Declan Murphy wrote:

You might have warned us that you were not in Limerick or Milton Keynes
:-)

I thought I did warn youse. In the original post if I recall correctly,
which I must admit I don't always manage to do.

You did, but in the very last line which could easier have been skipped
over. I did wonder why you were cross-posting to a UK group....

Most of our regular fj.life-in-japan posters wouldn't know a garden if it
grew under their tatami.

That's no excuse.

__________________________________________________ ______________________
Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!

Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" writes:
|
| Nick it does enlarge sufficiently to see the "cherry like" bark and much
| more detail of the flowers. It looks like one of those graft type things
| that has been buggad around with.
| Perhaps a Daphne on a pear:-)

The bark doesn't look very cherry-like to me - it was the thing that made
me think that it WASN'T a cherry - and I can't see any detail on the
flowers.

Photos are the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html

Regards Declan,
Okazaki, Japan

Louise Bremner wrote:
Declan Murphy wrote:
I thought I did warn youse. In the original post if I recall correctly,
which I must admit I don't always manage to do.

You did, but in the very last line which could easier have been skipped
over. I did wonder why you were cross-posting to a UK group....

Good point. I chose the UK group because after a week of browsing it
seemed a little better than the other NG I browsed. Maybe that nation
of gardeners cliche has something to it.

Most of our regular fj.life-in-japan posters wouldn't know a garden if it
grew under their tatami.

That's no excuse.

One of my neighbours raises strawberries in old tatami (outside).
Unlikely to ever read fj though.

Declan Murphy wrote:
Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" writes:
|
| Nick it does enlarge sufficiently to see the "cherry like" bark and much
| more detail of the flowers. It looks like one of those graft type things
| that has been buggad around with.
| Perhaps a Daphne on a pear:-)

The bark doesn't look very cherry-like to me - it was the thing that made
me think that it WASN'T a cherry - and I can't see any detail on the
flowers.

Photos are the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html

Your digital camera seems to be doing a great job of getting the ground
into sharp focus and ignoring the tree.

--
__________________________________________________ _____________
Scott Reynolds

Scott Reynolds wrote:
Declan Murphy wrote:
Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" writes:
|
| Nick it does enlarge sufficiently to see the "cherry like" bark and much
| more detail of the flowers. It looks like one of those graft type things
| that has been buggad around with.
| Perhaps a Daphne on a pear:-)

The bark doesn't look very cherry-like to me - it was the thing that made
me think that it WASN'T a cherry - and I can't see any detail on the
flowers.

Photos aren't the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html

Your digital camera seems to be doing a great job of getting the ground
into sharp focus and ignoring the tree.

I know. Though it might be my lawn fetish. When it stops raining I'll
try again.

Declan Murphy wrote:

Scott Reynolds wrote:
Declan Murphy wrote:
Nick Maclaren wrote:
In article ,
Rupert \(W.Yorkshire\)" writes:
|
| Nick it does enlarge sufficiently to see the "cherry like" bark
| and much more detail of the flowers. It looks like one of those
| graft type things that has been buggad around with. Perhaps a
| Daphne on a pear:-)

The bark doesn't look very cherry-like to me - it was the thing that made
me think that it WASN'T a cherry - and I can't see any detail on the
flowers.

Photos aren't the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html

Your digital camera seems to be doing a great job of getting the ground
into sharp focus and ignoring the tree.

Impressive, isn't it?


I know. Though it might be my lawn fetish. When it stops raining I'll
try again.

Doesn't it have a little rectangular thingie in the middle of the
viewfinder and/or LCD screen? Or manual focusing? Or maybe you should
try putting a plain board close behind the subject, if all else fails.

__________________________________________________ ______________________
Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!

Declan Murphy wrote:

Louise Bremner wrote:
Declan Murphy wrote:
I thought I did warn youse. In the original post if I recall correctly,
which I must admit I don't always manage to do.

You did, but in the very last line which could easier have been skipped
over. I did wonder why you were cross-posting to a UK group....

Good point. I chose the UK group because after a week of browsing it
seemed a little better than the other NG I browsed. Maybe that nation
of gardeners cliche has something to it.

Most of our regular fj.life-in-japan posters wouldn't know a garden if it
grew under their tatami.

That's no excuse.

One of my neighbours raises strawberries in old tatami (outside).
Unlikely to ever read fj though.

You could take one of the photos to a garden shop, claiming you took it
while out for a walk in the neighbourhood and want to buy a similar
shrub for your garden. Make some excuse to abandon the quest after
learning the name of it but before actually buying it....

__________________________________________________ ______________________
Louise Bremner (log at gol dot com)
If you want a reply by e-mail, don't write to my Yahoo address!

