[pleurothallid-l] Judging of Orchid Species

Dan Newman hgardens at earthlink.net
Wed Nov 7 12:46:06 EST 2012


Orchid species, like all other natural organisms, developed their
characteristics in order to survive and reproduce, not to please humans.
We can appreciate them or not, but what is the point of evaluating them
against an arbitrary system of aesthetic standards?  In my opinion, it
would make just as much sense to have the orchids judge the people
(maybe they already do!).

Dan Newman

-----Original Message-----
From: pleurothallid-l-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
[mailto:pleurothallid-l-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of
pleurothallid-l-request at lists.ibiblio.org
Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 7:35 PM
To: pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: pleurothallid-l Digest, Vol 50, Issue 1

Send pleurothallid-l mailing list submissions to
	pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org

To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
	http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pleurothallid-l
or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
	pleurothallid-l-request at lists.ibiblio.org

You can reach the person managing the list at
	pleurothallid-l-owner at lists.ibiblio.org

When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
than "Re: Contents of pleurothallid-l digest..."


Today's Topics:

   1. FW: Student Judge looking for opinions (Lynn O'Shaughnessy)
   2. Re: FW: Student Judge looking for opinions (James Rassmann)


----------------------------------------------------------------------

Message: 1
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 21:43:36 -0500
From: "Lynn O'Shaughnessy" <freespirit at pleurothallids.com>
Subject: [pleurothallid-l] FW: Student Judge looking for opinions
To: <pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <011f01cdbc91$afde3e70$0f9abb50$@com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

I received this question through the Pleurothallid Alliance website.
Answers are most welcome.  I will be sure they are passed on.

 

Thanks!

Lynn O

 

Hi, I am working on a talk regarding the reluctance of the AOS to award
flower quality awards to very tiny flowers- despite many of them having
all
the characteristics considered highly desirable in other (larger)
flowers.
Below is the text from the question I have been putting up on orchid
forums.
I would love to hear from some of you- in fact- I may have already. 

 

I am particularly looking for a solution to this issue, is it equipment-
things that magnify, dissect, take good photos? Is it a reasonable data
base
so one can actually compare the candidate to another? Is it overcoming
the
prejudice in the AOS, it was based on the cut flower industry after all,
or
what? What does it take to make a tiny plant with equally tiny flowers,
a
thing of beauty? 

 

Any responses would be delightful, I am also looking for photos to use,
so
if you have a plant that really wants to strut its stuff, please pass
the
pic on, I'll credit you.

 

What follows is the board post:

 

 

My new research topic is on the issue of why miniatures are so often
relegated to getting a CHM or a CBR, even though many of them have
flowers
that are full flat and round.

 

Below are some of the things people have said to me, these are
growers/hobbyists/judges/vendors etc.

 

"We give it a CBR if we would mow it over, and a CHM is something we
would
keep in our greenhouse."

 

"Shouldn't the standards of beauty be just that? Standards- meaning that
a
restrepia should not be compared to the size of a cattleya."

 

"Centers with equipment, dissecting microscopes, special camera lenses,
etc,
tend to be more likely to award these plants (minis.)"

 

"We are losing an entire market for the AOS, people become
disenfranchised
when their plants are only considered for two types of award."

 

"The AOS was designed to be about the cut flower market. That means
big."

 

"I want the Wow factor to reach me from across the room, either as
several
large flowers, or many tiny flowers en masse. The former is flower
quality
material, the latter? CBR or CHM."

 

"Beauty not easily noted by the naked eye isn't beauty."

 

"At our sales table we see less of the devoted hobbyist, you know, the
kind
of person who wants the latest pleuro on the market- people who only
bought
one type."

 

"Miniatures represent an enormous market as people are downsizing, being
able to grow minis successfully in terrariums, under lights means that
they
are becoming even more popular."

 

"They are really just weeds."

 

As you can see, I have written down all sorts of commentary. Now I would
love to hear from all of you- as people who love these plants. I too,
have
gone over to the minis, having first fallen for restrepias, now I have
several terrariums of all sorts of pleuros.

 

Personally I believe that the AOS is failing to evolve with the times. I
am
also concerned about the lack of consistency between judging centers
across
the US. As a dog/poultry/horse showing person, I know that lack of
consistency is the quickest way to cause the public to lose interest,
and
that public, or fancy as we call it in the dog world, is who really
controls
the money. These are the people who join associations, come to orchid
shows,
enter plants in judgings, buy from vendors- you get the picture. 

 

I would love some responses to the things I have been told, also would
love
your own ideas, along with a possibly solution- a data base of enough
pictures of each type of mini- I know, crazy- but to really know if a
flower
is unique amongst its peers, one must have comparisons, and this does
seem
to be a real problem in the AOS.

 

Thank you in advance for your help. The talk is largely complete, but I
want
to hear your words first.

 

Happy Growing

Ellen Coss Kennedy and Coco the Wonder dog

 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/pleurothallid-l/attachments/20121106/
d8a8c450/attachment-0001.html 

------------------------------

Message: 2
Date: Tue, 6 Nov 2012 19:29:01 -0800
From: "James Rassmann" <rassmann541 at msn.com>
Subject: Re: [pleurothallid-l] FW: Student Judge looking for opinions
To: <pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org>
Message-ID: <COL120-DS1570E0AEEEAEE4118C0A01EA6A0 at phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"

In b/t the election news here's a response:

Miniatures generally aren't passed over, but smaller flowered species
(botanicals) are.

