garden gates

Last fall I was at the local metal supply shop where they were having a special on sheets of stamped stainless steel. About that time I was thinking of rebuilding the gates to the back yard. The stainless sheets were 4×4 feet, narrower than the opening that need to be gated. But after a little work with pencil and paper I came up with these two designs.


What you see are the back sides, the sides that have a little more detailing, and the sides that I like the most. On the second gate I spaced and cut the center support too short so that I had to fill in with another piece of wood. I wound up liking the repaired version than the original drawing. With construction and with photography, I like to plan a bit ahead of time. But accidents will happen, and they often make the outcome a lot more interesting.

Basic materials: ribbed stainless steel, ipe hardwood trim, painted pressure-treated wood structure.

how to scare adults and small children

A box showed up last week. Inside was a plant I’d bid on on eBay, Darlingtonia californica, the cobra lily, a plant for the new bog garden. It was a nice little division, packed in sphagnum and still wet from the bog garden it had just left. I showed it to John.

“It’s enought to give me nightmares,” he said, shuddering a little.

Darlingtonia californica

I have this scare of snakes, a fear instilled in me by a nanny who took me to the Rangoon zoo and pointed out the the banded kraits. “See that one? It can kill you with one little bite. And that one,” she said, pointing out the Burmese python. Well, she didn’t need to say anything. Multi-feet long, and as fat as I was, there was no question I wouldn’t want to feel its loving embrace.

Some people want gardens that are pretty and make them feel good. But somehow I end up getting this plant that has more than a passing resemblance to my childhood fears. Maybe it’s about time I faced them head-on. And as scary as this plant is, I think it’s also fairly amazing-looking. And for the first time, I have this compulsion to give this plant a nickname, something like…Audrey

shameless self-promotion

If you’re in San Diego, I invite you to attend The Photographer’s Eye: A Way of Seeing, one of the current shows at the Museum of Photographic Arts. It’s got one of my works from my Going series as part of it. The show closes April 20.


James SOE NYUN: Steering wheel, Monument Valley (from the Going series).

Also, a few posts back I mentioned that I’d put up the link to the Top 50 Photographers at Portland’s Critical Mass, where one of my portfolios is featured. The link is now active. Take a look!

bad day for ferns

After three weeks of days in the 60s the last two have pushed into the 80s. It’s the kind of intensely sunny spring weather that makes people productive or delirious. Next door they’re playing basketball and downing beers, and here at home John and I have been getting a final coat of paint on some steel stairs to the roof deck that had started to fade and show some rust spots. For us, the beers and margaritas will flow later this afternoon, when we go over to Mason’s and Carlos’s for dinner.

What is a great day for humans hasn’t been so kind on the Australian tree fern, Cyathea cooperi that we put in the ground last fall. General planting guidelines for them say to give them semi-shade, except near the coast, where they can tolerate full sun. Three weeks ago we had a weekend like this one, suddenly sunny and hot after a long period of cool weather. The plant wasn’t used to the heat, and the last set of fronds suddenly browned.

Fortunately the fern was producing a more fronds at the time, and they since unfurled into a gorgeous new set. Hopefully that hot weather prepared the plant for more sun and heat, and that the new set of fronds doesn’t dry up like the last ones did. We should find out in a few days.

Still, in the end, I won’t worry too much. This is about as hot as it ever gets at the coastal edge of town. The plant is getting established, and it’s fully capable to produce more fronds just in time for the cool, overcast months ahead, months with conditions that the locals have dubbed “May gray” and “June gloom.” Now that the sun’s out, though, it’s time to work on my tan…

online plant databases compared: PlantFiles vs. Hortiplex

Imagine opening your mailbox and getting one of those seed catalogs with no pictures and names you’ve never heard of before–something like the J.L. Hudson, Seedsman listings, for instance, which just hit my house a couple days ago. With a little work you can find out at least something about almost any plant you’re interested in on the web. Often the results from a general search engine query are a mess to sort through, and I wanted to see if I could find out information on general plants by testing out specific databases that would have predictable interfaces and results.

I’ll look at more general resources like Wikipedia and the USDA’s Plants Database in the future, but for this little study I narrowed the databases to those available at two of the big garden sites, the PlantFiles at Dave’s Garden and Hortiplex at GardenWeb. Both Dave’s Garden and GardenWeb offer memberships that give you various privileges, though Dave’s Garden charges for their premium services. Both sites let you look for information in addition to just plants, but to simplify this study I’ve limited my scope to searching the plant databases.

