Definitely no P. richardianum in my eyes maybe not even var. lynniea but a normal P. lowii. If the colours are true in the photo a very intense coloured one.Nice flower! But looks more like lynniae to me.
According to O. Gruss the differences are :what is the difference to lowii??
Yes, it is normal lowii.Definitely no P. richardianum in my eyes maybe not even var. lynniea but a normal P. lowii. If the colours are true in the photo a very intense coloured one.
I know photos where the color saturation for Paph flowers has been turned up. Here it looks similar... I can't help but also the green of the leaves has this intense unnatural 'coloration'.The color seems really dark red for any lowii I’ve ever seen. Could we see a pic in natural light without photo editing? Perhaps next to another Paph flower?
I didn't want to say that clearly in my post #4 ... but also in my eyes the photos are all oversaturated ones.I know photos where the color saturation for Paph flowers has been turned up. Here it looks similar... I can't help but also the green of the leaves has this intense unnatural 'coloration'.
Brucher, no and why ? Everybody is responsible for his posts .... as long as the content doesn't come in conflict with the forum rules everything is o.k.. Seems to be a question of personal taste and skills to me. So, some photos are blurred others oversaturated......Shouldn’t there be a rule against posting heavily edited photos?
I don’t know about the mentioned species, but these colors are beautiful, very intense.Definitely no P. richardianum in my eyes maybe not even var. lynniea but a normal P. lowii. If the colours are true in the photo a very intense coloured one.
I probably post the blurred onesBrucher, no and why ? Every body is responsible for his posts .... as long as the content doesn't come in conflict withe the forum rules everything is o.k.. Seems to be a question of personal taste and skills to me. So, some photos are blurred others oversaturated......
Enter your email address to join: