# Complex Paph hybrids / bulldog Paphs... why?



## gore42 (Dec 8, 2006)

Some of you may have noticed that I mostly grow paph species. I can sum up pretty quickly the reasons why: I love the natural diversity of species, the beauty of the different types and forms, I like the idea of conserving plants that are rare (or worse) in the wild, and I am intrigued at a scientific level about the adaptive and evolutionary issues related to Paph species.

I also find primary hybrids interesting (though to a lesser degree)... there's such a wide range of flower shapes and colors that become possible. That's interesting.

But I can't seem to get interested in Paph complex hybrids. I'm talking about the bulldog types... big, round, flat flowers in one of a few different colors. It's not that I hate them or anything... they just don't grab me.

I can understand why people would want to breed them; there's a creative, artistic process in having a vision and trying to create it with a set of tools (stud plants, in this case). That must be fun... especially if you get awards, or loads of money for selling them.

But what do you get out of growing them? Is it just that they're "Pretty flowers", or is there something more to it that I'm missing? I hate to dismiss the whole genre... there are so many people that love them and grow them that they must be getting something out of it.

What is it? Please don't leave me in the dark.

As Ever,
Matthew Gore


----------



## kentuckiense (Dec 8, 2006)

Matt, I support you until the end of our days.


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 8, 2006)

I am by no means a "bulldog" connoiseur and only have a handfull personally, but the ones I have I cherish.

First and foremost is the flower. It never ceases to amaze me how noticed they are by people who only know orchids as the expensive flowers at the grocery store. A few years ago, I was floating around the local orchid show quietly enjoying the conversations I heard coming from all the visitors, when I noticed something that blew my mind. In one exhibit there was the most beautiful Paph. rothschildianum in full bloom in the dead center of the display(needless to say covered in ribbons). I don't think I've ever pointed a flower out to so many people. But, every visitor I showed what in my eyes was the most incredible thing in the building gave it a good look, and then immediately turned to the plant next to it and their jaws dropped and the cameras started flashing. Low and behold it was an average (in my eyes) green bulldog type. People couldn't get over the thing! "Is that real?!?!?!" was heard numerous times along with a guy offering big bucks to buy it for his mother even after repeatedly telling him it wasn't mine and display plants aren't for sale.

I asked numerous visitors why they liked the thing so much, and the unanimous answer was that it was "incredible". For me, it's the size and texture of the blooms. Seeing a dinner plate sized flower that looks and feels like it is made of plastic is still a marvel to me. How something like that can exist and not be made from artificial materials is what always struck me and I believe deep down that is why the general public felt the same way.

The other reason I cherish mine is the history behind them. There are clones around that have truely stood the test of time and are still available today. It's like having a living antique! This same factor is one of the things I really love about Neofinetia clones as well.

I will always be a species nut, and will always stop dead in my tracks to see a nice rothschildianum in bloom, but I have a lot of respect for some of the complex hybrids of old and will always have bench space for them.

Jon


----------



## gore42 (Dec 8, 2006)

Jon,

Well spoken. 

I think that if I were more interested in the human history behind Paphs, I'd really enjoy complexes a lot more... I do really like the idea of owning an orchid that has been grown and passed down for a hundred years.

When it comes to the "incredible" factor, I guess I'll have to accept that they're just not my type, at least for now. Maybe one day I'll see one and it will grab me, and I'll start down that road...

- Matt


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 8, 2006)

This is the last one to grab me. It doesn't have great form or color and will never win an award...but holding a flower up to my nose and realizing it was the size of my face on a first bloom made me immediately decide I had to have it.






Maybe one day you'll see a large plant of Winston Churchill with a flower that looks like it could take a punch and change your mind. If not, there are plenty of incredible species out there with just as much if not more WOW power to them.

Jon


----------



## Heather (Dec 8, 2006)

I appreciate the history of these complex Paphs, and even like a few when I see them in person, but in my opinion, they're the poodle of the orchid world. 

Overbred and over-appreciated. 

No offense to anyone who grows them, and Jon, I liked your explanation. It always amazes me when a specimen Phrag hybrid or a Complex get's recognized (and they often do) over the species or hard to grow and bloom Multi hybrids. My Sander's Pride last month lost out to a Phrag caricinum x Sorcerer's Apprentice just because the Phrag was big. It was by no means spectacular, and not a difficult or rare plant.


----------



## TADD (Dec 8, 2006)

Y'all need to visit Hadley Cash's place about right now! That's all I got to say... I think alot of species are absoluteley incredible, but some of them are just kind of drab and boring. I think having complexes and alot of these novelty crosses really invigorates growers. Species tend to have a definite blooming time (for the most part). These hybrids keep you interested in the off blooming seasons. How much fun would it be all summer, fall, and winter without much blooming species wise.... Now I know there are exceptions to the rule. I feel as if they are more variable than species, you can definitely get a dog but also, these types of flowers are the "gateway drug" for alot of paph growers. 

My control of the english language is not so good....


----------



## slippertalker (Dec 8, 2006)

I look at this issue as an ever evolving fad. What is the latest fashion?

Complex paph hybrids are the end result of 100 years+ of hybridizing. When you consider that most of them are primarily composed of insigne, villosum, spiceranum, etc. they are much larger, fuller and colorful than their species ancestors. There are color ranges white, pink, red, tan/browns, greens, yellows and combinations of all of these colors. In many of these crosses the progeny is mediocre or poor, but there are a few keepers in every bunch. Of course, some crosses have a better average.