As of last Friday, the press kit for PlantFiles had this background:

The PlantFiles is the world’s largest collaboratively-developed database of plants, created by real gardeners from around the world. It is targeted toward serious gardeners and professionals, but is easy enough for anyone to use. Currently 162,130 plants are featured along with images and notes; more are added each day. Submissions are subject to peer-review, with errors corrected by a team of editors. PlantFiles is the fastest-growing feature of DG, and is responsible for attracting more than half of all new subscribers.

On the same day the Hortiplex page said it contains “101,133 records, 78,477 links, 50,744 taxa, 50,389 cultivars, 14,409 images/image links, and 1,651 vendor links.”

Side-by-side comparison: On one day (April 4, 2008) I looked up a collection of plants in both databases, one database immediately after the other. I selected general plant names, names of specific varieties, and nicknames for plants. My sample was pretty small–16 queries in all–but I think the results give a good sense for what the databases offer. The results of what I found are listed in the table below.

Entering queries: The search interfaces behave a little differently. PlantFiles automatically turns queries of more than word into keywords booleaned together with an “or” operator. If you don’t want that to happen, you can do an exact text search by placing the words together within quote marks. That’s similar to how Google and probably most other search engines operate, so if you’ve mastered that, you can search PlantFiles in the same way. All the multi-word searches in the table below for PlantFiles were entered in quotes except where noted.

Hortiplex behaves differently. It automatically assumes right-hand truncation, so that a search for something like “kale” (which I used below) will pull up various kale plants, but it also will retrieve Hemerocallis ‘Kaleidomania’ because “kale” is how the word “Kaleidomania” begins. I couldn’t find a way to defeat that “feature,” either by using quotes alone, adding a space to the end of “kale,” or by adding a space and wrapping the whole thing between quotes. Maybe there’s a way but I couldn’t find it, and I couldn’t find any documentation on how to search. This feature isn’t a problem all the time, but I’ve noted some of the gross results below.

Dave’s Garden PlantFiles GardenWeb Hortiplex
Petunia 244 hits

With separate hits for the generic P. hybrida plus additional hits for specific cultivars and other plants that have “petunia” in their name.
Many hits with photos.

43 hits

1 hit for genus; garden petunia varieties clustered together under P. hybrida; other hits for various species–various petunias and plants that have “petunia” in their name. 11 hits with images or links to images.

Double Delight rose 0 hits using this exact string; 1 hit using string “rose double delight”; 14 hits using shortened string “double delight”; 8092 hits when no quotes used around search string. The single hit for this exact cultivar had 44 images. 1 hit

With image.

Sarracenia 152 hits

Includes species, forms of species, and many hybrids. Many hits with 1 or more photos.

56 hits
Includes species, forms of species, and cultivars; 20 listings with photos.
Sarracenia purpurea 5 hits

Found the species, one form, one subspecies, and two varieties. Four of five hits with 1 or more photos apiece.

5 hits

Resulted in the type species plus four varieties, including two cultivars. Two hits with images and/or links to images.

Hinoki cypress 3 hits

Each with 1 or more images.

2 hits

1 for species and 1 for cultivar. 1 hit with 3 photos.

Dianella 10 hits

Includes 6 species plus 4 varieties or cultivars. 9 with 1 or more pictures.

7 hits

1 for genus, 6 species. 1 with image.

Salvia divinorum 1 hit

With 3 images.

1 hit

With 1 image.

black-eyed susan 50 hits

Includes hits for several species, but the majority are for cultivars of Rudbeckia hirta. 34 hits with 1 or more pictures apiece.

10 hits

2 for genera, 8 for species. 7 hits with pictures.

kale 93 hits

All examples of kale, flowering kale, or other appropriate hits. 23 hits with images.

18 hits

Included 3 groups of kale species, 5 kale species, 10 other hits that had text string “kale” though weren’t the vegetable. 6 hits with images or links to images, only 1 of these for the vegetable.

tomato Mr Stripey 1 hit

With 3 photos.

0 hits

Also tried “Tomato Mister Stripey” but still no hits.

alpine strawberry 9 hits

All hits for cultivars of 1 species. 6 hits with 1 or more photos.

1 hit
mizuna 6 hits

Hits for 2 species, 3 varieties, 5 cultivars. 2 hits with 1 or more photos.

1 hit
muscat grape 0 hits / 1 hit for “grape muscat” / 262 hits for “muscat grape” entered without quotes, with desired entry in the #2 position. 0 hits for “muscat grape” or “grape muscat”
lettuce Nevada 1 hit 0 hits / only hit for general “lettuce” search.
lemongrass 0 hits as 1 word / 3 hits for “lemon grass,” including 2 hits with several photos. 1 hit / 1 additional hit for “lemon grass,” the latter with image.

