"Kay" wrote in message
...
In article , Brian
writes

"Franz Heymann" wrote in message
...

"Just Molly" wrote in message
news:e0TEc.38$JG6.13@newsfe4-gui...

"Bob Smith" wrote in message
...
Hi,

I don't really like asking "what's this" all the time, so is there
a
website
or piece of software for me to identify things myself?

i swear by my RHS enyclopadia of plants and flowers.

It is good if you know a name and you want to see what it looks like.
If you've seen the plant but don't know the name. it is hard work
identifying it from the Encyclopedia.

Franz
_________
I agree with Franz. The very best texts for identifying wild
plants use a comprehensive key and very few illustrations.

Depends a bit on your knowledge level! You have to be a fairly
enthusiastic amateur botanist to use Stace, for example. I tend to use
Fitter et al, and give up with getting any closer identification than
eyebright, dandelion or hawkweed ;-)

For garden plants, I use the Roger Phillips and Martin Rix books becuase
their photos are close up and therefore better for identification - many
of the RHS photos give you an overall picture, but without a close up.
But they're a good start.

No cultivated
flower key seems to exist.

It'd be a bit difficult, wouldn't it, with all the new varieties being
developed. Addition of a new variety isn't necessarily a matter of
adding a new question at the end - it may mess up one of the dichotomies
further up the key.

Long, long ago, in the days before PCs, I remember helping a colleague
with a program that took a key, added in your new species in the middle,
and checked all the consequences all the way through the key. It was not
a simple process.

--
Kay
"Do not insult the crocodile until you have crossed the river"
__________________
I agree that a key for cultivated plants would be impossible. A
help to group them is quite often found and then the encyclopaedia assists.
For wild plants I use Clapham,Tutin & Warburg~and can still get
lost. It is totally comprehensive and is the 'bible'. It has very few
illustrations. However I understand the point you make~~if one can
understand the use of a complex flora then it is quite likely that you don't
need a flora at all!!
Regards Brian.