I was wrong yesterday when I said the blooms of 'Fairy Tale' Amaryllis didn't seem much smaller to me than those of a "regular" Amaryllis. I think I was swayed fooled by sheer numbers or maybe that same phenomenon that happens to all Mother's (when they talk about their "kids") came over me? Whatever it was, I'm 'fessing up today and "righting" my mistake. Besides, there's little else to do at -7 F, right? May as well pass a little time comparing two gorgeous blooms. I just happen to have the perfect Christmas flowering Amaryllis for the job. 'Razzle Dazzle' (on the left in the photo below) is currently re-blooming and just happens to look a lot like 'Fairy Tale' (on the right):
I positioned them side-by-side in the "greenhouse" and what do you know? 'Fairy Tale' (the miniature Amaryllis) is indeed a smaller flowering Amaryllis. I stand corrected. However, when it comes to describing Amaryllis, "miniature" does not refer to height ~ as you can see, 'Fairy Tale' is the taller of the two.
Viewed next to each other like this, 'Razzle Dazzle' (still on the left) out-and-out wins the most showy contest based on size alone. Notice how much larger her petals are than 'Fairy Tales.' I think one of 'Fairy Tale's' blossoms could probably be nestled inside one of 'Razzle Dazzles' and there would be "room" to spare. In fact, let's try that ~ there's so many blooms on 'Fairy Tale' we won't miss one for the sake of experimentation.
Ah ha. Our very scientific comparison is complete. We've firmly established that miniature Amaryllis definitely have smaller blooms. I know it already stated that in all the catalogs. But look at how much fun we had verifying it this frosty morning. :-) By the way, the combination makes a very pretty double-flowered variety, don't you think?
Very pretty. Like a striped candy cane. As always, I'm happy to see more pics of them.
Posted by: Pam/Digging | January 08, 2010 at 10:25 AM
Gosh, your newly made double is fabulous, Kathleen! I still don't think of the size of Fairy Tale as a miniature anything. Am I being too literal here? HA
Frances
Posted by: Frances | January 08, 2010 at 12:11 PM
I like how you are willing to sacrifice a bloom for science :) Kind of like the daffodil bulb you cut in half :)
Miniature or not those are some very pretty flowers.
Posted by: Catherine | January 08, 2010 at 02:32 PM
I saw one taller and one shorter Amaryllis in a planter together that made a stunning display. I can hardly wait for next Christmas.
When you visit Blotanical, click on the Help tab and read the FAQ and watch the video on picks. You'll be an expert in no time!
Posted by: Nell Jean | January 08, 2010 at 06:37 PM
:-) Oh, Kathleen! I have just done a double-take... probably due to the fact that we've been having such cold, snowy, blowy (is that a word) weather... that I'm thinking "wildlife." When I read your post title I immediately thought of doe - a deer! And wondered if they were taking smaller bites? Your amaryllis is beautiful. It doesn't matter, does it, that it's shorter??
Posted by: Shady Gardener | January 08, 2010 at 06:52 PM
BEAUTIFUL!!!
Posted by: Darcy | January 08, 2010 at 07:11 PM
Oh, how pretty! I got my first amaryllis just the other day. It was on 75% off sale rack at Walmart. It is red lion. They're very nice.
Posted by: Cinj | January 08, 2010 at 07:33 PM
Big or small, they are sure striking. Love the color.
Posted by: Janet | January 08, 2010 at 07:47 PM
I just love your Amaryllis shots- so beautiful! Next year I'd like to try bunching a few different varieties together in one pot- it would be really beautiful!
Posted by: Tessa at Blunders with shoots, blossoms 'n roots | January 08, 2010 at 08:17 PM
I think I actually prefer a smaller-flowered Amaryllis, having had to resort to awkward propping devices in the past. lol Both are beautiful.
-7 -- now that's cold. I hope you are at least getting some sun with those frigid temperatures!
Posted by: Sweet Bay | January 09, 2010 at 07:44 AM