"Shiva" writes:

You're welcome, for some reason all I could do was Stupid Computer Tricks
last night. The second time, the bloom photo didn't show up at first, but
did later.

SCT on my part is why the leaf photo didn't come through. I went through all
the motions, but didn't save it as a jpg file. My fault.


I can see why someone might mistake the bloom for RdV, as it is close to
the right color and very shallow-cupped--but for sure the thorns give it
away as something else. My RdV is in its third year now, and ghosty little
plant with grey-green foliage, no thorns, and very small, shallow blooms
at the end of lonnnnng canes. An own-root from Michael's, it grows like a
climber here. I have pegged it, so now have sprouts every couple inches.

Your RdV has no thorns at all? I was reminded by someone else that its only
"nearly thronless" but I don't see how anyone could call this one even nearly
thronless. They aren't large, but there are pleny of them. Even the backside
of the leaves and the flower stems have tiny prickles. Not something I would
want to brush up against daily.
I wouldn't call the foliage grey-green. If you have Bontannica's Roses, look
at Cardinal de Richelieu. Except for flower color that matches my rose
completely.
My blooms are on short laterals off the main canes, it does remind me of a
climber.
What about fragrance on yours? It's pretty much non exsistant on this one.
Certainly not a strong rosey smell.


The rose seems to be very disease
resistant.

There's a good reason for keeping it!


I keep reminding myself of that. I'm not sold on the blooms yet, but if it
stays clean it may well stay in my garden. After all I like pretty plants as
well as pretty blooms.