Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with circular
short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth, is 2:1
pleasing to the eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2 standard roses
with Hybrid teas around them. Then would dwarf patio roses make a good
border, or would a miniature box hedge look better?

Broadback wrote:
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with circular
short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth, is 2:1
pleasing to the eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2 standard roses
with Hybrid teas around them. Then would dwarf patio roses make a good
border, or would a miniature box hedge look better?

Beauty, as ever, is in the eye of the beholder, and what "looks best"
is a very subjective decision. If you have a severely modern house and
straight paths, then a rectangular bed may be more appropriate, or you
may feel that something curved would relax the visual tension better.

For many years we have been advised to avoid straight edges to beds,
serpentine curves and the like being much admired.

That said, an ellipse is a very classical form, and easily laid out by
putting two sticks in at the "foci" and using a fixed length of rope
round the two pins and the moving marker. Your two standards could go
at the two focus points The classical ratio for length to width would
be the golden section, 1:1.618 .

If you want to get /very/ serious about proportion, you need to
consider from where the elliptical form would be viewed - from standing
close or far off, or from an upstairs window, and re-calculate on the
basis of foreshortening and inclination. But I wouldn't bother.

Peg some sheets of newspaper out in the shape you envisage, to see how
well it fits in with what you already have, and to get an idea for how
much room you will have at the ends for access etc.

Get some graph paper (it's printed with squares like a grid)...consider each
square to be a foot squared or 6 inches depending on the size of your
garden, then measure your garden (length width and any
features...sheds....trees...ponds...odd shapes...etc) and draw out the
measurements onto the graph paper, I would do a couple of these, therefore
you can look at different positions and shapes for your design, it's not
hard to do and when youv'e got the templates done you can have hours of fun
re-designing your garden without any costly mistakes. a surveyors measuring
tape will come in handy (click below)

http://www.toolfinder.co.uk/catalog/...37037260e4eb5f

Some canes and string is also essential for making curved edges and
eliptical shapes.


--

Regards
p.mc


wrote in message
ups.com...
Broadback wrote:
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with circular
short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth, is 2:1
pleasing to the eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2 standard roses
with Hybrid teas around them. Then would dwarf patio roses make a good
border, or would a miniature box hedge look better?

Beauty, as ever, is in the eye of the beholder, and what "looks best"
is a very subjective decision. If you have a severely modern house and
straight paths, then a rectangular bed may be more appropriate, or you
may feel that something curved would relax the visual tension better.

For many years we have been advised to avoid straight edges to beds,
serpentine curves and the like being much admired.

That said, an ellipse is a very classical form, and easily laid out by
putting two sticks in at the "foci" and using a fixed length of rope
round the two pins and the moving marker. Your two standards could go
at the two focus points The classical ratio for length to width would
be the golden section, 1:1.618 .

If you want to get /very/ serious about proportion, you need to
consider from where the elliptical form would be viewed - from standing
close or far off, or from an upstairs window, and re-calculate on the
basis of foreshortening and inclination. But I wouldn't bother.

Peg some sheets of newspaper out in the shape you envisage, to see how
well it fits in with what you already have, and to get an idea for how
much room you will have at the ends for access etc.

In article . com,
writes

That said, an ellipse is a very classical form, and easily laid out

My first thought is "will I be able to mow the lawn easily with this
shape?"

Some shapes look good but for practical purposes the grass cutting
becomes a nightmare of twists and turns, so whatever you end up with
make sure especially if you enjoy stripy lawn, that you can mow and
balance up the stripes properly.

Janet

--
Janet Tweedy
Dalmatian Telegraph
http://www.lancedal.demon.co.uk

"Broadback" wrote in message
...
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens but
lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose bed, what
would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with circular short ends
best? Also what proportion of length to breadth, is 2:1 pleasing to the
eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2 standard roses with Hybrid teas
around them. Then would dwarf patio roses make a good border, or would a
miniature box hedge look better?

Depends on the size of your garden, the aspect, the elevation, view from the
kitchen window etc etc :~))

Stake out the shape and fill lightly with sand to see how it looks. You can
brush it into the lawn when you have the shape sorted.

Think about underplanting with something evergreen to give winter interest.
Rose beds are very bare in winter.
Jenny

Broadback writes
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with circular
short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth, is 2:1
pleasing to the eye?

Shouldn't the Golden Ratio come in here? (Square root of 5) divided by 2
if I remember rightly.