When I started judging 30+ yrs. ago judges wouldn't look at a "small",
out of the ordinary "botanical". In fact I recall one elderly judge
loudly saying (braying), "get that crap out of the judging room". Now
interesting botanicals appear in many Centers frequently.

I see occasional efforts by some judges to talk up a typical clone of
one small species or another. That's unfortunate as there really are
great clones out there of many species - including the small things.
Unfortunately judges who don't travel overseas rarely see the "good
stuff". Come to the Medellin, Colombia Orchid Show and get your socks
knocked off!

Judges of longer tenure tend to be fixated on the standards (Cats,
Phals, Paphs and so on). Younger judges tend to be more open to
interesting small things.

"Beauty not easily noted by the naked eye isn't beauty." This statement
must come from a very short sighted (no pun intended) judge. Have this
person get glasses or a loupe. Or perhaps a better Center photographer.

Judging Centers are not homogenous! Some are deeply entrenched in the
dark ages on many levels. As a member, and later Chair, of the JC for
many years I can say with some experience that Judging Centers march to
the beat of very different drummers - some of whom can't keep the rhythm
going to save their lives.

Jim Rassmann - feel free to pass on my name.


  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Lynn O'Shaughnessy<mailto:freespirit at pleurothallids.com> 
  To:
pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org<mailto:pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.o
rg> 
  Sent: Tuesday, November 06, 2012 6:43 PM
  Subject: [pleurothallid-l] FW: Student Judge looking for opinions


  I received this question through the Pleurothallid Alliance website.
Answers are most welcome.  I will be sure they are passed on.

   

  Thanks!

  Lynn O

   

  Hi, I am working on a talk regarding the reluctance of the AOS to
award flower quality awards to very tiny flowers- despite many of them
having all the characteristics considered highly desirable in other
(larger) flowers. Below is the text from the question I have been
putting up on orchid forums. I would love to hear from some of you- in
fact- I may have already. 

   

  I am particularly looking for a solution to this issue, is it
equipment- things that magnify, dissect, take good photos? Is it a
reasonable data base so one can actually compare the candidate to
another? Is it overcoming the prejudice in the AOS, it was based on the
cut flower industry after all, or what? What does it take to make a tiny
plant with equally tiny flowers, a thing of beauty? 

   

  Any responses would be delightful, I am also looking for photos to
use, so if you have a plant that really wants to strut its stuff, please
pass the pic on, I'll credit you.

   

  What follows is the board post:

   

   

  My new research topic is on the issue of why miniatures are so often
relegated to getting a CHM or a CBR, even though many of them have
flowers that are full flat and round.

   

  Below are some of the things people have said to me, these are
growers/hobbyists/judges/vendors etc.

   

  "We give it a CBR if we would mow it over, and a CHM is something we
would keep in our greenhouse."

   

  "Shouldn't the standards of beauty be just that? Standards- meaning
that a restrepia should not be compared to the size of a cattleya."

   

  "Centers with equipment, dissecting microscopes, special camera
lenses, etc, tend to be more likely to award these plants (minis.)"

   

  "We are losing an entire market for the AOS, people become
disenfranchised when their plants are only considered for two types of
award."

   

  "The AOS was designed to be about the cut flower market. That means
big."

   

  "I want the Wow factor to reach me from across the room, either as
several large flowers, or many tiny flowers en masse. The former is
flower quality material, the latter? CBR or CHM."

   

  "Beauty not easily noted by the naked eye isn't beauty."

   

  "At our sales table we see less of the devoted hobbyist, you know, the
kind of person who wants the latest pleuro on the market- people who
only bought one type."

   

  "Miniatures represent an enormous market as people are downsizing,
being able to grow minis successfully in terrariums, under lights means
that they are becoming even more popular."

   

  "They are really just weeds."

   

  As you can see, I have written down all sorts of commentary. Now I
would love to hear from all of you- as people who love these plants. I
too, have gone over to the minis, having first fallen for restrepias,
now I have several terrariums of all sorts of pleuros.

   

  Personally I believe that the AOS is failing to evolve with the times.
I am also concerned about the lack of consistency between judging
centers across the US. As a dog/poultry/horse showing person, I know
that lack of consistency is the quickest way to cause the public to lose
interest, and that public, or fancy as we call it in the dog world, is
who really controls the money. These are the people who join
associations, come to orchid shows, enter plants in judgings, buy from
vendors- you get the picture. 

   

  I would love some responses to the things I have been told, also would
love your own ideas, along with a possibly solution- a data base of
enough pictures of each type of mini- I know, crazy- but to really know
if a flower is unique amongst its peers, one must have comparisons, and
this does seem to be a real problem in the AOS.

   

  Thank you in advance for your help. The talk is largely complete, but
I want to hear your words first.

   

  Happy Growing

  Ellen Coss Kennedy and Coco the Wonder dog

   

  _______________________________________________
  pleurothallid-l mailing list
  pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org
  http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pleurothallid-l
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL:
http://lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/pleurothallid-l/attachments/20121106/
dd055efc/attachment.html 

------------------------------

_______________________________________________
pleurothallid-l mailing list
pleurothallid-l at lists.ibiblio.org
http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/pleurothallid-l


End of pleurothallid-l Digest, Vol 50, Issue 1
**********************************************



More information about the pleurothallid-l mailing list