186 
The Garden Magazine, May, 1921 
with this chart. Even with some imagination it is difficult to 
think of our gorgeous flowers in such dull garb as the “ Brilliant 
Violet’’ and “Golden Yellow” found on the printed page. On 
the other hand, we are indebted to these pioneers in color charts 
in America. They did the best they could with the material 
at hand and taught us how real is our need for a standard 
nomenclature. 
This confusion of nomenclature is emphasized by the two 
charts. The colors printed are similar, where not identical, in 
the two. Possibly the colors of the Mathews chart have the 
advantage in intensity. But, literally, in not one case do the 
names of colors agree in the two charts. If experts disagree, 
how can bewildered amateurs hope to know what is meant in a 
catalogue written by equally amateurish colorists, admitting 
that both may be horticultural experts? Warning! avoid 
using both Mathews and Sedgwick charts. 
The Most Comprehensive Chart 
T HE nearest complete color chart arranged exclusively for 
use with plants and flowers is the “ Repertoire des Cou- 
leurs,” done to aid in the determination of the colors of flowers, 
foliage, and fruit, published in 1905 by the“Societefranfaisedes 
Chrysanthemistes.” In a general way it follows the nomen- 
clature and arrangement laid down by Chevreul, one of the 
earliest and most intelligent students of color in its relation to 
the arts and industry, and a pioneer in the study of flower color 
combinations. The divisions follow the spectrum colors cir- 
cuited as usual. But they are elaborated in such a way as will 
be particularly useful to students of flower color. There are 
twenty-five iridescent mineral colors (gold, silver, amethyst, 
etc.) and three hundred and forty mat colors, printed on white, 
generally, though not always, in four tones. A numbered plate 
is devoted to each named hue. 
We must applaud in this work the best sort of international 
cooperative endeavor. As a result of its publication one might 
formerly (salaams to Quarantine 37) order new plants with 
color descriptions according to this chart from nurserymen in 
Holland, France, the United States and probably elsewhere. 
Had the war not intervened it is possible that this chart would 
have stood unrivalled as the universal international standard for 
flower color. 
It has advantages and disadvantages. It comes unbound. 
It is easier to compare a loose sheet of paper to a flower than a 
small block of color in a bound book. On the other hand, loose 
sheets get scattered and lost. They are left forgotten in the 
sunlight and then rapidly deteriorate. 
Each block of color is of generous size — approximately ij" 
x if" The printing is by no means scientifically accurate, 
however. Many colors are dirty and more faded than the 
flowers they are said to match, before they have been exposed 
to the light. In ten years I fear that many of the plates 
will be worthless even with the best of care. And when using, 
one would always be uneasy about the extent of the actual 
change from the original tone. 
Last and worst, the “ Repertoire des Couleurs” is out of print 
and in all probability will not be republished for a long time, if 
ever. It is well to know about the “Repertoire,” but for 
practical purposes, a thing we cannot get might as well not exist. 
A Chart for Practical Use 
T HE most practical color chart for gardeners made by an 
American is found in Dr. Robert Ridgway’s “Color Stand- 
ards and Color Nomenclature.” It contains fifty-three color 
plates and one thousand, one hundred and fifteen named colors 
on small blocks pasted on a light gray background (which is 
appreciably better than white for the purposes of color match- 
ing). Each hue is as accurate and as near fast color as labor- 
atory experiment and admirable printing can produce. 
It is based on the six spectrum colors with the circuit com- 
pleted between violet and red. Selections from the infinite 
possibilities, are composed in arbitrary arrangement, as must 
be the case with all charts. But the selection is made ac- 
cording to a scientific order. The first twelve plates purport 
to show “pure, spectrum colors and intermediate hues, each 
with its vertical scale of tints (upward toward white) and shades 
(downward toward black) . . . The remaining plates 
show the same thirty-six colors or hues in exactly the same order 
and similarly modified . . . but all the colors are dulled 
by admixture of neutral gray, the first series containing 32 
per cent. . . . the second 58 per cent., the third 77 per 
cent., and the fourth 90 per cent. The last three plates show 
the six spectrum colors . . . still further dulled by ad- 
mixture of 93.5 per cent, of neutral gray. . . .” 
The progress of each tone from white to black is in nine 
colors, as in Doctor Ross’ classification. The process around 
the color circuit is more complicated, there being ten hues be- 
tween red and yellow, thirteen between yellow and blue, eleven 
between blue and red, and thirty-six in all including the primary 
colors. Consequently, there is a wide range of colors between 
yellow and blue (which includes all greens), a somewhat smaller 
variety between blue and red (which includes all violets) and 
still fewer between red and yellow (which includes all oranges). 
But in all cases there are a sufficient number of charted colors 
and their variations to satisfy the most fastidious. The 
classification allows for the determination by symbols of inter- 
mediate colors between those displayed and named on the chart. 
The charts are bound in a small, convenient volume easily kept 
closed, which does away with unnecessary exposure to the light. 
Finally, the book can be had in a week through any book dealer. 
From the viewpoint of the color purist there is one adverse 
criticism of Doctor Ridgway’s classification. In every case his 
“full,” by which he means most intense color, is found in the 
middle value between white and black. We do not need to be 
color physicists to know that all colors are not most brilliant 
at the middle of the value scale. Indeed Doctor Ridgway 
suggests this fact under his definition of “ Luminosity” on page 
20. But he attempts to distinguish between “Luminosity” 
or “Degree of brightness” and “Chroma” which he calls 
“ Purity, intensity or fullness of color.” This is confusing and, 
it would seem, inaccurate. The result is, approximately speak- 
ing, that his color Scarlet (PI. I, 5) and Benzol Green (PI. VI 1 , 
41) are the only colors in the book which are actually as intense 
as possible, since their utmost intensity happens to lie in the 
middle value. Theoretically, his most intense yellow and purple 
relatively should most lose in maximum brilliancy, for yellow is 
yellowest next to white and purple is most purple nearest to 
black. Actually this has resulted in a curious visual break in 
the chart. (It must be admitted that our eyes easily deceive 
us in considering color and we have Doctor Ridgway’s word for 
the scientific accuracy of his results). The only vertical 
columns (scale of values through a color from white to black) 
in the chart which appear to be “jerky” (badly graded) are 
yellow (Lemon yellow PI. IV, 23) and violet (Spectrum violet 
PI. X, 59) and those immediately adjacent. The most intense 
“Lemon” yellow seems too light to stand next the next darker 
“ Pyrite” yellow and inversely, the “Spectrum” violet too dark 
to stand next “Light” violet. In other words, the true value 
at which the color is most intense has apparently been dragged 
to the arbitrary middle value which Doctor Ridgway has 
selected to show his “full” color. The color purist would like 
to see the most brilliant yellow where “Martius” yellow (PI. 
IV, 23O stands, and the richest purple where he sees the dull 
“Blackish” violet (PI. X, 59m), and the other colors most 
brilliant in their own naturally most intense value. 
I N COLOR nomenclature as in all else, we want and should 
have only the best. 1 feel convinced that the American 
gardener, even after studying the “Repertoire des Couleurs” i 
and Ridgway’s “Color Standards and Color Nomenclature” 
(no other work can compete with either of them for first place) 
will unanimously agree to adopt the American as the better 
of the two, in permanence, accuracy, and convenience. 
