I took the picture above yesterday morning when the ground was still wet with dew and I sent it to Mrs. ProfessorRoush after telling her that I thought I'd captured a photo of a rose with exquisite coloring. After receiving it on her iPhone, sitting in an adjacent room to where I was engaged on the computer, I heard her immediately exclaim "no way!". And she then proceeded to accuse me of faking the coloration by photoshopping it. And wanted to know where it was in the garden (even though she passes by it every day).
Mrs. ProfessorRoush is a wonderful wife and human being, but I was deeply hurt that she could suggest I would resort to falsifying a photo to deceive her. I'm certainly not above cropping out a decaying bloom from the corner of a picture, nor occasionally playing with the brightness/darkness setting of a photo, but I would never, and probably could never, fake a picture like this one. I don't even own Photoshop. I do my cropping and compressing on the Microsoft Picture Manager that comes with the computer. If I had really faked this photo, I'd have certainly smudged out the insect bites on a couple of the petals.The photo is, of course, of Griffith Buck's 'Distant Drums' rose, a rose that I've written about before and one that is admittedly not one of my favorites. The blooms of this rose always have a unique coloration, but this trio went above and beyond their usual palette. Since it just gave me a chance to astonish Mrs. ProfessorRoush, I may have to raise my personal ranking of 'Distant Drums'. It's not often that I can gain a little respect at home, even if I have to loudly and fervently assert my innocence to get it.
I liked the photo so much, in fact, that I just made it my "masthead" for the blog. What do you think of it?
.jpg)

.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)
.jpg)