As for planting I am thinking of 2 standard roses with Hybrid teas
around them. Then would dwarf patio roses make a good border, or would
a miniature box hedge look better?

Dwarf lavender hedge?
--
Kay

"K" wrote in message
...
Broadback writes
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens but
lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose bed, what
would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with circular short ends
best? Also what proportion of length to breadth, is 2:1 pleasing to the
eye?

Shouldn't the Golden Ratio come in here? (Square root of 5) divided by 2
if I remember rightly.

The answer is about 1.6 so summat is wrong. Looked it up (1+sqrt5)/2.
Architect man spent ages wiffling away about this to me last week (at vast
expense).

--
Kay

Broadback wrote:
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with
circular short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth,
is 2:1 pleasing to the eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2
standard roses with Hybrid teas around them. Then would dwarf patio
roses make a good border, or would a miniature box hedge look better?

Remember, when planted you will no longer see the shape of the bed. What you
will see is the lawn space around it.

From a design point of view, design the spaces you will see and plant the
rest. The mistake we all make at the start is to do it the other way round
and end up with random strip and lumps of lawn that make no sense.

The formal oval or formal ellipse are only likely to work in a garden where
the rest is also geometric and then best if central.
If the rest is informal, an irregular offset kidney shape would be best

pk

On 30/6/06 11:30, in article , "p.k."
wrote:

Broadback wrote:
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with
circular short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth,
is 2:1 pleasing to the eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2
standard roses with Hybrid teas around them. Then would dwarf patio
roses make a good border, or would a miniature box hedge look better?

Remember, when planted you will no longer see the shape of the bed. What you
will see is the lawn space around it.

From a design point of view, design the spaces you will see and plant the
rest. The mistake we all make at the start is to do it the other way round
and end up with random strip and lumps of lawn that make no sense.

The formal oval or formal ellipse are only likely to work in a garden where
the rest is also geometric and then best if central.
If the rest is informal, an irregular offset kidney shape would be best

I don't wish to be the doomer and gloomer here but I don't know where the OP
is thinking of siting this bed. If it's visible from e.g. his living room
windows, they're going to be looking at a lot of naked sticks for much of
the year, until the roses come into leaf and then flower. Therefore, I'd
suggest that whatever shape is chosen, a lowish evergreen hedge is planted
which will give some colour to the eye and draw it away from the nakedness
going on in the centre of the bed.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(email address on website)

Sacha wrote:
On 30/6/06 11:30, in article , "p.k."
wrote:

Broadback wrote:
Not being an artistic sort of chap, I can admire well designed gardens
but lack the vision to design them. I am planning on an island rose
bed, what would be a pleasing shape, is an oval or oblong with
circular short ends best? Also what proportion of length to breadth,
is 2:1 pleasing to the eye? As for planting I am thinking of 2
standard roses with Hybrid teas around them. Then would dwarf patio
roses make a good border, or would a miniature box hedge look better?
Remember, when planted you will no longer see the shape of the bed. What you
will see is the lawn space around it.

From a design point of view, design the spaces you will see and plant the
rest. The mistake we all make at the start is to do it the other way round
and end up with random strip and lumps of lawn that make no sense.

The formal oval or formal ellipse are only likely to work in a garden where
the rest is also geometric and then best if central.
If the rest is informal, an irregular offset kidney shape would be best

I don't wish to be the doomer and gloomer here but I don't know where the OP
is thinking of siting this bed. If it's visible from e.g. his living room
windows, they're going to be looking at a lot of naked sticks for much of
the year, until the roses come into leaf and then flower. Therefore, I'd
suggest that whatever shape is chosen, a lowish evergreen hedge is planted
which will give some colour to the eye and draw it away from the nakedness
going on in the centre of the bed.
I'm always torn between trying to be short or possibly giving too much
information. It will be seen from the house, the "lawn" is not very good
as there is no topsoil. The total area is large so I thought a bed of
roses, I will have to dig, well pickaxe actually out and import top
soil. As the house looks down on the area I thought that the shape
would be seen. I take on board the "dead" Winter, so perhaps I will
plant a very low box hedge around the perimeter and not patio roses as I
first thought. though nakedness going on in the centre of the bed
sounds interesting! ;-)

Broadback wrote:
. As the house looks down on the area I thought that
the shape would be seen.

That is then a valid reason for having a "shape", but still think about the
spaces around the bed and how they work when you are in them.

pk