In our study we explore similarities and differences in the evaluations of 12 design gardens by students of landscape architecture and psychology students. The participants in our study visited the gardens and judged them on location. We used a questionnaire to assess similarities and differences in the evaluations of gardens by the two groups. We also provided the participants with the opportunity to describe their experience of the gardens in their own words, using their own evaluative criteria. We found significant differences between the two groups on the evaluation of four gardens. The analysis of the physical properties of the four gardens gives some clues as to what may have caused the differences, as they were 'minimalist', 'art-like', 'experimental', and 'traditional' gardens. In contrast, in spite of the large variation in the design of the gardens, no differences in evaluation were found on eight out of 12 gardens. The results of our study suggest that a high level of appreciation may be expected from the public for unusual formal designs of gardens while alerting the experts to the physical and formal properties of gardens most likely to raise conflict.