Many complex paphs are polyploids, hence larger flowers of heavy substance.

The original primary hybrids were made mostly in the late 1800's to early 1900's, then more complex crosses were made to jumble up the genetic material.
After this time frame, complex hybrids became the desired form of paphiopedilum until the 1960's. A renewed interest in species started again at that time and has continued today while interest in complex hybrids has declined. The introduction of things like Paph suhakulii, vinicolored callosums, and the Chinese paph species have focused the interest towards primary hybrids and species. It's interesting that vini paphs have evolved to become close to the complex standards, my guess is that the mini paph species will be hybridized to the same levels.

There are still people that grow a lot of complex hybrids, the Japanese love them, and many of the old American and European collections have many of these historically important hybrids. Remember that the genetic material that is included in many of these plants doesn't exist anymore. Presently the focus is on large greens and whites with the complexes, and eventually they will reach a maxed out level of quality much like white phalaenopsis, odontoglossums or cattleyas.


----------



## lienluu (Dec 8, 2006)

First and foremost, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, therefore what is beautiful to you, may be ugly to someone else and vice versa. It's everyone's right to have their own preference.

As for judging, I don't know how local shows work, nor how AOS judging events work. In most judging type set-ups, however, each individual is judged upon its own standard, not in comparison to its competition. The most obvious example are dow shows. Each dog is judged against its own breed standard, not against the dogs in the ring with it.

Just because a poodle is in the same class with a rare breed doesn't mean that the poodle shouldn't win the class just because it is a more common breed of dog. Why bother showing anything then, unless it is rare? But then if only the rare things get shown, then they're no longer rare and it's the common things that become rare since they aren't shown!

Another reason why some people "get such a kick" out of the complex bulldog types is for the mere fact that it is something they have created. It's their form of clay and they've managed to mould it into their idea of beautiful.

I don't have any experience breeding orchids, but I have years of experience breeding bettas. While I was a die-hard species breeder of Bettas, I was also a die-hard breeder of "man-made" fancy bettas. I worked for years in developing my own line of bettas that fit just the image I had in my mind. Some people hate the fancy bettas because they are so far from the original species... That's their right to feel that way. But I always got an immense sense of pride when I step back and look at photos of what I was able to accomplish. Here are some examples.

My primary work was with Orange bettas...and I was once told by one of the top breeders, who helped develop the "Halfmoon" trait that it would be impossible to breed for a halfmoon betta, since the quality was just so poor to start with.

Here is one of my original oranges, a veiltail. Most obviously, the caudal fin is droppy...next, the dorsal in is skimpy and long. the anal fin is pointed, and the body is torpedo shaped.






After two years, I managed to breed for a decent delta tail. Caudal fin improved immensely, it is now symmetrical. Dorsal fin has increased tremendously and the anal fin is much square, less pointy. Body is still torpedo shaped.






And after 4 years of work, orange halfmoon bettas, one of whom went on to win best in show at an international halfmoon betta show... Caudal is now a perfect halfmoon with 16-32 ray braching witha big full dorsal that does not extend beyond the caudal. The anal fin is a nice square shape but too long.... that would have been the next step, breeding for a shorter anal fin. The body is also a squarer shape.











These halfmoon bettas can be compared to the complex bulldog orchids. They are heavily inbred and line bred and completly artififically man-made. And there is a large group of breeders who hate them because of this. You can see there's a lot of manipulation in the body and fin structure of the fish.. .and it all depends on what the breeder has in his mind and then must somehow transform that into an actual fish. It's the same with the complex orchids...just a different medium


----------



## Barbara (Dec 8, 2006)

Lienluu, your work with the betta is just amazing. I do appreciate fish since we have kept various forms of fresh water tropical, goldfish and a few koi. And, I also understand the sense of accomplishment one gets from developing your own creations over time. I went to school for art, and the exploration of personal themes and the expression of those themes through drawing and painting can be greatly satifying. 

There must be a similar feeling from creating your own complex paphs. There are many beautiful hybrids, and yet only a select few are truly appealing. However, the natural and innate beauty of many the species, especially when seen in the wild, are just breathtaking. I believe that they call to a deep ancestral memory that is present in many of us, and this is one of the reason why we are 'bit by the bug.'

There is value in diversity. Excellant thread. Thank you, Barbara.


----------



## gore42 (Dec 8, 2006)

Lien and everyone,

I hope that you haven't misunderstood me; I am not suggesting that people who grow complexes have poor taste, or that they are somehow not as worth growing as species. 

There is no doubt that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and in this case, I am willing to admit that I just don't see the beauty yet. Maybe someday I will. My question was really about whether there is something beyond just "beauty" that drives complex growers, and Jon's post helped me on that account.

As Ever,
Matthew Gore


----------



## gore42 (Dec 8, 2006)

Oh, and those bettas are AMAZING, Lien! There's something else that I don't know much about 

- Matt


----------



## suss16 (Dec 8, 2006)

Excellent discussion... I am sort of new to this and hope not to sound to ignorant... For the species purist - how do F2, F3, F4 etc. generations of species fit into your collection? At some point they are pretty different than their wild collected ancestors - but still a species.


