Missed the results of the judging on Tuesday.

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message
.. .

Missed the results of the judging on Tuesday.

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk



If you're talking about Fernatix they got a gold.

http://www.rhs.org.uk/chelsea/2004/awards/awards.asp

Neil

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message
.. .

Missed the results of the judging on Tuesday.

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk



If you're talking about Fernatix they got a gold.

http://www.rhs.org.uk/chelsea/2004/awards/awards.asp

Neil


yup, they're the ones. Good, was hoping they'd continue their winning
streak.

I did look through the rhs site, but for some reason completely missed that
link.

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

The message
from "RichardS" noaccess@invalid contains these words:


"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?

If you're talking about Fernatix they got a gold.

Thanks for the question and answer..I'd been wondering about them too,
and I'm very glad they did so well.

To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens, but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

Neil

"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

"RichardS" noaccess@invalid wrote in message
.. .

Missed the results of the judging on Tuesday.

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?


--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk



If you're talking about Fernatix they got a gold.

http://www.rhs.org.uk/chelsea/2004/awards/awards.asp

Neil


yup, they're the ones. Good, was hoping they'd continue their winning
streak.

I did look through the rhs site, but for some reason completely missed that
link.

--
Richard Sampson

email me at
richard at olifant d-ot co do-t uk

The message
from "RichardS" noaccess@invalid contains these words:


"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?

If you're talking about Fernatix they got a gold.

Thanks for the question and answer..I'd been wondering about them too,
and I'm very glad they did so well.

To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens, but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

Neil

"Neil Jones" wrote in message as did
"Janet Baraclough

To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.
..

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens, but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

Funny, but when we used to go to Chelsea every year we hardly bothered with
any of the gardens.
Even when we managed to get exhibitors passes and could get in very early we
did the marquee, just us and Lord Snowden and family in the whole tent,
wonderful, and didn't bother going over to the gardens.
Probably just proves I'm a plant person (now where can I put that?) not a
designed garden person. :-)

--
Regards
Bob

Some photos of my plants at.....

The message
from "Neil Jones" contains these words:


"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens, but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

(Let's just assume for a lovely moment that the BBC research dept
takes urg seriously as a barometer of public reaction; and anyway I've
just laid down tools to cook..long hot fab day here).

I'm pleased that at long last, the BBC is devoting consecutive
evenings of primetime to Chelsea-week coverage; what's not great is the
dumb-it-down accommodation for viewers who aren't remotely interested in
plants or gardens. It's completely inconceivable that similar TV
coverage of any other interest or event would make endless references to
the presenter breastfeeding her baby or who designed the presenters'
clothes. To gardeners, it does not make a water-garden "interesting" to
see a presenter paddling in it. And so far as I am concerned, Chelsea
coverage is the very last place to feature the crashingly dull home
garden of breakfast-TV meeja wannabees.

The programme director should be ashamed to waste endless screen time
on computer-generated pastel dissolves loosely based on a plant, AND
endless references to cod digital-viewer "participation", whilst
ignoring the elementary technical step of providing all viewers with a
screen subtitle name every time a real plant is shown on camera.

Whenever a presenter is lisping or smirking his/her way through an
auto-cue telling viewers all about a garden or plant they have seen, I
would prefer the camera shot to be on the garden or plant, not the
presenter. A voiceover would be more than enough from most presenters.

There. I'm off to the kitchen now.

Janet.

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in message
...
The message
from "Neil Jones" contains these words:


"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens, but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

(Let's just assume for a lovely moment that the BBC research dept
takes urg seriously as a barometer of public reaction; and anyway I've
just laid down tools to cook..long hot fab day here).

I'm pleased that at long last, the BBC is devoting consecutive
evenings of primetime to Chelsea-week coverage; what's not great is the
dumb-it-down accommodation for viewers who aren't remotely interested in
plants or gardens. It's completely inconceivable that similar TV
coverage of any other interest or event would make endless references to
the presenter breastfeeding her baby or who designed the presenters'
clothes. To gardeners, it does not make a water-garden "interesting" to
see a presenter paddling in it. And so far as I am concerned, Chelsea
coverage is the very last place to feature the crashingly dull home
garden of breakfast-TV meeja wannabees.

The programme director should be ashamed to waste endless screen time
on computer-generated pastel dissolves loosely based on a plant, AND
endless references to cod digital-viewer "participation", whilst
ignoring the elementary technical step of providing all viewers with a
screen subtitle name every time a real plant is shown on camera.

Whenever a presenter is lisping or smirking his/her way through an
auto-cue telling viewers all about a garden or plant they have seen, I
would prefer the camera shot to be on the garden or plant, not the
presenter. A voiceover would be more than enough from most presenters.

There. I'm off to the kitchen now.

Janet.

