The adage about beauty in the eye of the beholder is certainly true in the examples within this article. I'm on board with focal points, paths that tempt, and more being "just more" (although the problem with the "more" photo isn't the multitude of colors, it is the uniformity of all those same sized flowers and the fact that no similar colors are grouped together). The photo of the flowering shrubs speaks to me and makes me want to add more flowering shrubbery to my gardens.

However I'm not big on sharply defined borders. I like gardens that seem to rise up out of the lawn at an indeterminate point. Also I dislike the look of mulch and bare earth. And the recommendation for pastels is not for me. I like bright vibrant colors, and a lot of them!

I tend to learn from my own mistakes for the most part. I generally just ignore other people's gardens that are unpleasing to my own eye, but I do take inspiration from gardens that speak to me. Gardens that strike me as beautiful give me ideas, while I tend to just tune out those that I find unpleasing.

I learned a ton from the Landscape Design forum on GW. It has lost many of the professionals who used to post, but the old threads are still there, I am fairly sure. You do have to have a bit of a rhino hide on some of the threads from 10-15 years ago as some folks were somewhere in the blunt to rude range, but that didn't make their points any less valid. Current discussions are more about "curb appeal" than previously.

I learn a lot from just looking at plantings around homes in my area and trying to evaluate what I like or don't. I can remember doing the looking part even as a kid, though I couldn't have put in words why I wanted to hang out in some yards and not in others.

You could do searches for "before and after" gardens, both here on GW and on other sites. And do check out Plant Amnesty's website and the examples they have (in the right sidebar) of bad pruning examples. There are various cringe-worthy pruning jobs that don't enhance the plant's health or appearance.

And as Sped said, while there are principles of design, not all have to be followed slavishly. To my mind, gardening is for our pleasure and I feel that we get to pick and choose what part of the standard design rules we follow since we aren't pros working for others. And I also disagree with the use of mulch as an attractive part of the garden's look that the linked article seemed to suggest - not as bad as a sea of red mulch, but I like plants rather than mulch visible in my garden. That isn't to say I don't use mulch, but I really try to have it mostly covered with plants. I do like having a distinct edge, but have no problems with having plants that spill over it; I don't need several inches of bare ground or mulch as a garden border.

I think that the article contained several examples of poor design IMHO ;>). For instance the edge in the first photo would be a hassle to mow - all that illogical wiggly in and out. Or in photo two, there is too much of the same leaf shape and little balance, with all the tall plants on one side and all the shorts ones on the right, to say nothing of the vine to the right and the tree behind look in poor shape as far as health, so I don't think the mulch edge helps improve the look much. And I think that the color theory part is fairly lame.

I would recommend the blog "Dirt Simple", written by a Detroit area designer. Though her design style is miles from mine, tending to a formality that doesn't fit with my old buildings and rural spot, I have learned a lot by looking at her photos and reading her explanations of why she has done what she has.

I second Barb's suggestion of Dirt Simple. If you need inspiration for Winter Holiday planters, Deborah Silver ( Dirt Simple/Detroit Garden Works) productions are stellar. Sometimes I've straight-out copied them.

I wouldn't have looked so closely at those photos, Barb, if you hadn't yourself. I didn't look at the credentials of the writer, but I'm sure you've noticed a lot of web article bloggers or writers are completely derivative. All they do is lift and re-package other people's writings. Few of them have deep experience in their subject except "she's been blogging about gardens for 5 years)

Either the writer is an inexperienced gardener, mediocre photographer or borrowed crappy photographs. He or she just chose poor examples of the subject. Maybe it is a matter of taste, but if I were to show the benefits of edging, I'd find some beds that have the sharp angled edge that are well trimmed. Most of us can't or can't be bothered to achieve that, but for examples in a public forum, "average" is not very instructive. My opinion. I wonder if the writer didn't have access to really top notch gardens or really didn't know any better. That shot of the tall grasses with day lily foliage is just plain boring. Frankly, I'd rather see the grass with the all too familiar autumn joy, which is, at least, a contrast that works.

That "destination" photo is lackluster. Just because you show a plant at a distance with a path going to it doesn't mean the trip is interesting.