What did I think? As you can see PlantFiles at Dave’s Garden pulled up the most results most of the time. If you’re looking for a specific cultivated variety, it’s the most likely to have what you’re looking for. I did notice that Hortiplex does have a pretty decent sampling of rose varieties, though it didn’t find the variety of lettuce I was interested in. Still, there are sure to be times you don’t want to sort through 244 different petunia entries for general information. The lack of plant name authority control at both sites, at least for common names, can cause spotty, incomplete results of the sort you can see in the “lemongrass” example above, where “lemondgrass” and “lemon grass” were considered different things. Some sort of fuzzy “did you mean instead?” searching and retrieval would be nice, but these are sites without the resources of Google.

The displays in PlantFiles were fairly random, and those big sets of results sometimes took a long time to make sense of. Multi-word searches seemed to generally cluster at the top the results of your query in some sort of relevance order. Hortiplex offers a much more rational display of the results, listing the best matches at the top, and organizing things by genus, then species, then variety. Families, genera, species (including subspecies and varieties), grexes/groups, and cultivars are all displayed in different colors, so it’s easy to tell them apart.

Both sites offer ways for users to enter new plants, though Hortiplex’s method seemed less elegant. There’s a basic review of proposals for new plants before they go up on both sites. Both sites offer some basic scientific classification information that seemed pretty reliable, however there isn’t much of it–mainly information like family, genus, and species. Beyond the information on classification, PlantFiles offers some basic generic cultural information along the lines of plant size, hardiness, soil needs and propagation methods. Unfortunately many of the supposed hits on Hortiplex are just links out to other sites, and I found that some of the links don’t go anywhere.

Once a plant is in the database, both sites offer ways for users to contribute information and photos. To see the images or comments required scrolling down in PlantFiles or clicking on a link in Hortiplex. I preferred the scrolling method, though PlantFiles requires an additional click when there are more than seven images. Both sites have knowledgeable users, so you’re likely to find good information about at least some of the plants.

In the aesthetics department, I’d say that both sites are…functional. You go to the sites for the information, not for ideas on how to make you web page look hip.

At some point in the future I’ll take a look at some broad encyclopedias and at more specialized databases. I know that there’s a rich compost heap of information out there!

Just for fun, you can try out your own search comparisons using the little search forms below, courtesy of some basic HTML code that’s offered at each site.

Find your plant by searching PlantFiles:


Search the HortiPlex Plant Database:
(enter a common or a botanical name)


Include all records
Only records with images
Only records with vendor links
Only records of botanical taxa

"away from the soft pornography of the flower"

The quote in the title is from a statement by Charles Waldheim about the work of landscape designer Piet Oudolf in a January 31 article in the New York Times, “A landscape in winter, dying heroically.” (I ran across this in a post to Alexander Trevi’s interesting Pruned blog.)


Photos by Herman Wouters for the New York Times article.

One of Oudolf’s interests is in constructing landscapes that acknowledge the cycles of nature, the browning and the dying, along with the greening and regrowth.

“You look at this, and it goes deeper than what you see,” Oudolf is quoted. “It reminds you of something in the genes—nature, or the longing for nature.”

“You accept death. You don’t take the plants out, because they still look good. And brown is also a color.”

These are gardens about deeper things. They’re as beautiful as all those merely skin-deep gardens, but they’re so much more nourishing. I wrote earlier referring to a comment about Monet’s gardens being designed to expose natural processes. Oudolf’s gardens do the same thing, and I’d love to be able spend some time lost in his landscapes…

Piet Oudolf’s website.

april plant combinations

The garden is always changing. As plants mature and others come into bloom, I’m always seeing combinations of plants and interesting relationships between them. Here are a couple plant combinations in the yard that I’m particularly happy with.

This is Homeria collina, a South African bulb, with an unidentified rosette-forming succulent–quite likely a graptopetalum, possibly G. ‘Point Dexter’s’ or G. paraguayense–blooming in the foreground and cascading over a retaining wall. It’s right on the sidewalk in front of the house, and it’s extra-nice that you see the combination at eye-level.


I like how the purple-gray tones in the succulent complement the color of the block wall, and how its orangey tones work well with the homeria.

In the back yard there’s a different group of things converging, a bromeliad going out of bloom, some red Russian kale that’s just about ready to pick, plain white landscaping pansies that are nearing the end of their lifespans, and a Penstemon with its first flowers of the season. (The kale was much more purple just two weeks ago, before the weather started to warm up.)

In a couple of weeks these combinations will be gone, and there’ll be new ones that I’ve never seen before. All these joys of gardening!

winner of an ugly contest

Last summer John and I were at the farmer’s market in Ocean Beach, a funky, alternative neighborhood of San Diego. We were looking over some of the offerings at a stall when someone behind me starts laughing and shouts out over my shoulder, “Look at those ugly-ass tomatoes!”