Louise Bremner wrote:

You could take one of the photos to a garden shop, claiming you took it
while out for a walk in the neighbourhood and want to buy a similar
shrub for your garden. Make some excuse to abandon the quest after
learning the name of it but before actually buying it....

Louise, that is nearly as cunning as a cunning fox who is professor of
cunning at some Oxbridge dump. Except that in this town everybody knows
everybody. If I do manage to take a photo that doesn't completely suck,
I'll take it to a nursery and say what I said in the original post.
Can't manage that until I have a day off work though (May 21st...)

Louise Bremner wrote:
Declan Murphy wrote:

Scott Reynolds wrote:
Declan Murphy wrote:

Photos aren't the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html

Your digital camera seems to be doing a great job of getting the ground
into sharp focus and ignoring the tree.

Impressive, isn't it?

Especially for someone who makes part of his living from stills and
video.

I know. Though it might be my lawn fetish. When it stops raining I'll
try again.

Doesn't it have a little rectangular thingie in the middle of the
viewfinder and/or LCD screen? Or manual focusing? Or maybe you should
try putting a plain board close behind the subject, if all else fails.

The pointy part of the camera has a circular thingee that can spin a
little and focus the lens. Theoretically speaking. Maybe before work
tomorrow.

Louise Bremner wrote:

Doesn't it have a little rectangular thingie in the middle of the
viewfinder and/or LCD screen? Or manual focusing? Or maybe you should
try putting a plain board close behind the subject, if all else fails.

Is manual focusing even possible with the midrange digital cameras they
sell these days? Mine has a neat zoom feature, but I don't think it has
manual focus.

Of course, the super expensive ones that are designed to look like SLRs
have manual focus, I'll bet. Heck, if you pay enough you'd probably be
able to buy one that didn't have autofocus at all.

--
__________________________________________________ _____________
Scott Reynolds

In article .com,
"Declan Murphy" writes:
|
| Photos are the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
| http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html

If those leaves are single (i.e. not made up of multiple leaflets),
it is NOT a paeony.


Regards,
Nick Maclaren.

Nick Maclaren wrote:

| Photos are the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
| http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html
If those leaves are single (i.e. not made up of multiple leaflets),
it is NOT a paeony.

Could it be a Magnolia, like 'Susan'?

"La Puce" wrote in message
ups.com...

Nick Maclaren wrote:

| Photos are the best, but would these 4 help identify it at all?
| http://www.declan.tv/gardening_misad...e_is_this.html
If those leaves are single (i.e. not made up of multiple leaflets),
it is NOT a paeony.

Could it be a Magnolia, like 'Susan'?


K mentioned the word Magnolia as well. I have not seen "Susan" but I think
it is not as pink (almost gaudy pink) as the one in the quiz.
The solitary leaf looks about right for Magnolia
I guess Magnolia is the best bet so far.

"La Puce" wrote in message
oups.com...

Rupert (W.Yorkshire) wrote:
K mentioned the word Magnolia as well.

No, she suggested a peach.

Yes you are right it was Janet B that mentioned the word "Magnolia"

I have not seen "Susan" but I think
it is not as pink (almost gaudy pink) as the one in the quiz.

Yes. I've looked at the 'Susan'. I had remembered it deeper pink.

The solitary leaf looks about right for Magnolia
I guess Magnolia is the best bet so far.

Indeed. Also it looks so much like a witch hazel but totally wrong
colour )

I can't see much in it like a witch hazel-other than it's flowering on bear
stems a bit like a Daphne.
I am surprised that someone has not recognised it yet by the distinctive
bark.
If we bandy enough words around perhaps we will win the quiz:-)

Declan Murphy wrote:
(Apologies for the crosspost)

Would some kind soul identify this flowering tree for me please? It is
about 45 centimetres high, and I've inherited it from the previous
owner of the garden. The stem is only about 15mm thick at the base, so
I'm assuming it was planted early last year or the year before. Thought
it may be dead, but it began flowering about 10 days ago.

http://www.declan.tv/images/what_kin...ee_is_this.jpg

(image is 186KB)

Regards Declan,
Botanically challenged,
Okazaki, Japan

When I first saw it, I immediately thought of a forsythia - only a
bright pink one instead of yellow. But I googled for pink forsythia,
and while there is such a thing, it doesn't look much like your plant.
Come to think of it, the only commonality with forsythia is the bright
flowers on bare stems, the leaves coming only second later in Spring.
Fat lot of good my answer is :-)
Well done, all the same, Declan. It looks like you've stumped a whole
newsgroup of experts (and don't include me in that).
Cat(h)