I'm sure most of us could come up with better stock photos to illustrate the writer's points. One could look at Nan Ondra's "Hayefields", Deborah Silver's "Dirt Simple" or go on line to look at photos of gardens with national reputations such as "Chancileer (sp) Manhattan's High Line, Polly Hill, any Omstead garden or even nurseries like White Flower Farm.

I know this has taken us afield from the OP's question and the photographs weren't the point but it really got me thinking about what good teaching material is and how important it is to consider it closely.

NHBabs, the gardens in "Dirt Simple" are miles from my style of landscape also, but the brick and wrought ironwork settings for her gardens take me back to Boston/Beacon Hill where we lived long ago, with all its hidden court yard gardens and Olmstead's "Emerald Necklace" of public parks. I have a fondness for city gardens. I like that she maintains this elaborate garden to make money via garden tours for the "Greening of Detroit" project.

Marie, I love the "High Line" garden in NYC. I've never been there, but from pictures alone, it inspires me,

"I'm sure most of us could come up with better stock photos to illustrate the writer's points."

Since you offered... :-) That would certainly be welcome! There is most certainly a treasure trove of experience on this forum.

I would not say I'm at the point where I can illustrate much. I'm at the point where I look at things that are amazing and try to figure out why I love it, but I don't have enough knowledge for it to all "make sense" yet. I could easily think it's just the color combination that draws me, when actually it could be the way different textures play off each other that makes something so attractive, etc. The photograph I found most helpful was the chaotic cottage garden. I still struggle with how each of my chosen single plant species will look as a whole, and I end up with a mess that does not match my visualized goal.

I do agree that the grasses and day lilies and grasses are boring, and that the one hydrangea in the distance looks like he's trying to find a home somewhere. The shrub illustrations were helpful for me. I just couldn't stand conifers and evergreens until recently. They reminded me of the scrappy southern pines I grew up with that were everywhere. Now I'm starting to appreciate a well-placed and beautiful blue spruce.

NHBabs, thank you so much for taking the time to post above. Your winter views are as beautiful as your summer views! I loved how peacefully whites winters in NH were, and your photos evoke that. Winters here don't have quite the same quality because the snow usually melts quickly and my kids are old enough to be busier.

Your spruces and other evergreens are magnificent. Really inspiring. The pictures are tremendously helpful for seeing the value they can give to a view and design. I sometimes worry about an evergreen shading a bed that needs sun, especially since I have to fight for all the sun I have. I don't have a single space in all day sun, but now, after tree removal, I have some spaces that get maybe six hours. Do your beds face south? If not, do you find the shade from the evergreens to be an issue?

Everything looks wonderful. I love the colors, the mix of textures and heights, everything.

I thought quite a bit about what I wanted to do this winter and researched many different types of plants. I had charted the sun last year, but that data changed since we took out more unhealthy trees last fall. It did, however, give me a place to start planning. Plans went around and around and around. One thing I've determined can really waylay my planning is impulse buying. As much as I want to support local businesses, I've decided that when I pick a plant I want to use, I'm better off calling ahead to see if a nursery has it, and then going there with blinders on to everything else, rather than buying this and that pretty thing whenever I see it. Same with buying seeds for winter sowing. I can end up with 50 packets of things I have no idea what I'm going to do with. The plants above are, ironically, an exception. I did buy them at a nursery, but when I saw them I knew they would fit in with my plan.

Wow NHBabs! I'm just now getting into winter interest gardening and your pictures are an inspiration! I hope you don't mind but I think I want to copy that one hemlock bed. I have a question, do you have or ever put any spring bulbs in that bed? Or is there not enough room? Just curious. I'm still pretty new to the NE, gardening and winter, lol

Thanks!

