pro's and cons of lighting

[candylime12]

I'm designing a grow room for bloom. the dimensions that i want to use is 6x6x6 to grow 6 plants. my problem is hps or cfl
my plan was to have 2-105 watt cfl per plant and 2-23 watt per plant for side lighting near the walls. and 105 watt between the plants hanging. i figured that the cfl way would be in total 12-105 watt and 12-23watt at a guesstamated total wattage of 1536 per hour and at least a 400$ start up cost.

option 2
1- 600watt digital system at the cost of 600 watt per hour and a start up of around 300$ with out the cost of wiring the cfl's

where would i be more beneficial the cfl's or hps ???

if my math or any other thing isnt correct could someone explain this to me so i can make the best choice.

 

[Boneman]

Go with the 600w.....period. You will grow better and bigger buds with much less wiring. No if, ands or butts about it.

I am not a cfl hater at all. They do work but the 600w compared to CFL is like comparing a bicycle to a harley.

 

[communistcannabis]

hps all the way for flowering

 

[LUDACRIS]

I'm designing a grow room for bloom. the dimensions that i want to use is 6x6x6 to grow 6 plants. my problem is hps or cfl
my plan was to have 2-105 watt cfl per plant and 2-23 watt per plant for side lighting near the walls. and 105 watt between the plants hanging. i figured that the cfl way would be in total 12-105 watt and 12-23watt at a guesstamated total wattage of 1536 per hour and at least a 400$ start up cost.

option 2
1- 600watt digital system at the cost of 600 watt per hour and a start up of around 300$ with out the cost of wiring the cfl's

where would i be more beneficial the cfl's or hps ???

if my math or any other thing isnt correct could someone explain this to me so i can make the best choice.

h.p.s from start to finish.
skip the cfls and the mh.
(not reqd imo).

https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/723-things-know-about-lighting.html

 

[AeroKing]

Blue CFLs or better yet, T5s for veg and first 2 weeks of flowering to prevent stretch. Then HPS for flowering for yield and density, even if you only get a 400w and run it w/ the Floros.

 

[LUDACRIS]

Blue CFLs or better yet, T5s for veg and first 2 weeks of flowering to prevent stretch. Then HPS for flowering for yield and density, even if you only get a 400w and run it w/ the Floros.

cfls suck.
my last grow was started with cfls and moved to hps for flowering but this time i used hps from start to finish and its 100% better and faster and the plants did not stretch as much going with the hps as they did under cfls and the growth rate and plant development is second to none.
i will never use cfls again(waste of time).

 

[Brick Top]

HID lighting gives the highest gram to watt ratio you will achieve. It would be best to use a MH for veg and a HPS for flowering. That will give your plants the best light spectrum for each growth cycle.

 

[LUDACRIS]

HID lighting gives the highest gram to watt ratio you will achieve. It would be best to use a MH for veg and a HPS for flowering. That will give your plants the best light spectrum for each growth cycle.

this is true but there are many new dual spectrum hps bulbs that put out enough blue spectrum(like mh lamps)light for vegging and are made on the basis that 1 bulb does all(vegg+flower).
http://www.greenshorticulture.co.uk/Grow-Lights-182/Grow-Lamps-192/Dual-Spectrum-Grow-Lamps-806.asp

 

[TeaTreeOil]

CFLs only suck when used improperly. You'd have to plant 100 seedlings under a 400 watt MH or HPS to match the efficiency of fluoros for vegetative growth.

There's nothing, at all, wrong with using all light sources you deem appropriate to your successful grow. Can we just leave it at that?

I'd suggest, for optimal flowering a combination of CMH and aHPS(these are both special bulbs, and not as inexpensive as conventional bulbs). CMH lamps have strong UVA and UVB output(more potent buds), and powerful full spectrum output(more, bigger growth) with a nearly perfect CRI -above 90. aHPS bulbs have an even wider MV*/pressure-broadened spectrum to support flowering(dense, sticky buds).

aHPS=agro/horticulture HPS lamp, not a conventional barn/street/hardware light
CMH=ceramic metal halide, not all MV are CMH, sometimes called enhanced MH, or by trade name
Both typically use MV* or multivapor to broaden spectrum and increase output. These additional vapors(gases) are quite expensive. You get what you pay for. Conventional/generic HPS and MH do not use these additional expensive gases, and offer less performance, while often claiming a higher lumen rating due to a slightly greater peak intensity nearer to peak human-vision, instead of powerful -yet broad, intensity.

I have attached a comparison of a conventional MH Hortilux lamp with their enhanced MH called Hortilux Blue.

 

[Syriuslydelyrius]

You will see alot of debate and agruments about the best choice of lighting. Most people will defend there choice claiming its the best with there last dieing breath...

