Background history:

"Orange Velvet" is a semi-evergreen diploid introduced in 1988 by Enman Joiner. (It is also available as a tetraploid conversion.)

Char created a thread about Enman Joiner:
The thread "ATP Series: The Daylilies of Enman R. Joiner, Sr." in Daylilies forum

More information can be found on the Joiner Daylily Gardens website:
http://www.joinerdaylilygarden...

This cultivar can be found in the ATP Plant Database:
Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Orange Velvet')

According to the ATP database, it is listed as a mid-season bloomer and can rebloom. It has a rust resistance rating of 1.3 (which is noteworthy!). It has earned three AHS awards: Award of Merit: 1995, Honorable Mention: 1992, LAA: 1999
It is pod and pollen fertile with 22 children currently registered in the Plant Database:
http://garden.org/plants/paren...





Please join in, if you own this plant! We would love to know more! (I award an acorn for performance information posted on this thread.)

Also, please consider adding a "Local Report" to the ATP Plant Database!!! Thank you!
Daylily (Hemerocallis 'Orange Velvet')

Orange Velvet has done fine here.
It's in partial shade and always blooms with tall sturdy scapes.
Not very many buds but I think it does fine.

Ashton - Thanks for adding your evaluation.

I was looking at some of the photos in the Plant Database and I took note of some of the photos that show the scapes are loaded with buds. I was pretty impressed. I wonder if yours would produce more blooms if it was in full sun? Just wondering ... I hope others here post their evaluation of this cultivar for a comparison.

ORANGE VELVET is pretty and tall in my garden.The scapes lean a little but it is a keeper.

I got a piece of conversion this year. I can't really comment on stats yet but the color of the blooms is absolutely amazing.

James ( @JWWC ) - Do you have the diploid also? If so, I was wondering how the color of the blooms compares between the tet conversion and the original dip?

Orange Velvet was just planted in my garden on April 3rd 2015 along with about 20 other varieties.So far it has been one of the best performers of that group. It is a little early to give a full evaluation of this plant. Early impressions are that this will be a good "garden" type daylily, and that is what it was purchased to be.
Photo taken of 'Orange Velvet' in May 2015:

Orange Velvet is one of my all time favorites. It is taller on initial bloom, about 40", and is a reliable rebloomer for me on 30" scapes. Bud count is about 22 on initial bloom with 4-5 way branching, 3-4 way and 12-15 buds on rebloom. The vibrance of color is something you can see from across the yard. It looks like radioactive orange sherbet. Even though it's an older cultivar, without any fancy patters or edges, it is still one of the most beautiful flowers I have ever seen.

Orange Velvet was planted in my Zone 4b garden last fall (2014), and unfortunately did not bloom this year. Leaves were sparse. It was a rather small fan when it was planted, so I will give it another season to see how it does (if it survives the winter!).

beckygardener said:James ( @JWWC ) - Do you have the diploid also? If so, I was wondering how the color of the blooms compares between the tet conversion and the original dip?

No, I don't have the dip so can't compare them.

Thanks for replying James!

OV was an old favorite in Region 11 when I started my daylilies journey. It was registered in 1988 which means it is approaching its 30th anniversary which is old for a daylily. When I first planted it in zone 7 it clumped and bloomed like crazy. Lots of Oklahoma summer heat and every day it made me want some sherbet! Then I made a traditional gardening mistake. I figured it was doing so well surely I could get better performance by moving it. I dug an divided it and it never performed for me again.

Now I'm up at 8000 feet in zone 5/4 and I chose a perfect spot for it. (We love sherbet in New Mexico as well) and it sulked and pouted so I said to heck with that and stuck it behind some physostegia. Now it's flourishing and blooms galore.

I guess it's telling me not to try and tell it where to grow. By the way, it still shows on one of last year's pop polls.

Not bad for an old timer.

Orange Velvet was planted in late spring of last year, and has not yet bloomed for me. It is in full sun, and gets regular watering, as well as, fertilized with 16-16-16 slow release two times a year. I look forward to seeing it bloom, I hope next year.

Gale

Hi Becky and everyone, I am very curious as to why this was called a "bi-color" in the first post? It most definitely is not a bi-color, but a light ( creamsicle orange color in this area) orange self. I gave the last few fans of this to a family member back in the spring who is just starting a daylily garden. It had grown here since the late 90's, having arrived in an order from the Joiners back then. I've seen ORANGE VELVET grow taller than the 30" registered height in conditions of ample water and full sun. One year in Betty Jean Crichton's yard ( open garden at Region 3 meeting held in Baltimore) her clump had to have scapes that were 46-48" tall. My clump here never looked quite that good but it was always a reliable performer here with decent bud count and large blooms. Blooms were always about the 6.5" registered size. This plant seems very happy in zone 7 or even 6. I've seen it growing in many gardens here in Region 3, and in other gardens across the country.

Here were a few images taken here in the garden.



Another great plant for those beginning their journey with daylilies!

Lots of good info, folks. Thank you!

Julie - "bi-color" was listed in the ATP Plant Database. I wondered about that, too. The only thing I could think of that may have warranted that description is some of the photos did look like there were 2 different colors on the blooms (petals were a darker color than the sepals):

If that is the case, then the term "bi-color" was used improperly. Bi-tone refers to two different hues of the same color. A bi-color would be two distinctly different colors.
One of the images I posted showed the sepals having a slightly lighter hue ( of the same color) on the sepals but the hybridizer did not register this as a bi-tone, therefore why would this information be changed? I can see why someone might want to list this under anecdotal data but this is not how it was registered by the person who registered it. Maybe this is a typo?

Let's ask the keepers of the ATP Database ... @Calif_Sue , @Char

Can you tell us why the database lists this cultivar as a bi-color? Should it be bi-tone? Or neither?

Bicolor also caught my eye and I wondered about that, I thought to myself, "Mine was not a bi-color", then I looked at my pictures of it and the lighter colored sepals then jumped out at me. Still,I thought bi-color meant two different colors. So I just thought the hybridizer considered those two different colors. I do think bi-tone would have been a much better description. A good thing to add to the comments section of 'Orange Velvet'.
I love these Daylily of the Day threads, they are really bringing out some good comments about the plants.

Don't know why it's listed like that since all the registration info comes from AHS so someone must have added it at one point and I didn't catch it in the proposal. I'll go delete it.

Thanks Sue!