Erin - In central MA, you want to use a different evergreen since hemlocks have an insect (wooly adelgid) that will cause them to die a slow and ugly death. And in all honesty, ours are coming down some time in the next year or so since they have gotten really large and are taking too much room. When we put them in (not my choice, DH's) we were looking at a wind break rather than a backdrop, and I decided later that the hemlocks would make a good backdrop for a bed. However, after 20 years they have gotten to the stage that they are large and overgrowing the perennial bed and beginning to look gangly, so DH has decided they should go. I would most likely work around them for another 5 years or so, but he's the one who wields the chain saw and in all reality, we have many acres of hemlocks elsewhere, so I don't feel too guilty taking out 8 or so. I will most likely be looking to place at least some new evergreens behind the perennials, perhaps more of the dark green arborvitae 'Techny' that I used in the first bed in the photos above or one of the slower growing spruces. The first plants I put in front of the hemlocks were daffodils (vole proof), some tulips (mostly eaten by the voles) and some old-fashioned shrub roses that I needed to move away from the house because it needed foundation work. A few years later, I decided I wanted a deeper boarder with more impact there, so I added various other tall perennials, shrubs, and clematis on supports and then some medium to short perennials across the front of the bed, all in tones of red, pink, and white. Here is a June photo from last year that looks down the length of it. In all honesty, some folks would find this bed too random and chaotically cottage-y, but it brings me joy and I do think that the evergreens give it some structure that it wouldn't have if it was just backed by the small pond and field that are behind the hemlocks.

This folk doesn't see that, and I saw it in person a couple of weeks ago. It's interesting from one end to another. And I still hope you can find a place for persecaria polymorphia when you need some sturdy height; of course that will be where you can't brush up against and smell it.

I love that bed you just posted too NHBabs. I come from the British tradition of "cottage-y" gardens, and I find it much more natural and easy on the eyes. All around me in my part of America, I see these large blocks of one or two species of flowers/bushes/trees plonked down in the middle of huge swathes of mulch and they somehow dispirit & distance me--too simple, too designed, too arid almost. Give me the small, interesting, yes chaotic spaces of the pollinator-friendly (and perhaps weed-friendly) cottage garden.

I guess it's because the house & property sizes are so much smaller in England that the cottage garden still rules there--a riot of competing colors sometimes, a messy, fertile, friendly tradition that isn't so well designed but pulls everyone closer to look and enjoy.

Deannatoby I meant the kind of photos you find in good gardening magazines, and books that are readily available. "Quality" is certainly available on the internet (Deborah Silver, Nan Ondra have been mentioned as well as on-line versions of print) Over the years there have been, and still are, posters who really know their design principles and have the photographs to prove it!

Unfortunately, internet blogs may not be scrutinized by a knowledgable editor and publisher who have an investment and reputation to protect. (I'm not saying that everything that makes it into print is excellent, either!)

I was really expressing my annoyance at the poor quality of information that's so accessible on the internet because anybody can call themselves a 'blogger' and create a website that looks like it is providing solid information or, as in the case of we were originally talking about, even photographs that do not illustrate accurately a point it is trying to make.

In the cases of the original post, inexperienced gardeners may not realize what poor examples they are seeing or understand that the so called "expert" really doesn't understand what he or she is talking about.

Deannatoby, bed 1 is ESE to WNW with the photos of the mostly south side, so it gets sun for most of the day. It's bright enough on the north side, and gets sun late in the day.

Bed 2 runs north-south, and the bed is on the east side of the hemlocks so gets morning sun until 1 or 2 during the growing season.

Bed 3 is a half oval on the west side of the house, and so gets sun from perhaps 10 or 11 AM during the growing season until the sun disappears behind the trees across the field in the evening. First photo I was looking slightly north of west, so on the south side of the bed, while the winter photo was looking SW from the north end of the bed.

My planning tends to be general - a set of colors, some guidelines for the evergreens, a height limit, and a few specific plants, but then I go see what my local nurseries are carrying and only buy after checking them all and only buy things that fit the plan. So with the hemlocks I knew I wanted all the same plant and have added red, pink and white flowers and foliage over time. For the first bed ("the shop bed") I knew I wanted some deciduous shrubs with good fall color, at least 3 colors of evergreens (ended up with 5 types of evergreen shrubs) and my height goal was 12'-15' so the work area would be shielded, but the solar panels wouldn't lose winter sun. I found a dark green, a gold, and a blue type of conifer locally that should stay in the right size range for a bunch of years and bought several of each, and then the next season I added 2 or 3 of 2 different types of rhododendrons. The rest of the shrubs are singles or multiples that have flowers, fruit, or fall color, and so add other types of interest. There are clematis that grow into various of the shrubs along with perennials around the edges.

