Jaqueline, it is interesting his explanation for the fact that only the tips of the leaves are burnt. I would like to look for information on this fact. Is it possible that the rose bush stops sending sap to some parts to preserve others from death? I mean if that botanically is possible? I will imagine the explanation of the process. Maybe it's a crazy idea but I'll expose it: It occurs to me to think now what happens in autumn. As temperatures drop, the rosary is ready for winter. Before dropping the leaves the rose bush "recovers" the nutrients from the leaves and accumulates them in the roots. Then, since it is not going to specify the leaves for photosynthesis, the amount of abscisic acid and ethylene increases, and this increase causes that in the zone of abscission (leaf-to-stem bonding) the leaf detachment finally occurs . In this case it is not a matter of recovering the nutrients from the leaves nor does the rosal need to be detached from them because it will continue to specify them for photosynthesis and transpiration. Ethylene and abscisic acid do not increase and so leaf detachment does not occur (leaf senescence). It only allows the tips of the leaves to die, leaving the part that is possible to them alive. This part of the saved leaf of death will continue to be useful for photosynthesis. Hahahaha Sorry It was just an idea of what could happen. Should be an amateur with botanical knowledge who could tell us if this is really the process or we are in error.

The first photo is an inspiration picture, it appears. The actual bathroom is probably the room where the 2 samples are sitting. The small white tiles on the right looks like what the OP is working with at this time. I like the one on the right. It is similar to what I did my shower in. I like @pat's shower picture above. I did a dark floor and shower pan with my porcelain marble, where @pat did porcelain marble throughout. both work, just depends on your vision for the room. My room would have higher contrast. The sample on the left could be beautiful too. I would think that you would need to balance the heaviness of the boldness somehow, but it surely could be done, and well executed. Pat's image is very light and airy. My bathroom has walnut vanity, and casework and doors, along with the light paint and marble look alike tile. I have a dark heavily varagate floor to go with the subtle shower tile. I do have real marble counter top. My walls are similar to Pat's, might be a little lighter. tile with walnut: Overall look of the tile in the shower: This is my shower pan and the tile for the floor that is darker and a different fake stone look. I like it a lot, but the tile saleswoman was taken back with my mock-up choices. LOL. I could have gone dark gray with the shower pan but went light to hide water mark possibility. Picture of the floor tile. kind of a blue with greens and browns: here is the tile before the doors arrived. I was using a shower curtain: My bathroom is much more contrasting than Pat's, yet we both used the subtle marble porcelain tiles. Though you can't see the tile in this pic, it is similar enough to the countertop that I think this pic represents a good description of the components and how I tried to balance the heavy contrast.

I vote for #2, though I fully admit that color is my Kryptonite. I like #2 best because it feels the most neutral, the most basic ... and I see floors as a background item, not something I want to stand out. I find #1 rather flat in tone. Might not be the best descriptor, but the color just seems "wrong" to me. I don't like #3 because the boards are somewhat mis-matched in color. Perhaps it wouldn't matter so much once the whole room is set up with furniture ... but I prefer the more "even" look of #2. I actually like the slightly darker #4 (slightly darker than #2, which I've already identified as my favorite) ... but I don't like that the darker edges almost "outline" the boards. Again, I prefer a more "even" look. None if that's a satin finish on the floors. What's the better, low-to-no maintenance finish of choice?

I'm not sure if it's possible to divorce the notion of shade tolerance from the issue of rainfall/humidity/droughtiness. All other things being equal (which isn't likely in the real world), I would expect a plant in a dry environment with little rainfall (or long stretches of no rain) to appreciate shade more than a plant that gets more moisture from the air and from regular rains. There can also be a question of the quantity, color and quality of light received by plants. We talk most about UV radiation because it can cause damage to human eyes and skin, but I don't know if too much ultra-violet light is as harmful to plants as, say, too much exposure to light elsewhere on the spectrum, but the closer one is to the equator, the more UV light there is. Another factor is that trees and other things that give shade can protect plants from wind and possibly mitigate wide temperature fluctuations. As for distinguishing the Teas from the Noisettes, their ancestry is often so intermingled, that the decision to class a rose one way or another is often arbitrary. In my dappled shade conditions, I'd say all of my roses are shade-tolerant, but I suspect that what you really want to know is which roses will bloom best with some shade? My conditions are not yours, but FWIW, my best bloomers so far are "Smith's Parish", "Emmie Gray", "Natchitoches Noisette" and 'Mutabilis'. Virginia