I have to agree with you, though my own preference is towards the design
interest, as in garden design and not designed garden person as Bob Hobden
has just wonderfully put it.
But, as with many things, be it the success rights of pigolists (from a
previous thread,(spelling??), objections to a ban on smoking within enclosed
public spaces,or a "Garden" show that's not really for real gardeners....
it's the loud assertion that we should yield to market forces which is only
ever really heard.
So, in a word, though I agree and empathise.... Tuff!
(or Tough! if you want it in real English)

Patrick

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
The message
from "RichardS" noaccess@invalid contains these words:


"Neil Jones" wrote in message
...

Does anyone know how the guys with the ferns fared?

If you're talking about Fernatix they got a gold.

Thanks for the question and answer..I'd been wondering about them
too,
and I'm very glad they did so well.

Hear hear.

To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what
Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Repeat hear hear.

Franz

"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
The message
from "Neil Jones" contains these words:


"Janet Baraclough.." wrote
in
message ...
To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what
Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the
Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens,
but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different
part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last
night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

(Let's just assume for a lovely moment that the BBC research dept
takes urg seriously as a barometer of public reaction; and anyway
I've
just laid down tools to cook..long hot fab day here).

I'm pleased that at long last, the BBC is devoting consecutive
evenings of primetime to Chelsea-week coverage; what's not great is
the
dumb-it-down accommodation for viewers who aren't remotely
interested in
plants or gardens. It's completely inconceivable that similar TV
coverage of any other interest or event would make endless
references to
the presenter breastfeeding her baby or who designed the presenters'
clothes. To gardeners, it does not make a water-garden "interesting"
to
see a presenter paddling in it. And so far as I am concerned,
Chelsea
coverage is the very last place to feature the crashingly dull home
garden of breakfast-TV meeja wannabees.

The programme director should be ashamed to waste endless screen
time
on computer-generated pastel dissolves loosely based on a plant, AND
endless references to cod digital-viewer "participation", whilst
ignoring the elementary technical step of providing all viewers with
a
screen subtitle name every time a real plant is shown on camera.

Whenever a presenter is lisping or smirking his/her way through an
auto-cue telling viewers all about a garden or plant they have seen,
I
would prefer the camera shot to be on the garden or plant, not the
presenter. A voiceover would be more than enough from most
presenters.

There. I'm off to the kitchen now.

I'd like to add to Janet's list that chatting to celebs, would-be
celebs and celebettes is neither amusing nor educational in a
programme about gardens and gardening.
And please, could they keep the camera more or less horizontal,
approximately at eye level if possible? I am neither a worm nor a
bird. And my eyes are usually nearly horizontal when viewing at an
exhibition.

Franz

On 27/5/04 18:13, in article ,
"Janet Baraclough.." wrote:

The message
from "Neil Jones" contains these words:


"Janet Baraclough.." wrote in
message ...
To me their dedicated plant-obsession was the epitome of what Chelsea
used to be all about, but has mostly lost since the Bunny'n'Diarmuid
set
started cultivating meeja careers.

Janet.

I tend to agree that there's too much focus on the show gardens, but
from what I can see the BBC is trying to emphasise a different part of
the show on each programme - there was much more about plants last night
than on previous shows.

Still not enough, though :-)

(Let's just assume for a lovely moment that the BBC research dept
takes urg seriously as a barometer of public reaction; and anyway I've
just laid down tools to cook..long hot fab day here).

I'm pleased that at long last, the BBC is devoting consecutive
evenings of primetime to Chelsea-week coverage; what's not great is the
dumb-it-down accommodation for viewers who aren't remotely interested in
plants or gardens. It's completely inconceivable that similar TV
coverage of any other interest or event would make endless references to
the presenter breastfeeding her baby or who designed the presenters'
clothes. To gardeners, it does not make a water-garden "interesting" to
see a presenter paddling in it. And so far as I am concerned, Chelsea
coverage is the very last place to feature the crashingly dull home
garden of breakfast-TV meeja wannabees.

The programme director should be ashamed to waste endless screen time
on computer-generated pastel dissolves loosely based on a plant, AND
endless references to cod digital-viewer "participation", whilst
ignoring the elementary technical step of providing all viewers with a
screen subtitle name every time a real plant is shown on camera.

Whenever a presenter is lisping or smirking his/her way through an
auto-cue telling viewers all about a garden or plant they have seen, I
would prefer the camera shot to be on the garden or plant, not the
presenter. A voiceover would be more than enough from most presenters.

There. I'm off to the kitchen now.


A Gold Medal for you, Janet. I'm sick of the whole boiling lot of those
smirking faces, all of whom appear to be presenting at Chelsea with a view
to book royalties or some such - anything but getting some plants shown and
plant names on the screen.
--
Sacha
www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
South Devon
(remove the weeds after garden to email me)