----------



## paphioland (Dec 8, 2006)

Lien cool betta pics.

The philosophy of beauty is compicated subject and is a whole conversation within itself. To me and partially Kant their is objective beauty apart from what we percieve. However, we all appreciate different objective aspects of beauty subjectively and weight some areas more than others. Such as symetry, color, size, proportions ........ These are all real objective traits that we subjectively value. 

As for complexes I have fallen for them recently. Apart from the breeding acumen needed to create them. They have amazing texture, symetry, size and color. They can be breathtaking and get better and better.


----------



## paphioland (Dec 8, 2006)

I started by liking species, added some phrags, moved to primary hybrids, to parvis and now am back to species and complexes


----------



## Heather (Dec 8, 2006)

suss16 said:


> Excellent discussion... I am sort of new to this and hope not to sound to ignorant... For the species purist - how do F2, F3, F4 etc. generations of species fit into your collection? At some point they are pretty different than their wild collected ancestors - but still a species.



We've had a few discussions about just this topic. Here's a little reading for your spare time (8 pages long, I think!). I don't want you to think I am discouranging our discussion of your question, though.  Just thought maybe you hadn't seen this thread yet.

http://www.slippertalk.com/forum/showthread.php?t=954&highlight=wild+plant


----------



## Leo Schordje (Dec 8, 2006)

One doesn't have to like all Paphs all the time. It is okay to have favorites. (in fact it is even okay if someone likes a plant that is not a Paph) I used to dismiss white Phals as boring. Then I was forced to do judging at a spring show of white Phals. Had to pick the best of class from 35 or so white Phal entries. I had to REALLY look, out of fairness to the registrants. Listened to Herman Pigors point out the merits of the 5 or so best, then voted. To this day I now keep one white phal in my collection, because they represent the peak of the breeder's art. Similarly i did not think much of Hellas. Until I saw a well grown division of Hellas 'Westonbirt', it was a plant owned by Warton Sincler before he got out of the business. A 3 growth division of Hellas that was so well grown it REQUIRED a 1 gallon nursery can as its pot. The flower was enormous. Exquiste, sunset colors and full flat shape. Again, 20 generations or more removed from Paph villosum and an exquisite representation of the breeders art. A well grown complex is a wonder of architecture. Sadly, few people grow them well. I have a few and when my culture is not up to par, it is embarrassing to see how aweful that division of Winston Churchill 'Redoubtable' can be. But when you get it right they are fabulous. 
Jon pointed it out, really very few Paphs, (species or complex) are "Pretty", they usually are fascinating, but not often "Pretty". If you want "prettty", you grow Cattleya or Phal. If you like intricate architecture you grow Paphs, they are the abstract sculpture of the orchid world. Paph appreciation is more similar to appreciation of sculpture than paintings. Cattleyas with their colors and texture are more like paintings. Color compostition is the key with Catts. 
I used to be a species snob, and species often are my favorites, but I have come to appreciate the breeder's art. And respect the effort that it requires. Consider this, most complex crosses produce very few truely exceptional seedlings. The awarded ones are the one in a hundred or one in a thousand out of a particular grex. FCC's are definitely one in thousands. Many crosses yeild no progeny of award quality. A good complex is a rare thing indeed. The bulk of complex seedlings end up compost. The good ones are great. While we don't have to like everything, I do love my half dozen awarded complexes. Each a sculptural monument to the breeders art.
Leo


----------



## Marco (Dec 8, 2006)

I think it's mainly on tastes and purposes on what particular individuals like.

Lien - lovely betta...i've been bitten by a bug not to long ago . Unfortunately, I think i reached capacity already.


----------



## Jason Fischer (Dec 8, 2006)

The one thing about complex paphs that nobody mentioned is how extremely difficult it actually is to get one with good proportions/shape and color. This is why there is a very high price tag on 'division' complex paphs. Divisions of nice complex can run from $100 to $10,000 to even more, on rare occasions. A lot of this pricing is based upon chances. Sometimes you'll have to bloom 100 of a complex cross until you come upon a very nice one (I've thrown away hundreds of bad complex paphs). Those odds will determine the price as well. Especially when it comes to pink and white complex, as they are harder to produce than others. Greens are quite predictable and have a high percentage of symmetrical flowers. It's like owning a piece of fine art, I suppose. After seeing how hard it is to produce good quality complex, I too have a great appreciation and admiration of complex. 

Although nothing does it for me like a neofinetia falcata (even though it doesn’t have a pouch)!

Did you see this recent posting I did? It's Paph. Stone Lovely, and that's about as round as they get nowdays!


----------



## lienluu (Dec 8, 2006)

Here's another lovely modern green complex, from the OZ, forget the cross






And one of my favourite pink complex, Legacy's Child, 'Beautiful Dreamer' from Hadley Cash:


----------



## SlipperFan (Dec 8, 2006)

Interesting thread.

I tend to agree with Matt, though. Although there are some in the complex category I appreciate, there are very few I like enough to try to purchase. Like Jason, I've observed that most of the complexes seem to have really bad flaws. The photos posted here in this thread so far are certainly exceptions.

I think that all of this is due to the concept of trying to create a perfectly round flower. This was the case with Phals and Cattleys, as well. For some reason, the idea of "round" became the ideal. I asked a question about that at a Slipper symposium at our local judging center last Spring, but never really got a satisfactory answer as to why round became the ideal.

