I have looked at picture after picture hoping to find a match or more to some orchids that were in large displays. Is look, look, looking the only way to get IDs?

TX, I have done the same numerous times, or should I say too numerous to count!
Of course they are people like Orchid judges, who truly studied Orchids, who will most of the time look at an Orchid and tell you the name. It goes along with increasing experience to be able to pinpoint an id, hopefully at least the Genus, maybe the grex or species or down to the cultivar.
I myself am very happy to get my Orchids from a reputable dealer and buy them hopefully with a correct tag.

Big Bill has helped me out a few times.

Jim

Funny that you should mention that, Jim. I did get a kind reply from Bill.

I've been playing with my new smartphone and taking a lot of pictures. Most are of flowers, gardens, etc. So while I might be wrong (possible) I know if a flower is an orchid. What I don't know is whether the orchid is a Phalaenopsis or Cymbidium or whatever. Not looking to get more complex than that unless I happened to have shot one that everyone knows the complete botanical name of. As beautiful and fascinating as orchids are, it's not my intent to begin collecting them. Apologies that I didn't explain all of this when I started the thread.

So with all of that in mind, could someone please ID this one? If too blurry than let me know. Won't hurt my feelings.

A semi-closeup:



A closeup:



And then:



Thanks.
tfc

That's an Oncidium I think. I have a few similar to that, and one with flowers that color, called Onc. Copper Scarab "Brass Brethren' although it has a little bit of white on the lip (bottom petal).

I am very far from an expert, but I can usually tell the more common families of orchids by the leaves and stem arrangements on the plant. Eg. Phalaenopsis have thick fleshy leaves that lay flat or hang downwards, and are shaped like paddles or dog's ears that come out of a central crown. Cymbidiums have lots of long, thin leaves very much like daylilies, Oncidiums have those fairly upright, thin, pointed leaves with a flattened pseudobulb at the base. Cattleyas have stiff, thick upright leaves on top of a cylindrical pseudobulb. (they come in a huge array of sizes) Dendrobiums are harder, because there are many different kinds, but the more common ones have fairly tall canes (stems) with relatively small leaves all the way up the canes.

Just saying, look at the leaves as well as the flowers if you want to ID an orchid.

It is in the Oncidium family.

Jim

Something like Oncostele Catatante?

Thanks. Now I know that if I take more orchid pictures that I should be sure to get the leaves. Hadn't occurred to me. Duh. At the time I was trying to avoid any pedestrians that were passing by.

I'm with Elaine. The closest I would guess is Oncidium alliance , but there a lot of orchids in that group.

Oncidium Alliance. Unfortunately the Oncidium and Cattleya Alliances are so large and encompass so many similar-looking genera it can be difficult to tell exactly which genus a plant belongs to just by the bloom.

I always try to get closeups of the flowers, the flower spike/inflorescence and the plant as a whole.

@tx_flower_child - I am also happy to try identifying your photos if you would like. Often I will not be able to get any closer than the genus, but for Cymbidiums I can pick quite a few grexes now.

Thanks, @Australis. That's a very nice offer. As to the Oncidium, I think I should just put it in the 'generic' entry for Oncidiums. If I decide to post it, would it be correct to post it here? Dancing Lady Orchid (Oncidium)

I'm counting on all of y'all to tell me when a photo is too blurry. I have glaucoma in one eye so it's hard for me to tell. I forget to squint using my good better eye.

BTW — Although I certainly might have missed it, I didn't see Oncidium Alliance in the Orchid database.

I do have a few other pics of orchids that I was able to also take pictures of the labels. Haven't looked to see if they're in our database yet. I think I did look them up on the internet. Or maybe it was the other way around. Hmm. I've just been having fun with the camera on my new smartphone.

For some reason I can't upload pictures to the database or individual posts from my desktop anymore. Only from my phone. It's a little annoying when I'm typing a post and just when I decide to include a picture in my post, I realize I'm typing on my desktop. Will send a few later.

Thanks to everyone for help with identifying.

You're welcome. Yes, Oncidium would be the best place to put it, but please note that it is an Oncidium Alliance hybrid in the caption.

The problem with the hybrid alliances is that they are actually groups of related genera that can interbreed, so there is no one entry for them. The best spot is the type genus for the alliance (i.e. Oncidium for Oncidium Alliance, Cattleya for Cattleya Alliance, etc.) with a clear note regarding the identity of the hybrid to assist in future, should it ever been reassessed (I occasionally go through the parent entries and if there are any that I have obtained a reliable ID for, I move them to the right entry).

Thanks but I'm a little confused. I didn't think that it was definite that it was an Oncidium Alliance hybrid. I don't mind putting it in the caption but obviously can't back that up other than saying, 'Australis made me do it.'

If you're good with that, than I am too.

tx_flower_child said:'Australis made me do it.'

That's fine! If you'd like to add it to the database, that is my preferred solution, since everyone so far seems to agree that it is either an Oncidium or in the Oncidium Alliance (or family).

I'll wear it if there are any complaints about the placement of the photos in future. If you'd prefer, please feel free to put something like "Identified as an Oncidium or Oncidium Alliance hybrid" in the caption instead.