TY, Sway. I love the technical when it applies to "me." Otherwise, yawn! right?
I hope the info helps people recognize the subtle differences. I don't believe what I can't see as a difference, human nature. If I (or anyone else reading with something to contribute) can't provide sufficient info to help the differences to be recognized, disbelief would be perfectly rational and understandable.
Obviously before saying something like this, I looked at the pics as closely as my eyesight would allow, and firm enough in what I said and saw to publish it. Some of the close-up pics of blooms submitted to the entry in question can be assumed to go with a shot of what looks like the same plant by the same owner, where both leaves and bloom are visible, but that IS an assumption I made when looking at them in a couple cases, if my memory is correct after a few days. I'm sure my bi-focaled vista isn't the most perfect interpretation of all things visual. From the fact that there's 2 other people here discussing and not objecting to what I proposed, I'm assuming you both looked at the pics and see the same things I saw. Is that correct?
If anyone with a pic I've put in question has had a chance to happen on this discussion and remains certain their plant is S. x buckleyii, it would be perfectly reasonable to say something. It would be best if an explanation for that pic could be offered that helps the difference to be identified. Anyone walking away from this thinking "I still think it's a CC," or "I just don't see what they're talking about," is a fail, my fail, hope that doesn't happen.