Triangles, I think, are just as nice. Then there are the long-petaled shapes...


----------



## gonewild (Dec 8, 2006)

SlipperFan said:


> Interesting thread.
> 
> I tend to agree with Matt, though. Although there are some in the complex category I appreciate, there are very few I like enough to try to purchase. Like Jason, I've observed that most of the complexes seem to have really bad flaws. The photos posted here in this thread so far are certainly exceptions.
> 
> ...



Round = $$
Round flowers was the goal of hybridizers because round is (was) a better shape for a corsage and other florist uses. As well a nice round flower packs in a box and ships better than a flower with "points" or edges that may become torn with use.


----------



## SlipperFan (Dec 8, 2006)

So it's all about money???

That doesn't explain why judges buy into it.


----------



## gonewild (Dec 8, 2006)

I never really cared much for complex hybrids either. But when I see a really nice one it is really nice! I don't like Picasso style paintings either but when I see a real one I must admit I like it.

Complex Paphs are much like roses. A matter of taste. Sending a dozen species roses might not have much impact. (or it might :sob: ) 

Jason's mention of "round" about his new hybrid caused me to remember a photo I took recently and I remember thinking when I took it "man that is round". The hybrid was registered in 1956. Look at the photo and realize the hybrid was registered 50 years ago.







I only intended to post the photo as a topic of interest but since I needed to look up the name I decided to look up the parentage.
The Hybrid is Betty Bracey 'Meadowlark' HCC/AOS

Seven different species have been used to create the hybrid:

species
spicerianum
insigne
druryi
villosum
lawrenceanum
callosum
niveum

The seven different species were combined into 11 different hybrids starting in the year 1884

hybrids
Leeanum 1884
Actaeus 1895
Winnianum 1886
Maudiae 1900
Christopher 1902
Memoria Jeringhamiae 1905
Purity 1916
Florence Spencer 1917
Gwen Hannen 1922
Gwenpur 1935
Betty Bracey 1956

What a history the complex Paph that I photographed a few weeks ago has!
I wonder what happened to it's progeny after 1956? I wonder if Jason's "Stone Lovely" is a descendant?

They are all beautiful in some way. Living art. 

I'm glad many people love and cherish them because these treasures deserve to be around forever.

This thread caused me to think differently about complex paphs. Thanks for starting it Matt.


----------



## paphreek (Dec 8, 2006)

gonewild said:


> What a history the complex Paph that I photographed a few weeks ago has!
> I wonder what happened to it's progeny after 1956? I wonder if Jason's "Stone Lovely" is a descendant?



Betty Bracey is not a descendant of Stone Lovely, but it is one of the parents of Paph Peachie = Hellas x Betty Bracey.


----------



## gonewild (Dec 9, 2006)

SlipperFan said:


> So it's all about money???
> 
> That doesn't explain why judges buy into it.



No, it's not all about money. But economic value is always a guiding factor in what makes something desirable. If something is worth more money it is always more desirable to someone or a group. If something is more desirable it is always worth more money. That is just how it is.

Judges don't buy into anything. Judges must look at what is in front of them. Judges don't make a decision as to what hybridizers will present them. But there was a time when judges were closely tied to commercial growers.

I would think when judging a hybrid a major factor in awarding it would be to recognize how it approaches the goal of the breeding line. 

I suppose if you brought in a perfectly square white Phal. it would get an award as something new?

Perhaps an experienced judge should comment on the point as to whether judges buy into a trend.


----------



## Billie (Dec 10, 2006)

*There are two reasons people here in W A grow complex paphs*

1. they are by far easier to breed and therefore a cheaper to buy $ 10 -$20 against $ 35-50 for a specie seedling 
2. they grow and flower much quicker .2-5 years from flask 
but give me a nice stoneii Id wait for that any day .
billie


----------



## SlipperFan (Dec 10, 2006)

gonewild said:


> Judges don't buy into anything.


If they don't buy into "round is ideal," then they are the ones who made that determination.


----------



## Rick (Dec 10, 2006)

Actually from what I've heard from judges in general about almost any orchid, its all about maximum viewable 2 dimensional space.

Big round and flat maximizes in your face presentation.

Reflex or cupping is wasted material within in the 2 dimensional presentation.

If you see daylight or jagged edges around the parts its a distraction from the overall presentation.


----------



## MoreWater (Dec 10, 2006)

Matt - my sentiments exactly. However, it is not possible to hang out with John in DC for long without getting brainwashed... albeit only enough to get a token few seedlings to try out. I am still not too excited about them and my WOWs generally go to species and primaries. 

I just returned from a business trip to find my first ever complex paph bud hasn't aborted despite the 2 weeks of total neglect. Of course, now that I'm home it will probably voice its complaints.....


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 11, 2006)

Catts and phals have been bred and inter bred to create the ideal full blooms, which look fantastic. For whatever reason, paphs don't look quite as appealing when they are so interbred to become round. They loose their natural grace and charm, and look a little strange sometimes. I think its a matter of taste. Some orchids were never meant to be round I guess. 

I think white complexes look nice...the resemblance to Paph niveum or our natural obsession with white things?? Complexes also really look like art when they are spotted and striped intricately, those are also the good ones.

