Paph insigne 'Harefield Hall'

[Ozpaph]

I'm enjoying the interesting discussion and photos. Thanks to all.

 

[quietaustralian]

Thanks Mick. It certainly looks like the painting. It is much bigger and chunkier than my normal insigne's. But it wouldn't reach the dimensions in that article. This is a small plant however and I expect the flower will get bigger on a larger clump.

It will be interesting to see yours as a comparison. Do they come from different sources?

David,

My three plants were purchased from 3 different sources but I believe two may have originally come from the same source.

I'm not holding my breath but the best prospect I have is a plant that is said to have been purchased from Ratcliffe's 40 years ago. The leaves on this plant are almost twice the width of any of my other insignes and the stem is almost twice as thick as well. This clone isn't a vigorous grower as demonstrated by the potting dates on the tag. The first date recorded on the tag is 1997 and its only a 3 growth plant.

The flower in Orchids limited's photo best fits the description of Harefield Hall, if it's 5-6 inches wide, you could have some confidence that it is a division of the 114 year old plant.

Xavier mentioned that he had seen Harefield Hall but did'nt mention anything about the size of the flower, I hope he gives us some more info.

I was talking to 4 veteran judges (all 30+ years judging) last night and asked if they had seen Harefield Hall, the answer was yes, they had all seen the plant. I said " it must be a sight to see a 6" /150mm insigne with 1'/25mm petals" and there were some blank faces. I showed them a copy of the original description and all agreed that the biggest they had seen was about 4"/100mm max.

If we look at the description, it says that the flower was carefully measured, so it wasn't a guess. I have looked for other written contemporary evidence that confirms the colossal size of the flower but have only found a few references without actual measurements. There is a mention of 'Harefield Hall' in a 1908 edition of Orchid review, "the flower is gigantic".

The Feb/March 2000 edition of Australian Orchid Review has an article by Gary Yong Gee about Paph insigne. A very detailed article that discusses many of the forms/varieties/cultivars of insigne. Gee says that 'Harefield Hall' is about 4"/100mm wide and a double page photo shows what is claimed to be 'Harefield Hall' and a normal size insigne. There is a difference in size but its not that dramatic.

Does 'Harefield Hall' exist? I don't know..

Regards, Mick

 

[biothanasis]

Very beautiful!!!

 

[emydura]

Thanks Mick

That plant from Ratcliffe's sure sounds promising. Look forward to seeing a photo of it as a comparison.

Mine is 4 inches across. Five inches if you spread the petals horizontally. It is way bigger than a normal insigne but short of 6 inches. I'm sure my flower will get a little larger on a bigger clump but 6 inches seems out of reach.

Here is a photo of it fully opened. To my eyes it looks very similar to Robert's clone except the petals are not as flat, although this is a pretty plastic trait. I sent some photos to David Banks as he has written about all these fake 'Harefield Hall's' and he said it was the 'real deal'. He sent me some photos of a few of the fake ones and mine looks nothing like those. One of the fakes looked all but identical to Jim's 2nd photo.

 

[emydura]

I had a further conversation with David Banks. His and my plant come from the same source - Neil Finch (DUNO Orchids). Neil Finch's father started growing this clone in the 1950's. So I'm still to be convinced that this isn't "Harefield Hall". Unless it is true that the flowers need to be 6 inches across.

 

[quietaustralian]

It certainly looks more like the RHS painting in this recent photo. I acknowledge that your plant is small and that on subsequent flowerings it could increase in size. I've been astounded by the increase in size from year to year at times.

As I mentioned previously, there is so much conflicting information about the plant. Xavier said its not vigorous and doesn't clump, yet I read that Olaf said it is a very vigorous plant and that it was divided many times.
There appears to be a gap in the literature from about 1910-1936 regarding 'Harefield Hall'.

Should my plant flower to look like the RHS painting and be of good size, I'll have a chromosome count done. Ironically my largest insigne is marginally larger in some dimensions than given for 'Harefield'. I'll take a group shot of some of my insignes tomorrow to show some variation in size.

Like any division of an awarded plant, you would expect at some point in time, given good culture that you could achieve the dimensions as per the award. In this case 150mm wide with petals 25mm at the widest point. I'm not saying that 'Harefield Hall' doesn't exist, just that I haven't seen or heard of an insigne that matches the description 100%.

Mick

 

[Ozpaph]

Thanks Mick

That plant from Ratcliffe's sure sounds promising. Look forward to seeing a photo of it as a comparison.

Mine is 4 inches across. Five inches if you spread the petals horizontally. It is way bigger than a normal insigne but short of 6 inches. I'm sure my flower will get a little larger on a bigger clump but 6 inches seems out of reach.

Here is a photo of it fully opened. To my eyes it looks very similar to Robert's clone except the petals are not as flat, although this is a pretty plastic trait. I sent some photos to David Banks as he has written about all these fake 'Harefield Hall's' and he said it was the 'real deal'. He sent me some photos of a few of the fake ones and mine looks nothing like those. One of the fakes looked all but identical to Jim's 2nd photo.

that looks more like the RHS painting.

 

[Paphio]

Thanks Mick

That plant from Ratcliffe's sure sounds promising. Look forward to seeing a photo of it as a comparison.

Mine is 4 inches across. Five inches if you spread the petals horizontally. It is way bigger than a normal insigne but short of 6 inches. I'm sure my flower will get a little larger on a bigger clump but 6 inches seems out of reach.

Here is a photo of it fully opened. To my eyes it looks very similar to Robert's clone except the petals are not as flat, although this is a pretty plastic trait. I sent some photos to David Banks as he has written about all these fake 'Harefield Hall's' and he said it was the 'real deal'. He sent me some photos of a few of the fake ones and mine looks nothing like those. One of the fakes looked all but identical to Jim's 2nd photo.

Hi David!

I'm in Sydney and would love one of these to the collection. HH would be up there with my favorite paph's. Would you be willing to sell a division?

Cheers,
Aristotle

 

[emydura]

Hi David!

I'm in Sydney and would love one of these to the collection. HH would be up there with my favorite paph's. Would you be willing to sell a division?

Cheers,
Aristotle

My plant is in bud at the moment. It shouldn't be long before the flower opens.

My plant isn't big enough to divide sorry. I'm finding it very slow to multiply. Certainly much slower than a normal insigne.

You do see divisions on eBay from time to time although you need to be careful it is the real deal. There are a lot of fakes out there.