I love tall daylilies .......that being said , my pet peeve is a daylily that has trouble holding up it's head. I dont want a scape that leans or tries to touch the ground with its head . I want my daylilies to stand up proudly. It irks me that daylilies are registered and offered for sale that do this no matter how pretty the blooms . It is not an attractive trait.

signet

I have one, think it is called Fiery Temper, ALWAY"S blooms right on the ground. The bloom scapes are maybe a couple of inches long. Nice big flowers, but not abundant. It has never had a single proper bloom. I can't imagine anyone selling a daylily like this. I have a few others that occasionally will bloom down in the foliage, but I just can't imagine anyone having the nerve to register this one. I gave it several years to improved, tried moving it, I think I finally got rid of it last year. I agree about the fading colors. I don't have any that has leaning scapes, but I wouldn't like that either. I also have Christmas Is, love the flower, but it has a very minimum of blooms. I really need to get a similar daylily & ditch that one.

I agree with the short, weak, and fading being peeves. I've fixed a couple of ones that fade with a shadier spot, but others [all of which are now gone] wouldn't bloom in a shadier spot. I also am bugged by ones that have very few buds, and ones that don't bloom every every year. I've been in the process the past 3 years of finally getting rid of ones with these weaknesses. My flowers were overcrowded anyway. One more year or so after having moved some last fall, and some more will be gone if they don't shape up! This will be all but a couple of favorites that I will hang onto anyway.

One of the things I like about this forum is people talk about how well certain varieties bloom, and when I see one that I like, I make note of it.

#1 would be weak, spindly scapes.

#2 is flowers with petals that "canoe" and don't fully open

Amen to that Cindy! Another one that seriously irks me is when a seller gets a daylily that has been misnamed and continues to sell it under the wrong name . A big one is the daylily Howdy being sold under the name Magic Dawn which is registered as a rose pink self 3' 2" early daylily and Howdy is a 3' 4'' bicolor mid season daylily .Not sure how this happened and not sure why people continue to perpetuate the situation.

Signet

That is most frustrating - a misnamed daylily that takes two years to show up. At least it could bloom the first year! .......How about another annoyance. Those daylilies that have one of the petals poking straight out. Reminds me of a kid sticking their tongue out at you.....Maryl

Signet, I am perplexed about this correct Id stuff. Here is my picture of what I was told Magic Dawn, the description sounds like Howdy. AHS and All Things Plants has both daylilies with pictures that look like Howdy. Where is the pink version pictured and described? I guess I just want to identify mine correctly. I see what you mean, this is a pain!

Sherry

Sherrygirl , what you have there is most likely Howdy ( hard to tell for certain ) . You are not the first person to be duped and the reason for that is that this has been going on for many years. No one has bothered to correct the problem. This was a discussion some time ago on the Spider Robin. i have been trying for years to get the real Magic Dawn . I bought one that supposedly is the real thing but have yet to see it bloom so hopefully this year the real Magic Dawn '" will please stand up " . I dont know why the daylily organizations allow this to continue ....doesnt speak well to the integrity of sellers if they are selling misrepresented plants. Years ago I did find a picture of the real one online . I am in the process of trying to find that picture again . I believe it is on the hard drive of my old computer that died so I will try to find again online .

Another that has sparked my curiousity is Bonanza . Description says" red orange self with green throat " Now my plant here is yellow with a red orange chevron and a yellow throat . AHS regisitration shows a yellow plant with a yellow throat and a reddish orange chevron but that is not how the description reads. Does this mean that the Bonanza i am growing is another case of misrepresentation ? I dont know . Frustrating . here is a link to a gardenweb post : forums.gardenweb.com/discussions/1855411/daylilies-that-look-alike-and-got-mixed-up .......that brought up this very subject in 2009 so this issue has been around a lot longer than 2009 and still no one does anything about it . Sad!