I've never seen a paph used as a corsage before yet....

On the other hand paph maudiae hybrids are also really bred and interbred but they look great. I never hear a complaint about them. Maybe round complexes are now outdated and not as trendy here.

Complex breeding does make them much more vigorous, which can be a reason for their popularity. Not everyone has the patience or ability to grow and bloom species, especially back in the past when cultivation info and technology was lacking. 

I've seen some pics of really badly defective blooms though because of all this interbreeding. LOL plants with triple pouches. The plant can't figure out its own genes.


----------



## slippertalker (Dec 11, 2006)

gonewild said:


> No, it's not all about money. But economic value is always a guiding factor in what makes something desirable. If something is worth more money it is always more desirable to someone or a group. If something is more desirable it is always worth more money. That is just how it is.
> 
> Judges don't buy into anything. Judges must look at what is in front of them. Judges don't make a decision as to what hybridizers will present them. But there was a time when judges were closely tied to commercial growers.
> 
> ...



As an AOS judge, as you state, we view what is placed in front of us. For complex paph hybrids (and odonts,cymbidiums,cattleyas,etc) the standard for many years has been full segments forming a circle. Of course, the parentage is taken in to account. Award quality complex hybrids are fairly rare compared to the awards for more simple hybrids and species. 

The standards were created by an older generation of orchid judges, many of whom were the giants of hybridizing in the 1930's and 40's. The AOS has been around of 84 years, and judging began shortly thereafter, evolving from the RHS judging format. To answer the question about why we have a standard of round and equilateral, it was because that is what hybridizers were formulating as their idea of perfection and for the most part it is pretty pleasing to the eye. I really don't think money has anything to do with it other than breeders will have award quality seedlings to sell.

Other flower shapes are judged like brassia species and hybrids, stanhopeas, catasetums, gongoras, etc. The consideration is always given to the parentage and whether the product is an improvement. 

Whether judges "buy" into a trend is a good question. To my eye, it's more a matter of whether the trends fit into the standards set by the Handbook. A good example is the Harlequin phalaenopsis plants that are all the rage these days. The streaky flowers are hideous to some, exciting to others and just strange to others, but the bottom line is they still need to have good flower count, substance, shape and clear coloration. Many do not at this time...


----------



## littlefrog (Dec 11, 2006)

smartie2000 said:


> On the other hand paph maudiae hybrids are also really bred and interbred but they look great. I never hear a complaint about them. Maybe round complexes are now outdated and not as trendy here.



But the trend in Maudiae breeding is towards rounder flowers... To be awarded now, a maudiae type should have wider petals and a flatter dorsal than previous awards. I don't think the genetic material is there to have perfectly round maudiae, and I don't think anybody would want one. Crosses between maudiae type and complex are also becoming popular, these will have a more open form than the bulldog parent.

Now, why is round better? It isn't. We wouldn't accept a 'round' Paph. sanderianum or rothschildianum. But for the type, bulldogs are expected to fill a space with no gaps between the flower parts. For symmetry (the human eye finds symmetry more pleasing than asymmetry, this is well documented), this means a round flower. It is all type and breeding.

Personally I don't give a whole lot of weight to 'roundness' when judging. Symmetry, yes. Asymmetry in a slipper flower is a fatal flaw for me.


----------



## gonewild (Dec 11, 2006)

smartie2000 said:


> I've never seen a paph used as a corsage before yet....



In the past they were. Back in the 1960's we sold many paphs as cut flowers and most were used as corsages. When the "hippie" movement came along the corsage flower market took a dive and many flowers that were common for corsages were no longer in demand. 

The reason I pointed out that commercial use and demand ($) played a lead role in flower shape desirability is because commercial flower growers bought many times more plants than did hobbyists. Most (quantity) hybrids were produced by commercial growers and it only stands to reason they would hybridize for qualities that they themselves needed. 

Paph. rothschildianum just is not going to be in demand with florists for use in weddings. But Paph. Maudiae or complex hybrids will always be.


----------



## Sue (Dec 11, 2006)

smartie2000 said:


> I've never seen a paph used as a corsage before yet....



Here you go:






My fiancée and myself with corsages I made. This was at a friend's wedding. I used a Paph. hainanense and three Den. Spring Dream 'Apollon' for mine, hers was made from a Slc. and Phal. hybrid, names too long to remember or bother with.

This is totally off topic. Especially since I used a species, and not a round one at that. But now you've seen a paph used as a corsage. Well, I guess it's really a freakishly large boutonniere.


----------



## slippertalker (Dec 11, 2006)

It's not unusual for cymbidiums to be used for corsages. I've seen pictures from the 50's and 60's with cattleyas and even paphs used as corsages.


