now grown roses is two very, very different climates I am not so certain that cultural care is the primary cause of people having problems growing roses. In southern California, inland from the coast by 20 miles, I could make pruning mistakes and the roses hardly missed a beat. However, in My Nocal garden, it's a different story. If I make a pruning error to a rose in this garden, it takes a couple of seasons before the plant outgrows my mistake. I have to prune differently in this climate for roses to really look good and to be healthy.

I still can't figure out the timing for when to prune because every spring has been different. I have to watch the roses to let me know when to start, and living in the mountains, the weather can change drastically back to winter weather within a day and the new growth spurt that follows pruning is lost.

I have also watched the roses out in front of my home deer-pruned annually until I finally realized I am not going to transplant them and went ahead and caged them to protect them from the deer. (I hate caged plants !) Those roses came back just fine every year. The trick is that those roses like this climate and like my normal care practices and happened to respond very well to "hard" pruning. The deer certainly did not prune those roses correctly.

I did leave one rose "uncaged" hoping the deer would finally kill it off. Not a chance. I am going to have to do the hard labor and shovel prune that ugly-to-me rose. Sure the deer have had at it again this year, but it doesn't know it isn't supposed to survive harsh deer pruning. Dang rose is going to come back just fine.

In my experience, if a rose likes your climate, likes where you site it and how you care for it, you might as well call it a weed because they are hard to kill. It's finding the right rose for your situation that is the first and most important step.

Yes, there is a lot of information on the internet, but as Kim has pointed out in this thread most people don't even know how to purchase a healthy plant, much less what to do with it when they bring it home.

Smiles,
Lyn

Lyn, I agree, climate makes a huge difference, as my previous garden was in z4/5, while this one is z8 and a breeze compared (I can finally have climbing roses, yipee!). Yet again, you and me know something about pruning and care for the roses, so even in forgiving climate we do not normally do drastic mistakes. Then again after planting astilbes in a sun for about 10 years, last year I figured they are actually shade plants... Doh, but it kind of happens, if it is not the plant you generally are interested in a lot.

Some roses are harder to kill than others, but overall they require more advanced care than more easy to grow ornamental bushes, the ones you sort of plant and forget, no fertilizing, no pruning apart of whacking it to the ground once in odd 3 years, that sort of stuff. Knock outs apparently can do that, same for the Fairy roses popular here, rugosas in my cold garden could be pretty much a weed, but when it comes to big pretty blooms, things get more complicated. No matter how good some roses are for the given climate, whacking roses that bloom on old wood to the ground ain't going to work, same for teas or chinas, that sort of stuff.

Actually, the reason that I have around 200 roses is that some of them are so darn easy to grow and thrive on neglect where I live now--they are as easy as any other bush in the yard.

I didn't grow them when I lived in Florida because my yard was pure sand with pine straw and palmetto fronds on top. If you dug a hole you'd get seashells. Very dry, very alkaline, blackspot heaven. Organic material added to the soil burned up too quickly, and the nurseries only carried "popular" roses--i.e. mostly HTs, no OGRs. When I moved to Washington State and saw neglected roses thriving, I gave them another chance. AMAZING difference. Soil prep? Not much--maybe a little compost dug in, and then they are top-dressed with more. Same as my other bushes. The clay soil really holds water, so if the soil's wet, they might not even get watered in when planting other than enough to remove air pockets. If it's raining, they might not even get that. A couple hands full of alfalfa meal, maybe a little fertilizer in the spring if I get to it, a little nipping here and there if I get inspired. Maybe a lime-sulphur spray in late winter. Maybe not-no other spray. NO additional water once they're starting to get established, and not much before that. And most of them are thriving. If they need more care than that, they get yanked out. Granted most of them are once bloomers. The gallicas are superb, mosses and damasks are wonderful, as are hybrid musks and rugosas. And my yard is probably not to many peoples' taste--I don't worry about aphids (the syrphid flies and lady bugs will take care of them) or the occasional leaf that isn't perfect. And as elemire says, you have to know that you can't whack a gallica to the ground in the spring. Would they look better if they got more care? Probably. But I think they look pretty darn good, and I don't do much of anything to them.