I find that I am prone to impulse buying, but I went shopping for these beds with specific colors and types of plants in mind, and was able to stick to the plan since I knew just putting in the planned plants would take a lot of time and energy. Particularly for the shop bed (first one) once I got the plants home, I placed the pots on the prepared bed and then looked at them from various angles and shifted things around until the backbone of the large plants was set before actually planting. Then over the next couple of seasons I filled in the perennials and smaller shrubs and vines.

I think NHBabs hit the key idea with "negative space." It's really the most important element in a landscape yet the one that is so often undefended, especially by plant lovers. The problem with squiggly lines, as opposed to perfect broad sweeps, is what they do the negative space, not the planted space.

It's true that anybody can do a blog. It is most frustrating to find conflicting information on subjects even from reputable websites. And, the internet's identiy lies in skimmed knowledge, as well. If I want indepth knowledge about a subject, the internet can be my enemy. Link after link of quick summations, or outright plaguerized information, or the same information linked back to an original source I just clicked on a few minutes before, and on and on.

Gardening-wise I have this summer been most helped by some of the online publication of the Chicago Botanical Gardens. They have great pdf copies of their trial studies, etc.

My problem right now with gardening is that there are so many small parts that make up a beautiful whole. When I look at a beautiful picture, I can no more copy all those small parts than I can create a Homer Winslow. Being able to see each of the parts separated and discussed is clearly what I need. But most gardening sources, including print, lean far more heavily on the whole than the parts. They talk briefly about each part, give maybe a couple of examples, followed by lush pictures of the whole, page after page. I need the parts!

I got some of Gordon Heyward's books off of Half.com for 75 cents plus shipping. He's very helpful. Your House, Your Garden is wonderful. He goes into far more detail on the parts, discussing with several examples, plan included, his thought process on the design and why he placed elements as he did. He also points his thoughts back to the his central philosophy/goals with each garden. Hope to find more like that!

I checked out Deborah Silver's page and subscribed to her blog. She seems to make each blog very informative with good details. I look foward to having more time to spend with her past posts.

That should actually be Winslow Homer. Yes, that guy. Not editing my above post to keep me humble!

This book is a good resource.

https://www.amazon.com/Garden-Design-Illustrated-John-Grant/product-reviews/0917304802

Not about plant design but since you are rapidly becoming a very serious gardener: The Well Tended Perennial Garden by Tracy Aust- [senior moment] has done research on techniques for effective plant maintenance. Buy it as inexpensively as possible . The last many pages are a journal with lots of blank space for keeping records. Nice idea, in theory, but I kept thinking "for this I paid full price ?"

My dad was an ace at making gardening mistakes...his most common mistake that he did over and over again was planting trees to close together often once they matured you could not get a push mower between them. Palms almost ontop of each other when they got bigger.

Another mistake was just the badly planted tree or shrub...bushes too close to the house, trees too close to the fence.

Then the bad color harmony...the front yard of his home was mostly red and blue flower...kinda a fire and ice thing til he planted the fuchsia confederate rose smack dab in all that red...it clashes so badly.

those are the mistakes i've witnessed.

I have the original WTPG book. It was just reprinted this year to include new varieties, and I treated myself and got the new one after a couple weeks of deliberation. The pictures have been improved, which wasn't hard because the pictures in the old one were subpar. There are some new varieties, but they totally got rid of the blank journal pages at the end. Not happy with that. I do find that book invaluable . Have started a calendar with all the pruning requirements on it from that book so I'll be able to keep on top of things. One of the most useful garden books for herbaceous perennials for me.

so you found the blank journal pages helpful?

Well...no. My journal pages in my old one are still blank. But, I always meant to write in them. Every time I saw them I thought, "Yes, if I would write in these all my pruning notes would be right here with this great pruning resource." And then I never wrote in them. When I heard she had updated it to include new varieties I decided to take the plunge, because I seem to be plunging a lot lately with gardening resources. I like the ones I get for $0.75 + shipping on half.com. This one was brand new, so no chance of that. I would have to pay full price (full amazon price) and then this time I would write in those pages! I would, I tell you! I was all excited about getting my new updated copy and finally writing in those pages. It arrived, and...

Ms. Subaru Faust, why why why why? Oh, well. (I never can spell her name correctly.)