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Dec 11, 2006)

When I first got into orchids, I remember seeing pictures of complex paphs and finding it incomprehensible that anyone would enjoy them...in fact, it was the "roundness" of the flower that turned me off...to me, sukhakulii and Maudiae were the ideal paphs. Then I finally saw one in real life...and I was hooked. No photo could prepare me for the size of the bloom I saw, or its texture...like pure wax. Now I love them....granted, there are only so many that you can have in the confines of a windowsill type grower. They get repetitive, and while I like the greens and spotteds, I'm not that thrilled with the "reds"....There is definitely more variety in the primary hybrids, and I truly love the species...knowing what I have, having the (slightly possible) goal of collecting every species of paph (try that with a hybrid...) is definitely something I can appreciate. And the whites...! I generally find white flowers boring, but not white paphs! We all have our tastes...I actually find the multiflorals the most repetitive, and I find Phrags incredibly repetitive (in fact, I intend to never get another phrag hybrid again.....at least until I see what the kovachii hybrids look like) but overall, in principle, I've never seen a paph I didn't like...well, alright...maybe hennisianum....and randsii (although I would try a randsii just for the challenge, and for the point of trying it...) Take care, Eric


----------



## Equestris (Dec 12, 2006)

This thread has convinced me that I absolutely MUST try a few complex paphs. Have a couple enroute to me as we speak. Now, I would prefer to buy them from Matt--but we all know how he feels about it! LOL! Thanks for educating me on this topic!

Oh, by the way Jon in SW Ohio--what is the name of your plant in post #5?


----------



## gore42 (Dec 12, 2006)

Hey Equestris (I never know what to call you at this forum....), 

I hope that I get to see yours when they bloom  What ones did you end up getting? And did you get them from Marriot?

There's no doubt that complexes can be impressive in person, and beautiful in any circumstances. When Hadley Cash visited the Denver Orchid Society last year, he had pictures of some of the most impressive complexes I've ever seen, not to mention all of the plants that he brought along. 

But after his hour long presentation, I still bought two species from him; villosum and a stonei flask (which was outrageously over-priced; I don't know what I was thinking). I guess it's just as well... I don't think that I have the money to start buying all of those famous complexes yet 

But my wholesaler in Hawaii is bugging me about buying their new crop of complexes. Maybe just a few....

No.


- Matt


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 12, 2006)

That is Paph. (Sea Cliff x Via Virgenes). I got it at our Spring Show from Natt's Orchids and saw it in the box while they were unpacking and quickly asked him how much it was.

Jon


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 12, 2006)

Symmetry is also a big thing for me too. I didn't like the first bloom of one of my paphs as much because the asymmetrical dorsal sepal kept bothering me.

I think I figured out why bulldog complexes aren't so attractive to many species loving people. There are no gaps in between the sepals and petals because they have become so wide. So wide that petals and sepals can overlap. That's just unnatural for the most paph species.

Paph maudiaes, no matter how wide the petals get still have gaps. 

Maybe it's because I'm too young to have seen a paph corsage. I've seen other orchids used in weddings before in corsages, hair, cakes, etc... Dends, phals, cattleyas, and cymbidiums are typically used. Dends, phals, cattleyas, and cymbidiums are regarded as the elegant/pretty orchids, and they shoot more than one bloom per spike, so one bloom costs less.
Are paphs too unusual/unelegant looking for a corsage nowadays? Paphs do have a unique look, which we slipperorchid people love, but I'm not sure if the general public would demand for them for a wedding. (My mom doesn't have a taste for paphs, but she grows other orchids.) Or maybe they are too costly because they only give a single bloom for each growth. Maybe I'll have a wedding with paphs one day...($$$ I'll need many white paphs...more expensive, harder to germinate, slower to grow than other colours I believe$$$)
Nice corsages Sue.


----------



## Heather (Dec 12, 2006)

smartie2000 said:


> Are paphs too unusual/unelegant looking for a corsage nowadays? Paphs do have a unique look, which we slipperorchid people love, but I'm not sure if the general public would demand for them for a wedding. (My mom doesn't have a taste for paphs, but she grows other orchids.) Or maybe they are too costly because they only give a single bloom for each growth. Maybe I'll have a wedding with paphs one day...




I also kind of wonder (and have wondered before) if women just don't tend to be as attracted to paphs as other orchids (hence they might not wish them to be involved in their weddings). Men are the overwhelming majority here...


----------



## kentuckiense (Dec 12, 2006)

At my hypothetical wedding I fully intend on wearing a rothschildianum.


----------



## gonewild (Dec 12, 2006)

kentuckiense said:


> At my hypothetical wedding I fully intend on wearing a rothschildianum.



Do you think your hypothetical wife will wait for it to bloom? oke:


----------



## kentuckiense (Dec 12, 2006)

gonewild said:


> Do you think your hypothetical wife will wait for it to bloom? oke:


I'm pretty sure that's actually a pro instead of a con!

"Sorry honey, the roth still isn't spiking!"


----------



## Heather (Dec 12, 2006)

kentuckiense said:


> I'm pretty sure that's actually a pro instead of a con!
> 
> "Sorry honey, the roth still isn't spiking!"




LOLOL!!!!! 
Nice excuse!


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 12, 2006)

Heather just made me realize I talk about paphs and other orchids to mostly guys (or at least I think they are men) on these orchid forums....BTW, I'm a guy too and my dad liked the first paph I bloomed. It was a really dark vini. My mom didn't say much. I guess its true then...Maybe she will like the pink paph magic lantern thats showing signs of going into bud.
I don't think they show everyones gender on these forums do they? Now I'm really off topic.


----------



## Heather (Dec 12, 2006)

Not at all off topic! 
You know, Paphs were very popular in the early days of collecting and women were NOT allowed to grow orchids because they were deemed too sexual. I often wonder if (why?) the Paphs are not as well loved by women and if it has anything to do with their relatively phallic nature. There. I said it.