Obviously someone used to the perfectly shaped (and perfectly tasteless) grocery store tomatoes, he was pointing out a pile of Cherokee Purple tomatoes to his girlfriend. “They’re, like mutant. Who’d buy that?” To be sure, the tomatoes were flat, irregularly shaped and sized, partly green and partly reddish-purple. Nothing to win a spot on a pinup calendar of tomato varieties. But these tomatoes have their rabid followers, and I count myself one of them. They’re like the best tomato you’ve tasted, and sliced up they’re actually pretty attractive.

The above is a picture from the Seed Savers Exchange catalog [ source ]. These are prettier examples than you usually find of this variety.

One person even has a domain name, cherokeepurple.com attached to his blog entries about trying to grow this variety (without much success) in Arkansas. I might not be that rabid, but last year I decided to save some seeds from the best examples of Cherokee Purple from the farmer’s markets so that I could grow my own. This is an heirloom, open pollinated variety, so they should come true from seed.

I consulted Saving Seeds, an older book by Marc Rogers that’s still available via Amazon (and probably a few other sellers). If you own the book, give it up–You’re a plant geek. There, the basic instructions were to first clean the seeds as best as you could. Next you drop them into a jar full of water for a few days until the gummy pulp surrounding the seeds ferments and liberates the seeds. When that happens, the previously pulpy seeds–which floated–would sink to the bottom of the jar. Finally you drain and dry them and store them away. I followed the instructions, but I was worried that there was still some pulp attached to some of the seeds when I was done with the process so that not all of them sank.

The acid test came three weeks ago when I put some of the seeds into pots. Maybe not all the seeds were processed perfectly, but I’m now the proud parent of six pots of Cherokee Purple seedlings!

I have a few spots around the yard selected for them, places where I’ve never put tomatoes, so I’m hoping they’ll take to their new locations and thrive. I’ll probably give them a couple more weeks in their pots, and then it’s time to set them loose. I’ll post the baby pictures as they grow up…pictures so ugly only a parent and lover of Cherokee Purple could love.

a mountain of plastic pots

I had a mountain of unwanted plastic pots, mostly in the 3-5 inch size, leftovers from when I was growing more than just a few orchids around the house. The pots were used, a little old, but basically functional. I couldn’t part with them–who knows when I’d need them? After a couple years of goading from John, a couple hundred of them went to the landfill last fall.

Then I heard about the Missouri Botanical Garden having a great idea. They’ve started up a program to recycle those unwanted leftover plastic pots into something useful.

Garden pots and trays have been recycled into landscape timbers, useful for building retaining walls and landscape borders. Each timber measures 7-inches X 9-inches by 8.5 feet long, weighs 280 pounds, and lasts for up to 50 years.

Well, yeah, Missouri would be a little far to go next time I have a pile of pots I need to part with. But I’ll be a little more diligent in looking around for more sustainable solutions than dumping them!

color resources

Here’s the side view of my studio. The colors are pretty atrocious and I wanted to try out some different options.

Colourlovers lets you play with colors in lots of ways, and I started there. I used their tool to extract some of the general colors of the studio from the picture above. I can’t change the brick easily, so the orange-red color is pretty much a given. I want to use foreground plantings that are mainly green, though I’ve already planted a Loropetalum chinense var. rubrum ‘Plum Delight’ which has vivid purple foliage much of the year. I made a “before” swatch combination incorporating the green and purple foliage with an orange that generally represents the brick. I also used the gray and army green colors from the studio for the first swatch. Those are the colors I want to play with modifying.
Studio: before

My current main idea is to do something a little more daring with the basic color, probably some in the intense blue to blue-violet range. I think the plant colors would look pretty amazing against it. About the time I redo the siding on the studio the patio will also get redone, most likely with charcoal gray/black uprights to mirror some charcoal supports I have going on in the front of the house. I’ll stare at the new swatch below to see if it really would be as cool as I think it might be. And if I don’t like that one, maybe something like the second alternate, something using rusted steel to cover the eaves and a dark, warm gray on the building… And if I don’t like those options, changing swatch colors is lots more workable than repainting everything.
Studio: option 1

Studio: option 2

While you’re at the site you can also take your swatches and turn them into plaids or stripes or a whole bunch of other patterns. A few months back I was spending waaaaay too much time playing at Colourlovers!
Studio Plaid 2
Studio 1

A similar resource, one that’s devoted just to swatches, is Adobe’s Kuler. It’s not as social a place as Colourlovers, but the interface is beautifully designed. Also, you’ll probably find more professional palette options that people have contributed. Enjoy!