I'm laughing so hard it's not correct to abbreviate it to lol. If you have her other book, you know what she looks like too. and she's a tri-athlete....a really good one too. Subaru Faust....dissolving into giggles......

I'm glad I asked if you really used the blank pages...I was not being the least ironic, but your answer was priceless.

Ps...the Subaru did it....it is Sabato-Aust ....and Ididn't even need to look it up...then a sad thought occurs to me: was it auto-mistake that corrected Sabato to Subaru? Tell me not...

I tell you not. Subaru was the successful intention.

I don't want you to get overconfident, though. Technically her name is DiSabato-Aust. And, I hope no more "sads" occur to you (see your post above) because of that. ;-D

Marie, please have many many many more senior moments for many years as long as you keep helping me with my garden!

She lost more than the journal pages in her new edition. She lost her cornrows in her hair, too. Still plenty of muscle, but the cornrows have moved on. I don't think the journal pages and cornrows are linked, but you never know!

P.S. In the spirit of typing errors, of which I have made numerous, I have to tell you about my son's regatta last week. It was the Maine State Competition for young sailors (called Optis after the boat they sail), and was held at a fairly prestigious and beautiful yacht club. They were excellent hosts, made wonderful food, held a fantastic race, and put a lot of effort into the cool T-shirts. Too bad, however, that they misspelled "yacht" on the back of the shirts. Unless "Yact" Club is the Dutch spelling. I know they were mortified, but it doesn't matter. That they hosted an excellent race is what counts, and as more years are put behind the T-shirt the funnier it will be to them. Everybody else already found it funny in the present. If our club makes T-shirts I'll think we should spell everything with flags just so nobody will see our mistakes, too!

more giggles....There's a book unto itself, "public" spelling errors.

Laughing is welcome relief because I've felt grumpy that the garden has felt like housekeeping recently. Never done, always dirty, messy, needs a "paint job". etc. I finally got around to edging it with a square nosed shovel that my husband sharpened twice. It's August for heaven's sake already. That's like letting the laundry pile up for 2 months. And similarly, it took 3 days to do it. My back can only take 45 minutes, then there's 'prettying' up. That doesn't include going around on my hands and knees with sissors. (kidding) Campanula said somewhere that one needs a string trimmer that rotates 90 degrees. Just what I don't want is another power tool. Well, its that or manicure sissors,. The heck with spelling Tracey's name, I can't even spell that cutting implement, either.

Lol you guys are too funny!

The landscape design forum has lots of posts from people who are struggling with their yards and it is possible to see some "don't" pictures along with the advice on how to improve. My current landscape is a mess due to recent move and construction projects but I won't put up any photos until I get it under control.

@ Marie - We've only done the edge of the lawn in the back, that is closest to the windows, this year, so you are ahead of us. [g]. I can't really notice how messy the far edge of the lawn is, from my back windows. I have bricks edging the edge close to the windows, which makes it easier to keep up with. We avoid power tools as well.

Thanks for the tip. I didn't realize there was a design forum, but I'll head over there soon and post!

Hi PM2! glad to know you're in the background. If a power tool can do it faster, better and not threaten my hearing or toes I'll use it. Cutting down miscanthus was a notable exception. Chain saw was the only way to go, but the entire plant wasn't worth the hassle. Chain sawed but the digging was entirely by boot.

Hi Marie. :-). I've not been following for awhile, but poke my nose in every once in awhile. I have only one grass in my garden - a "Hamelin" which is pretty manageable. I've avoided the large grasses, because of the difficulty of getting them out. I've eyed a 'Morning Light' for years, but so far have resisted. Electric lawn mower and a Chain Saw for trees and large branches. That's about it. No string trimmer, no leaf blower. [g]

I used to lecture on garden topics, including design. I had several slides of, um, problem gardens, all taken from magazine photos. I always prayed none of the owners would be in the audience. Among the most frequent design sins I found were too many garden ornaments, too small garden ornaments, garden ornaments unrelated in material or theme. And I always told my design clients--one focal point per view whether it's an ornament or specimen plant. Volumes could be written on this subject and this is a great thread.