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 12, 2006)

oh i never knew that one....


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 12, 2006)

I wonder if women would have been allowed to grow Nepenthes clipeata back then oke: 

EDIT: I'll save you a trip to The Google
http://home.arcor.de/j.danz/N_clipeata.html
(pretty tame compared to what it looks like in person!)

Jon


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 13, 2006)

Lol:rollhappy: 
Nepenthes are hard to grow. I can't the humidity high enough. I disagree with Heather's phallic paphs idea...I never thought of them that way. Since we are doing this, the labellum of Cyp. acuale looks like....(what am I allowed to say here)


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 13, 2006)

I agree, the lip of a cattleya and the pouch of acaule look much more suggestive than any Paph. venustum pouch. I think Heather is talking about a "lower phallic" part that she sees in the pouch of some of them.

Jon


----------



## Heather (Dec 13, 2006)

Yes, but you guys are GUYS. Hence my point. I'm not talking about YOUR perceptions of Paphs, I'm talking about the average woman's perception (and I'm not it either so I cannot comment, really...)

Nepenthes, yeah, I cannot imagine we'd have been allowed to look at that one...


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 13, 2006)

Orchids are sexy plants, they are an metaphor for sex. They have been described that way many many times. Some serious orchid hobbyists seem to replace sex with orchids(I might be very wrong). Some cultures also believe eating orchids would boost men's sex drive. Even female authors have used them as a metaphor for sex in their literature. (How many times to I get to say sex before I get banned. Sorry I offended anyone. I cannot say that word on the other forum I post on. Please don't ban me. BTW who is the moderator for this forum?)

I really never viewed orchids these ways yet or grown them for those reasons. I view them as unique, exotic and beautiful and sometimes strange plants. I think its the bilateral symmetry they have, rather than radial symmetry in all these common everyday flowers we see. Plus the column(rather than stamen and pistil), labellum and diversity in shapes and colours is why we grow them. I would give my date a bouquet of dends rather than roses cuz im weird. 

Nepenthes are phallic. The first time I saw it, it already hit me. I have a Nepenthes sanguinea, that looks horrible because of low humidity. Its got no pitchers and brown leafs. I will have to set up something for it. Maybe my old 10 gallon aquarium.

I read somewhere Cyp. acuale was named for female parts, during my reseach on cypripedium cultivation. Its labellum...I'm never growing that one, thank God they are difficult to grow. Some people love its labellum though. Anyone good with latin here?

I'm way off topic now. I think we squeezed everything out of complex paphs now.


----------



## Sue (Dec 13, 2006)

Jon in SW Ohio said:


> I agree, the lip of a cattleya and the pouch of acaule look much more suggestive than any Paph. venustum pouch.



Hence my feeling that someone should cross venustum with micranthum, and register it as Paph. Elephantitis.

Why hasn't anybody done this yet?!

Perhaps I should write Jason Fischer directly. He might hear my pleas . . .


----------



## Jon in SW Ohio (Dec 13, 2006)

You'll soon realize we can't keep a thread on topic for more than a day or two
Don't be crude about it and no one should mind, this history is just another facet of the hobby. If in doubt, just search the site for Bulbophyllum vaginatum.

Even the word Orchid comes from the latin word for testicle...and if you've ever seen _Orchis_ tubers you'll know why. Even funnier, they make a dessert from these tubers called "Fox Testicle Ice Cream"...I think it loses something in the translation.

I believe _acaule_ means stalked in latin, referring to the short inflorescence but I could be wrong. Cypripedium means slipper and Cyprus(birthplace of Aphrodite). Aphrodite was the goddess of love and beauty so there is some link there.

Jon


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 13, 2006)

Yes that Ice cream was what I was thinking of. Its supposed to be chewy, I wonder what it tastes like.
Man, Bulbophyllum vaginatum is the oddest looking thing, doesn't look like a orchid. (I know it is) And _Orchis_ look like... 
What other orchids can we name lol.


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 13, 2006)

How come my sub name turned from bloom to pod?? hehe I didn't make my subname up, what should I call myself....


----------



## NYEric (Dec 13, 2006)

It changes automatically depending on the number of your entries.


----------



## eOrchids (Dec 14, 2006)

Nepenthes (CP) and Orchids are two very different plants. Though they come from very similiar environments, they are very differenr from one another!

My perception of the complex / bulldog paph is that they are alright; though I might get one. I really don't see much in them except a large flower! But with the multi floral paphs, there is something complex about them. The way how one plant can get multiple flowers on a single stem seems more mind blogging than a large flower.

Also N. Clipeata is like the Paph. Roth of the Carnivorous Plant World but it's a lot harder to get!


----------



## IdahoOrchid (Dec 22, 2006)

Don't know if this is on or off topic, but I noticed this on my Howeara while photographing it. Kind of intrigued my wife.


----------



## smartie2000 (Dec 22, 2006)

I don't think we can stay on topic anymore lol, nice picture......the things we see when we look closely....


----------



## orchidmaven (Mar 27, 2011)

gore42 said:


> Some of you may have noticed that I mostly grow paph species. I can sum up pretty quickly the reasons why: I love the natural diversity of species, the beauty of the different types and forms, I like the idea of conserving plants that are rare (or worse) in the wild, and I am intrigued at a scientific level about the adaptive and evolutionary issues related to Paph species.
> 
> I also find primary hybrids interesting (though to a lesser degree)... there's such a wide range of flower shapes and colors that become possible. That's interesting.
> 
> ...



