Here is a bud:

Here is a closed bud and also new (red) growth

Here is a pic of part of the bush when it was in full bloom:

Part of bush with partially open blooms:

Last photo -fully open bloom showing size - again, any thoughts would be wonderful.

Jackie

No clue. Sorry!

Thaks for responding, Jeri -I hope someone will recognize this rose. I found another pic of an open bloom which is still the darker color - here it is:

It's a very pretty thing! Much about it reminds me of First Prize, THE exhibition HT of the 1970s. It had huge flowers with similar color shifts and heavy prickles, like your rose. Matching it from photos will prove difficult as the colors are VERY temperature and light dependent. That's what it feels like to me.

Thanks, roseseek! I agree, and I just sent my friend several pics of 'First Prize' to compare with her bush. If it is FP, it has lived WAY longer (as it must have been planted by the 1970s), and in much better health, than many mid 20th century HTs (HMF says it was hybridized in 1966, and in commerce by 1972). I appreciate your help very much -

Jackie

P.S. Does anyone on here grow FP? If so, what do you think?

Radiance is a rose I have never seen that was popular I thought.

@Sheila z8a Rogue Valley OR I actually bought a "real" bare root Radiance (out of a box of saw dust) from Week's Roses at Agoura Garden Color in Agoura, CA way back in the mid 1980s. It's one everyone should have the chance to enjoy at least once. Radiance was declared one of the first "World Roses". J. Horace McFarland proclaimed it could be successfully grown "anywhere a man can live". He was right! I "satisfy" myself these days enjoying its striped sport, Careless Love.

Trust me. J. Horace McFarland was wrong on that :(

And nope, that isn't Radiance.

This is very likely another case of "location, location, location", Jackie. First Prize was the darling of the exhibitors who infamously sprayed everything. It required it in many cases as it has little resistance to black spot and mildew. It was infamous for mildew and for passing that along to its offspring. Your friend's bush was fortunate to be planted in a supportive location where those two fungal issues aren't likely to be successful. It was also fortunate not to have been "exhibition pruned", whacked within an inch of its life, to continually push long new stems for exhibition. Generally, the larger the foliage mass, the larger the root mass, both of which produce a vigorous, healthy plant. Constantly whacking it back to a small plant so it has to push those new flowering stems eventually weakens the plant. Probably the best example I can point to for this is how Iceberg performs in Southern California. If Iceberg is allowed to grow to the size it wants to be, it's often very healthy with only a little mildew on the new flowering stems. Plants which are routinely whacked to keep them smaller, frequently black spot badly and require spraying for it.

It's also entirely possible this plant is closer to the climbing sport than others may have been. Often "climbing" and "bush" types aren't an either/or situation, but rather points on a continuum, producing a wider range of levels of vigor than you might imagine. This plant benefited from being planted in a good place and receiving treatment that supported its success. That's often the situation when we find roses which have succeeded surprisingly well.

I agree, in this case the treatment has been mostly to ignore it when it is not blooming. We measured it at 9ft tall at the tallest. My friend's location in Novato is hotter and dryer than where we live, on average. I would guess that is not a happy area for fungus.

Jackie