Some common errors in garden design that I see on GW from folks who aren't happy with their gardens:

gardens with a single row of plants marching across a narrow bed rather than enough depth to allow for more levels of plants;

shrubs planted in too small a space so that they lean out away from the building or are otherwise misshapen, perhaps by poor pruning to try to make them fit, or else by irregular growth and crowding

one of lots of different plants; there needs to be some repetition, if not of the actual plants, then of shape or color such as a set of gold-leafed plants

I guess I also want to say that for a garden to give its creator pleasure, it doesn't have to be a model of good design - to my mind many of us garden for our own delight rather than to be models of good design.

Ginny, that's a great comment. I have no ornamentation in my garden for three reasons: (1) When I have tried it I was not successful, because (2) I have not had the time to be creative nor the money to buy something substantial that DOESN'T look silly, and (3) I do not understand how to place or plan it well. Truly something I appreciate when somebody has attractive ornamentation, and you're right about having too much. If I could only afford an amazing large stone or iron sculpture...one day. I love the perpetual motion machines made by artisans! Like the ones at Coastal Maine Botanical Gardens that cost as much as my house.

NHBabs, when you say plants lean away from the building are you talking about phototropism (a big word I just learned last month)? Repetition is something I've been thinking about lately, spurred by your photos above. I've certainly read about it many times in books and online, but sometimes it takes a while to get to a point where it can settle in to a meaningful spot in the brain. I always thought about the large massing of a plant type and then moved on to the next plant group. I'm trying to work more with repetition. I'm going to post a photo on this thread, hopefully this weekend, with some future plans for a long area, and I actually did think about repetition over the long space. Textures is still in formation for me, and visualizing plant heights needs work. I spend quite a bit of time just walking back and forth now looking OUT IN FRONT OF ME trying to visualize instead of looking straight down at the ground where I'll be planting.

Even though the garden is about the gardener, I do know that when I see a WELL designed garden is just evokes a sense of peace. I will say that I went to one of the top botanical gardens in the US earlier this year while on a trip. And, it was certainly well designed, but not the design that spoke to me and evoked peace and rest. The design leaned more towards the formal European geometric plantings. Beautiful it may have been, but I think in my busy life I appreciate a garden that leans more towards the natural feel. it says nothing bad about them, just more about what I need/want in a garden. I'm mesmerized by Piet Oudolf, almost zone out just looking at pictures. What would it be like to be in the middle of a garden like that! He inspired my large drifts of different echinaceas I put in this year. Crossing my fingers that next year they look natural!

He uses grasses so beautifully, but I am NOT going there yet. Haven't figured them out!

I'm not willing to use others' gardens as examples of poor design, but here's one of my own. Granted that it has issues, including my ever-present voles, an inability to make it the 3' or so deeper that would make it more balanced (snow gets plowed to right in front of this bed), the electric meter, the road only being 12' or so from the bed's front edge, and tree removal that made this once shady bed now in full sun until early afternoon. However, this bed really bugs me: almost all the plants are about the same height, most of the gold-leafed plants I planted to provide repetition faded away in the increased sun, my row of low-growing plants near the front have mostly died, and most of the back plants are not visible since they are shortish; I didn't move them when I made the bed deeper, from 3' to 5'. This is a bed I used for placing plants that needed to be out of the way of construction when we first moved in 20 years ago, and I just haven't gotten my act together to revamp it to accommodate all the changes since it was originally planted as a temporary holding bed. It's right along the road, and I hope that the other gardens distract from its randomness.

Thanks, NHBabs. One thing I see in my learning eye that distracts is the overall U-shape. There is ?spruce? on one end and a vine climbing up the meter on the other end, and the height shortens in the middle. Beyond that I could not have pinpointed what you did, so I appreciate the details.

You make me thankful for our cats and dogs that show off the occasional vole!

I'm going to continue this discussion on another thread where I'm posting pictures of some areas for critique and discussion. Let me know if I should send any tuition or presenters fees out to you all beforehand. I know some of you are/were professionals, and the rest are doggone talented and experienced. I'm blessed!

For the future reader, the post will be "My garden design for critique." Will add a link once it's up.

Deanna, all the tall plants are clematis growing up obelisks. The electric company wouldn't let me grow on the meter, so that clematis was planted to distract from the meter. I am hoping that the other clematis start to fill in to provide height in the bed's center since the shrubs I have often get nailed by heavy snow curling off the plow blade and so haven't achieved much height.