I don't know how old this tread is but as a breeder of Complex Paphiopedilums I would like to answer your Quarry as to why grow them.
They offer such a diversity of color and I do love color in flowers. The crosses are made and the seed sown, at each stage in their development I revel in my craft as a grower. Going to the greenhouse and seeing a crop of complex seedling growing well on the bench has taken years of learning from some of the best growers, and I continue to learn. During the month of September as the new buds begin to appear heightens expectation for the bloom season when new, never before seen flowers begin to show color. I guess you can tell I love Complex Paphs. Brown is not my favorite color so, I do not grow a lot of mutiflorals, yet I do have some. White flower do not excite me, yet I do have some. Species are a means to an end and I grow lots of them. Complex Paphiopedilums have come a long way and who knows what the future may reveal. Let us not forget that species are also in development as isolated populations produce new developments. Species evolve through natural hybridization, it is the way of nature. They are not stagnant. Species are hybrids. By way of natural selection and isolated populations, we get new species. Which are hybrids!

Theresa Hill
Hillsview Gardens


----------



## paphioland (Mar 27, 2011)

Understanding and appreciating complex quality is the most complex visual skill in slipper orchids. Complex breeding is the most challenging hybridization in slipper orchids. As Jason said previously since the breeding is so difficult and there is so much genetic variation the good ones are very very few. People will say this is my opinion but .....


----------



## paphioland (Mar 27, 2011)

wow the years just keep ticking by. I was 23-24 when I started collecting orchids and growing them in an high rise apartment in philadelphia and now I feel the same age with lots more responsibility. Are there any early 20 yo on here?


----------



## paphioland (Mar 27, 2011)

I reminisce because I remember this post as if it was yesterday.


----------



## JeanLux (Mar 27, 2011)

Thanks Theresa for reviving this cool complex thread  !!! Jean


----------



## paphioboy (Mar 27, 2011)

> Are there any early 20 yo on here?



I'm 22..


----------



## paphioland (Mar 27, 2011)

paphioboy said:


> I'm 22..



cool. how long you been collecting? what got you interested?


----------



## Marc (Mar 27, 2011)

Interesting topic but in the end it's all about personal taste.

I personally don't like the bulldog type paphs. I can enjoy other types of hybrids there are plenty of maudiae types that I enjoy. I am fully aware of the decades of breeding that go / have gone into creating these flowers but it's just not my cup of tea.

Each to his own I guess.


----------



## Shiva (Mar 27, 2011)

This has to be the oldest thread I read through so far. 
My own opinion is there is beauty in everything. I began growing orchids in the late 1970s and I can still remember the excitement when I saw my first phal, my first catasetum, my first cattleya... There are people making art with junk they find in garbage. We don't have to like everything but every once in a while, i see an art junk thing and I like it. As for orchids, I have my own tastes and I can still appreciate other peoples's taste, most of the time.


----------



## chrismende (Mar 27, 2011)

Dang! Big black standard poodles in fine coiffure are stunning! But it's actually a good analogy! It's a fashion thing!


----------



## Eric Muehlbauer (Mar 27, 2011)

When I first started growing orchids I bought the old Sunset book of Orchids. I looked at the pictures, and got hooked on slippers. What impressed me most from the book was sukhakulii...the complex paphs didn't impress me at all..too round. However, once I saw my first complex in real life, everything changed...I was hooked. For me, while there are many types of slippers I like more than others, there is no category that I would ever reject...I like them all. Even the cochlo's, which are my least favorite type of paph, still have plenty to please me.


----------



## eOrchids (Mar 27, 2011)

Even though, I only have 5 complexes! I love each and every one of them!

I grow them cause they are different from the rest of my paph collection. Plus I feel like I am owning a little bit of Paph hybridization history.


----------



## Ernie (Mar 28, 2011)

Eric Muehlbauer said:


> ...I like them all. Even the cochlo's, which are my least favorite type of paph, still have plenty to please me.



Hey! Cochlos are cool! :fight:


----------



## paphioboy (Mar 29, 2011)

> cool. how long you been collecting? what got you interested?



I've been growing orchids since I was 12. Started with a few common dends from the plant vendor at the weekend market and given by a neighbour. Only saw my first paph (barbatum) at an orchid club sales table later on.. 

On the subject of complexes, I do find them interesting because they really do look like plastic!  No other plant bears such large flowers of glossy appearance.. too bad they grow cool.. Someone should make a breeding line for warmth-tolerance..


----------



## Pete (Mar 30, 2011)

what ernie said


----------



## Brian Monk (Mar 30, 2011)

What Pete and Ernie said.


----------



## nikv (Mar 30, 2011)

I have gone decades without buying a bulldog Paph. I just didn't care for them. But my tastes have changed in recent years and I've picked up a half-dozen or so. They have grown on me. I'm particularly fond of the greens/yellows. So my advice is "never say never".


----------



## Marc (Mar 30, 2011)

I want to add one more thing:

What Pete, Ernie and Brian Monk said.


----------



## SlipperFan (Mar 30, 2011)

What nikv said! -- Thanks to Ross!


----------

