I'm updating my primary website and want to know F4F Member preferences for the layout of the Fig Variety pages.  The question is should I use the layout on page F3.1 or F3.2 MEDIUM COLORED FIGS with 9/page or 6/page respectively?  My inclination is to use the 9/page layout as it allows more varieties to be visually compared on a single page.  All photos may be viewed individually at a larger size for detail scrutiny by clicking on the photo.

Please check out those two pages and if you have a strong opinion of which is better, send me an e-mail telling why you prefer one over the other.  Don't reply to this thread so we don't overload the Forum with chatter.

http://sites.google.com/site/kiwifruitsalad2

Happy Growing,   kiwibob  Seattle

Hi kiwibob,
I don't know your source for "Dauphine", but yours is not the true Dauphine. The leaf should have more lobes.
Dauphine is of the common type. I saw it in Zone7 ripening both the brebas and main crop.
It would be best to refer to your tree as "dauphine src_name"

9 is better :) IMO.

Hi KiwiFigBob (Your new name to my mind :) !

Thanks for updating your already good website Bob. Fantastic and revealing pictures, especially for identification of varieties (and elimination of home made name varieties if you know what I mean).

                                   Hello Michael
question1-      Florea
question2-     Graham Roual
question3-    Italian honey aka  Latturala ,Conadria
    

The purpose of my original post was to solicit feedback about which layout of the Fig photos is most informative, the 9/page or 6/page.  I'm still looking for that feedback!

jdsfrance,  Condit lists "Dauphine" as a San Pedro type Fig with description starting on page 365 in his "Fig Varieties: A Monograph" which is downloadable as a PDF from my website.  Condit describes the leaves as being 3-5 lobed and coarsely crenate.  My Dauphine came to me second-hand from a F4F member whose original source is UC Davis.  The leaf came from a very immature tree shown on page F6.2 FIGS ON THE TREE so it probably isn't the dominant leaf form one would find on a mature tree.  As always, I question the accuracy of varietal names and in this case the Breba shown doesn't match photos I have seen of "Dauphine".  Time will hopefully resolve my skepticism but it is encouraging that the Main crop "Dauphine" that started forming this year on the tree shown on page F6.2 has aborted along with two more on a similar sized clone.

Michael,  Got your e-mail and I'm still working on my website revisions.  I hope that planned changes will answer most of your questions.

kiwibob   Seattle

Sorry Bob, for partially capturing your thread, where are my manners !

I also prefer 9 per view !

Please cotinue to answer Bob's Questions in this thread, I will start another thread where I ask for feedback on the potential new varieties for test in comparasion with the varieties Bob already describes for the Seattle Area.

Slavtcho, thanks for replying, I moved my question to a new tread, it would be great if you move your answer there too ! - I dont want to crowd Kiwibobs communication :) thanks.

I made the decision over the weekend to go with 9/page and have since deleted the page with 6/.  The objective is to convey the most comparative information with the greatest ease, thus 9/page so folks don't have to scroll!

I'm still working on the website revisions and will be for several days at least, but I'm not happy with the results.  Initially my goal was to reconstruct the site so it could be downloaded as a PDF but Google Sites works such that I can't see the entire page width when I "print as a PDF".  My alternate site on Wordpress now has a gallery function (which it didn't have when the site was created) where multiple photos can be assembled.  I'll try updating that site in the near future to see if my goal works on it.

kiwibob   Seattle