Here is a link from Dave's Garden showing a rose pink Magic Dawn . it is one picture of about 10 .....all the rest shown are actually H,. Howdy. Is this really Magic Dawn ? Your guess is as good as mine. http://davesgarden.com/guides/pf/showimage/291638/

Signet

Thanks Signet! Howdy makes more sense for my daylily. In my mind that is what it is now. If your Magic Dawn? Blooms this season please post a picture, I would REALLY like to see it.

Sherry

Can I add to the confusion? Years ago I was given a plant I was told was either Magic Dawn or New Dawn. Looked like the pic of New Dawn to me, but later when I learned the confusion between Magic Dawn & Howdy, I wonder if it isn't Howdy. To me the photos look & sound alike, but mine is taller than Magic Dawn & shorter than Howdy :) My photos are in Photobucket, so apparently I can't show them here.
I have read a couple descriptions, especially with older daylilies, that don't match the pics. Makes you wonder. My Bonanza is the normal yellow/orange-red chevron that I have seen in every photo of Bonanza, so I go with that.

My biggest annoyances are definitely fading and poor flower formation. I had so much trouble with Francois Verhaert not opening properly. At a guess, I think out of maybe 10 (?) blooms, only 2 or 3 opened properly. I think I'll give it another chance this year and if it does it again then maybe I'll move it. I love Amanda's Intrigue, but even on a mild summer day it fades. I have it in a spot that gets protected from the sun in the afternoon so I don't know what I can do to improve it.

I am surprised that fading is such a pet peeve for everyone. While I grant that it is not the ideal situation, even color-faded flowers can be beautiful. (As it seems that most blooms here color fade to some degree, I had better not mind that too much.)

I echo everyone's annoyance with: leaning scapes, misbehaving petals (canoed or sticking out at you), mis-named plants, flowers that bloom down in the foliage.

I particularly dislike blooms that melt or slick in the sun, blooms that don't open properly (to me, that means at least flat (or flattish) - I dislike anything tending towards chalice shaped), and top-branching.

Polymerous- I agree with you about the "melting" blooms, although I would probably melt in the sun too :) I don't mind a bit of fading, but when a flower bleaches out to being a dull, colourless bit of nothing it does get frustrating.

Polymerous-When I mentioned fading, I meant fading to a horrid brownish flower, usually looking all ripped up & ragged like as if a hailstorm hit them. I've had several of these; some were purple others red in the morning. But by noon you couldn't tell what the original color was. I've also had several reds that ended up virtually colorless &/or see through; very ugly.

Now, one of my favorite reds, Red Volunteer, fades too much with full sun. But I moved it to a shadier spot and it is great most days. Some of the others I moved just wouldn't bloom in a shadier spot, so they are long gone.

Now, Priscilla's Dream is the opposite and very unusual. It darkens as the day goes on.

I agree with everyone's pet peeves so far, especially the mis-identified plants. The AHS database is still relatively new, and honestly lots of flaws and less than professional programming. The only advice I can give you is to email the registrar with the errors. There's about a 50% chance you can get something corrected. Of course, it's not all the databases fault. Research how many ways you can spell Stella de Oro.

Lastly, my pet peeve is that some hybridizers use highly enhanced colored flower pictures to sell their new introductions. There are a couple of hybridizers that I won't buy their plants on principal only. And long after the plant is available in the secondary market, the enhanced pictures are still being used on many auctions and price lists.

I have to agree with you Ed. Those $200.00 pictures of a $20.00 daylily...As for fading, if you put up with less then colorfast daylilies, they will continue to market less then colorfast daylilies. I'm not saying it's easy, and, as a non-hybridizer, I probably am not up to speed on the degree of difficulty, I just know that a good level of color retention on daylilies can be achieved, and that some hybridizers recognize the problem and are working on it . There are just too many available even now that do a good job of holding their basic color to say it's impossible.......Brad: That Priscilla's Dream is pretty either way, and would qualify as being colorfast in my book just because at the end of the day, there is no guessing what color it originally was. The pattern may have changed but not much of the base color.........As for the AHS data base, no data base is flawless. Try pulling up "Ram" on the ATP database. I never can seem to find it...........Maryl

Francois Verhaert does not bloom well for me either. Out it goes. Enhanced pictures are often easy to spot. I don't buy many new intros but I don't buy any where I suspect the pictures are enhanced. There was one Carolina hybridizer that enhanced his pictures to the point that I would not have one in my garden. Christmas Is became Christmas Was - it never bloomed up out of the foliage and it had few flowers.