If you choose the right rose and are fortunate enough to have the right conditions, they're just as easy as any other garden shrub. If they weren't, I wouldn't grow them.

To summarize, the "basics" are selecting the right rose for the right climate. Climatic suitability. Learn from the rose, know what the thing will tolerate. NO book can teach you that. No person can, either. Observation. Look at the danged things. Learn to read them. Learn their language. They'll tell you if they're not happy and often, just what the dickens is going on with them. Yes, reading (IF you are one of the intelligent ones who WILL read, unfortunately as uncommon as "common sense") will direct you toward what is suitable for where you are and what type of gardener you are or will become, as will simply walking around where you are and talking to people who seem successful at doing what you hope to do. If you read a book or someone's post, find out where they are. British rose books are glorious to read, but they have NO relevance in Southern California...PERIOD. Peter Beales and Graham Thomas proclaiming New Dawn and Ballerina to be perfect roses, the most successful and wonderful plants of their types are pure misinformation in warm, long season climates. Austin's original writings about his Graham Thomas being a "mannerly, five foot shrub" makes sense in a British season, but NOT in California where it can easily be a twelve to fifteen foot climber. Unless you take the initiative to find out where the information is relevant, it is worthless. For me to tell Elmire that tender Tea roses are the best roses around is cruel and ignorant at best because they are very likely not to be where she is. For her to tell ME to grow Rugosas is the worst advice anyone could provide as they are not happy here, period.

There is tremendous information on line and, if taken with the knowledge of where it originated, can be invaluable. Pruning advice, particularly. In my climate, most roses do best with little pruning other than to remove what is no longer healthy or needed. Lyn must snow prune her roses or the weight of the snow will do it for her. Others must whack them to fit the winter protection they require. I know I irritate those who write me for advice about how to winter protect as the only response I can give based upon my experience is to continue dead heading and make sure they remain watered sufficiently if it doesn't rain!

The right rose for the climate, positioned in the right spot for the conditions, planted acceptably and permitted to do as it needs to with suitably benign neglect will often become a weed. "Weed" is the highest praise I can think of for any plant as they succeed in spite of us. What could be better?

Learn from the rose, know what the thing will tolerate. NO book can teach you that.

But that's a planners nightmare really. :D

I think there generally are two kinds of approaches. Some people first try it, if it does not work, ask online, google it, beat the head against the wall, then maybe read a manual or a book - or just figure the practical solution with a bit of experience and fantasy. Then there are people who first would read a book, maybe a couple of books, buy things very carefully, follow the given advice with a precision (like measuring fertilizer for each plant to be exactly x grams on x amount of water). Those two approaches generally do not overlap, except in very rare cases, as first do not have patience to read anything longer than 1 page and the second do not feel comfortable in experimenting without theoretical background (and get confused when the plant does not grow exact amount of branches as in the pruning guide). :)

I am getting in on this post late, but I agree. I grow roses on a hill that makes up my back yard. I need a good, bush form in my roses because the base of the plant may be at eye-level or higher! Yikes! I always look for full bush form and because I know how important they are I frequently post full-bush shots to this forum and HMF.

For those who don't like how their camera images look, I recommend shooting your pictures in overcast conditions (use shady conditions if clouds don't come your way). This keeps the bloom from being washed out or too contrast-y. Shooting in full sun just never produces the best pictures...no matter how much you spend on your camera (IMHO).

For Example: I shot pictures of Country Dancer in full sun and was floored that there was NO color difference in the bloom. I waited for a cloudy day and tried again. See what you would have missed without a few clouds on a sunny day!!

{{gwi:220949}}

Also, this flower looked bleached white in full sun...but so delicate in overcast conditions
{{gwi:232925}}

Hope this gives a touch of perspective...and a bucket of courage!! Post those pics!! ;o)

Ronda

I too am a seeker of full bush rose photos whenever possible. I think one person who really does a good job with showing both the close-up as well as the bush is jerijen.

She goes to the trouble of creating a double 'exposure' and putting both photos together.

Yes it takes extra time both to photograph and then to do the computer artwork necessary. But it is such a joy to look at and soooo useful to rose lovers.

Here is a link that might be useful: {{gwi:329129}}