I was so delighted to see a lowii in bloom, Geoff - I thought they were past blooming season (or perhaps they don't have one?). Then I saw you tagged it P. richardianum, which, as you noted, per Philip Cribb, is P. lowii var. richardianum, and I was thus immediately confused.
I looked up another P. richardianum, on this forum, that flowered in May 2011, (http://www.rv-orchidworks.com/orchid...rdianum-2.html), and which you commented on, because MY reference for slippers, per Harold Koopowitz, argues that P. richardianum is a separate species, to wit:
I note that in this photo, the bloom looks very much like that in Andre's post last year - although you can particularly see the notched vee far more in Andre's more mature bloom photos. I do think I've seen the same shape on a number of Pardalopetalum photos. The only other reference to P. richardianum, whether as a var. of lowii, or as a separate species, was in my reference book on slippers by Catherine Cash, which shows the following photo, captioned as a P. richardianum.
All of which, in spite of being, perhaps, a tempest in a teapot, makes me (not for the first time) question the tremendous weight given Mr. Cribb's conclusions as the last word on any orchid issue, paphiopedilums, or otherwise.
My interest in this stems from a deep preference for Paph. lowii to other Paph. species (although there are so many to admire) and I find this particular differing of minds most fascinating.
Tell me, if you would, how do you account for the differences in the identification, etcetera, of P. richardianum? Should Mr. Cribb's observations be given heavier weight?
In any event, the blooms are lovely and the photos terrific, as per usual.