What paphiopedilum subgenuses do you like and dislike?

[The Mutant]

Love:
Sigmatopetalum (almost all of them)

Love:
gardineri
philippinense var. roebelenii
lowii
rothschildianum
wilhelminiae

The rest of the Polyantha subgenus spans from "okay" to "meh".

Love:
gratrixianum
helenae
henryanum
Like:
fairrieanum (might change to love when it blooms)
villosum

The rest of the Paphiopedilum subgenus are pretty much "meh".

Meh:
Cochlopetalum

No thanks:
Parvisepalum

Over my dead body:
Brachypetalum (ugh, they make me think of dead bodies for some reason...)

 

[eggshells]

Over my dead body:
Brachypetalum (ugh, they make me think of dead bodies for some reason...)

What!? Blasphemy! :rollhappy:

j/k Its quite interesting what everybody likes and dislikes.

 

[mormodes]

I don't care what it is as long as it has good form, displays well and has good color.

 

[Eric Muehlbauer]

Really, every group has its positives and negatives, and its all a matter of taste. When I buy paphs, I tend to go for species. It's not that I'm a species snob, I just feel that since my finances are limited, species take priority. But I do love hybrids, and I even love the complex "toads". Now it may be true that multifloral breeding has improved species characteristics, but I am just not so much of an expert that I can appreciate them. The only advantage I have seen is that some of them bloom more easily. Since I am, well, not "blind" but "near sighted" to their improvements, I still find them repetitive. In some cases, like sanderianum, I have yet to see a hybrid to beat the species. I love barbata, because not only are all the species great, but that section seems to have the greatest variety. True, within any category there is repetition...alba's, vini's, etc vary mainly with regard to size, petal stance, and dorsal width (and saturation, for vini's and coloratums), but the fact that there is such a range of categories is enough for me. As for brachy's...I haven't found the hybrids to be any easier than the species, in any way. Just as many hybrids (proportionally) have died in my care as species...and, since they all look so much alike, I'll stick to the species.

 

[Rick]

Your argument is a purely philosophical one though.

That's totally true. Personal likes and dislikes have nothing to do with correct or incorrect

It's all perception. From an admitted species snob, I don't see endless variation and novelty in (simple/primary) hybrids. Just combinations and half ways between species. Then there are the hybrids which look just like extra large versions of species. Then there are the very complex that really are a divorce from any species, and I just see something artificial. But that's just me and just what I "see".

This is a thread that's probably better for Facebook

 

[Paph_LdyMacBeth]

I thought this thread would have people bickering but its actually pretty cool

Personally, I dislike the look of blooms in the section paphiopedilum. To me they all look very angular and aggressive and I prefer softer and prettier Paphs. Don't get me wrong I can admire and appreciate a large and straight roth, but they're so sharp and edgy looking to me. I also don't like their colours as much. Give me a delicate purple and chartreuse lowii any day

I love coclio x paph hybrids very much as it softens those hard sharp edges, but usually keeps some flower size.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9300 using Tapatalk

 

[emydura]

That's totally true. Personal likes and dislikes have nothing to do with correct or incorrect

I made that comment because OrchidBoy and I were talking about different things really. I was making the point that I think the multi hybrids are well worth doing as they provide variations that the species cannot provide themselves. Whereas OrchidBoy much prefers species as that is what occurs in the wild. I wasn't comparing species versus hybrids myself.

It's all perception. From an admitted species snob, I don't see endless variation and novelty in (simple/primary) hybrids. Just combinations and half ways between species. Then there are the hybrids which look just like extra large versions of species. Then there are the very complex that really are a divorce from any species, and I just see something artificial. But that's just me and just what I "see".
o

Not endless variation but more variation than the species can provide. Even just half ways between species is often different and an improvement. I'd agree when you start looking at complex multi's then you are just reshuffling the cards and not coming up with anything really new. But then you could say that about any of the Paph groups.

By the way, I grow a lot of species.

 

[The Mutant]

Oh, I forgot to say that when it comes to the barbatas, I'm probably a bit of a species snob, but that I do like some primary hybrids too. On the other hand, when it comes to the multifloras, there are plenty of both primary hybrids and complex dittos, that I like and would love to have. I find that rather interesting actually.

And I really don't like bulldogs.

What!? Blasphemy! :rollhappy:

j/k Its quite interesting what everybody likes and dislikes.

:rollhappy: I know! It is, isn't it? I honestly don't know why I make this very strange association, too many video games I guess. :wink:

I thought this thread would have people bickering but its actually pretty cool

Personally, I dislike the look of blooms in the section paphiopedilum. To me they all look very angular and aggressive and I prefer softer and prettier Paphs. Don't get me wrong I can admire and appreciate a large and straight roth, but they're so sharp and edgy looking to me. I also don't like their colours as much. Give me a delicate purple and chartreuse lowii any day

I love coclio x paph hybrids very much as it softens those hard sharp edges, but usually keeps some flower size.

Sent from my BlackBerry 9300 using Tapatalk

I think the reason you dislike roths and examples from the Paphiopedilum subgenus, is the very reason why I like them! I love the cheeky/cocky appearance of roths, and the simple elegance of many of the Paphiopedilums. Isn't it really interesting what one find appealing another might find appalling? It's all about personal taste and perspective.

 

[Rick]

By the way, I grow a lot of species.

I know and beautifully too:wink:


I don't know if you are familiar with the "Mister Potato Head" game. But that reminds me of many of the hybrids out there. To me it's all the same pieces just shuffled around.

I would like to eventually get more involved in orchid judging so that requires me to develop a better appreciation of hybrids. But I am struck with how much emphasis of hybrid judging is based on comparing back to the parents in the first place.

 

[emydura]

I don't know if you are familiar with the "Mister Potato Head" game. But that reminds me of many of the hybrids out there. To me it's all the same pieces just shuffled around.

I would like to eventually get more involved in orchid judging so that requires me to develop a better appreciation of hybrids. But I am struck with how much emphasis of hybrid judging is based on comparing back to the parents in the first place.

Same traits but better packaged. William Ambler is a great example. The dark colour in wilhelminiae is incredible and unique in that group. But the flowers are quite small so it doesn't quite get the WOW factor. But when you cross it with a roth that all changes. My William Ambler has the same identical colour as a wilhelminiae but the flowers are much bigger and better presented. I can't stop looking at it when it is in flower. The colour is so intense. It certainly has the WOW factor.

When I think of breeding with the multi's there are 3 main species to me - rothschildianum (size, shape, stature, petal stance), sanderianum (petal length) and lowii (colour). I like to see at least one of those parents in a hybrid. I think in most cases they will improve the other parent.

 

[NYEric]

A judge at one of the last judgings at our Regional center did the same comparison and didn't like the hybrid compared to its parents. I dont think plants should be judged that way. Unless of course the bloom is definitely worse than the parents.

 

[paphioboy]

Interesting thread. I also think 'dislike' is a too strong word, I think 'preference' is better. Some plants can not be fully appreciated through a picture. You have to see a stunning specimen in person for it to change your mind.. Personally, I love all sigmatopetalum (species and also Maudiae-type hybrids, for they are so vigorous), brachys, cochlopetalum (gotta love these hairy fellas), pardalopetalum (lowii, parishii, dianthum), and coryopedilum (roth, sandie, phili are a must). The ones that rank lower in my list aresection paphiopedilum (the ones I really like are insigne, spicerianum, villosum, and farrieanum, which make superb specimens) and parvis, mastersianum and sangii, mainly because my environment is not perfect for them. I would also grow a lot more kolos and gigantifolium, space permitting..