Here's one for you Maryl,

Ida's Magic is listed to be in the parentage of over 400 plants in the AHS Database. Search parentage and look at the plants listed on page 2, showing 11-20 of the 400. See a small flaw? All pages except the first are flawed.

You have to remember that the electronic check list is relatively new. The records were kept in a card file before that. I cannot imagine what AHS went through to convert to electronic records.

Not to beat a dead horse or sound negative, but Bob Clary was digitizing the check list back in the '90s. Then Tinker, et all developed a data base which the AHS database still doesn't rival. But instead of building on what existed, the AHS persisted in developing it's own database using it's own sources. I wish it would have worked out differently. I think it would be better today.

I agree with the mis-identified plants, and don't like fading, but in my climate, fading is expected...as I fade when the sun gets really hot. My main peeve is slow opening blooms. Malaysian Monarch is a prime example of slow opening, but not the only one. I get up early so I can take my bloom photos before the sun distorts the photos, but I kept it simply because I haven't got another that compliments Forsyths' Garret Mason as well as it does. When I find one I like that opens early, MM is gone!

kay

Kay, I have both Malaysian Monarch and Court Magician. Court Magician is VERY similar to Malaysian Monarch. If you pick a flower from each and bring them to me, I never know which is which.You may want to consider it as a replacement. They are both Munsons. For me Court Magician is a slightly better flower. Emperor Butterfly is somewhat similar too, also Munson, but a lighter color purple.

Brad

My pet peeve is sellers using photos taken by others or stock photo for their sales and not noting in their listing it is not their picture from their garden. It is not about giving credit to the photographer but it gives a buyer a false impression of what the blooms/foliage/scapes may look like in a zone similar to theirs.

I wasn't too far into daylilies when my "mentor" told me to be cautious of sellers who don't use their own field pictures of what they are selling....I want to add just as an aside that all of us who buy daylilies on line need to take a few minutes and post those experiences on the Garden Watchdog. I can't tell you how many times I've used that service and it certainly is the friendly thing to do for other daylily enthusiasts........Maryl.....Garden Watchdog

Unfortunately, many of the online sellers are not listed on the Garden Watchdog. There is incredible fraud in the depiction of daylily blooms. Even if the photo is not "enhanced," the grower knows when a photo is not typical. Lighting alone can change colors substantially, often giving more saturation than usual. But buyers are suckers. I've seen on the lily auction where people go crazy about a listing that has a glorified hybridizer photo, while a seller of the same plant who uses a true photo from the garden goes begging for bids.

I agree with Julia and would also add, that I prefer it when sellers include their own description of how the plants perform for them. I find both points very important, since I am wanting to know how it looks and performs in a similar zone of mine.

Hi Maryl I found it .......here is the page link from ATP for daylily Ram http://allthingsplants.com/plants/browse/plants/children/181473/?q=R&offset=240

Signet

Thanks Signet. It was the first time I'd seen Ram on ATP. I think I figured it out now. You don't have to wade through their numberous suggestions that pop up, just type in the name and hit the search icon......... It took you to point the way for me. Thank you again...........Maryl

I have Ram for sale. I will send a large (3-4 fans) for $15 plus around $10 postage. It grows well for me in Central Ohio. I love the big flower.

Well, not to put too fine a point on my number one Pet Peeve, but how much does Ram fade for you Dick?.............Maryl

A couple of my flowers this summer reminded me of a pet peeve not listed above. Having a large clump-or even a medium clump--that has only one or 2 stems. Certain flowers seem to do this often

Comment on sellers not using their own or using enhanced pics: I never trust them nor do I even enjoy the pics. The pictures here on Gardenweb are often much superior. I think most of us try to have as accurate pictures as possible. I know I take and retake over many days til I get as close as possible to the actual color. Some are not possible, but many can get close.