Well the fact is that the best choice is the one that works best for your situtation. Most will tell you that you should have 2000 to 3000 lumen per sq ft with 2k being the min and 3k for best results. I have had better results with close to 4000 per sq ft but going over 4000 wont give you any real noticable benifit. So you need to choose a light system that will give you this 2000 to 4000 lumen per sq ft while being able to keep your room from getting too hot.

600w HPS= 90,000 lumens = 150 lumen per watt (the 600 is the most efficient HID lamp) PROS= Faster/higher yield and efficiency, Long bulb life. CONS= Heat requiring a more expensive better ventilation system and more money on climate controll. If your going to shove a big old lamp in a little box you would also be smart to add a thermostat that will shut down your HID lamp if the temp gets too high.

The CFL's
105w (5000k spectrum) bulb is 6200 lumen= 59.04 lumen per watt.
23w (5000k) bulb is arround 1500 lumen (depending on manufacturer) = 65.21 lumen per watt. PROS= Alot less heat than a HID lamp, and most will agree that CFLs produce a higher quality smoke than the HID, Cheaper startup costs. CONS=Not as fast and efficient yield wise, shorter bulb life.


OK so your 2 plans on lighting.
The HID Lamp is 2770 lumen per sq ft.
The CFL setup is 2567 lumen per sq ft.
Either of which is in the proper ratio of needed light per sq ft. There are 730 hours average per month on a 12/12 bloom cycle you will have your lights on for 365 hours.

HID 600w X 365hrs / 1000 = 219kwh per month X $0.12 (an average price per KWH check your bill to see what you pay) = $26.28 per month during bloom.

CFL 1536W X 365 hrs / 1000 = 560kwh per month X $0.12 = $67.27 per month during bloom.

Now the figures and math I have given should scream to you use the HID lamp. However keeping a 6x6x6 box under 90 degrees with a 600w burning in it will not be a super easy thing to do however I dont think its impossible either. Make sure you get an air cooled reflector and if you dont have an electronic ballast then mount the ballast on the outside of the box to help with heat. you have 216 cubic foot of air in that box but I would go with a 450cfm fan with a speed controll which at full speed will totally refill your space with new air twice every min. This should surfice however spending extra money on a controller that will adjust the speed of your fan according to temp and shut down your lamp for a bit if it gets too hot would be good insurance.


Good luck and keep us posted..

 

[TeaTreeOil]

A typical 400w HPS lamp loses around 1k lumens per 90 days. Over the first year or so. Typically around two years, a HID is down to about 80%. By the end of its rated life it could be as low as 60-70%.

CFLs last much longer, 5 years or so, and still are over 80-90% efficient.

 

[Syriuslydelyrius]

A typical 400w HPS lamp loses around 1k lumens per 90 days. Over the first year or so. Typically around two years, a HID is down to about 80%. By the end of its rated life it could be as low as 60-70%.

CFLs last much longer, 5 years or so, and still are over 80-90% efficient.

www.1000bulbs.com sells all kinds of bulbs and there webpage has all kinds of info about each bulb. This is a good webpage for info even if you buy your stuff locally.

The 23w CFL's are listed as 12,000 hours and the 105W ones are 8,000 hours. A 600w Hid Bulb has an avg life of 24,000 hours. Now if your figure on lost lumens of 1k per every 90 days for the 1st year your still only talking about 4,000 lost lumens this isnt much really considering a good 600w hps bulb gives you 100,000 lumen. At the end of its life its still producing 60,000 lumen which yeah I would defently want to replace it before it got that low

So if your lamps are on for 750 hours per harvest in the bloom room an average bulb could be good for 32 grows with 1 600w bulb however I personally have replaced them before that long cause I had the money for it. The longer lasting CFL's your talking 16 grows per bulb also remember that these CFLs are loosing lumens over time as well, I doubt its as much as the HID lamps but still they degrade over time.

 

[TeaTreeOil]

Higher wattage bulbs decay more rapidly. Those numbers are only for a 400w HPS. It loses 10% the first year. 20% over two years. 600w would be slightly greater, over 9,000 lm and over 18,000 lm respectively.

A year is around 8766 hours. CFLs last much longer than a year. Ask any CFL grower that has used them for over a year.

Yes, CFLs decay, but they do so linearly, very slowly, and unlike HID, which increasely lose more lumens over time, CFLs lose more initially and it decreases the amount lost with time.

 

[Syriuslydelyrius]

Higher wattage bulbs decay more rapidly. Those numbers are only for a 400w HPS. It loses 10% the first year. 20% over two years. 600w would be slightly greater, over 9,000 lm and over 18,000 lm respectively.

A year is around 8766 hours. CFLs last much longer than a year. Ask any CFL grower that has used them for over a year.

Yes, CFLs decay, but they do so linearly, very slowly, and unlike HID, which increasely lose more lumens over time, CFLs lose more initially and it decreases the amount lost with time.

I have grown with CFL's and to get enough lumens without having to have 30 or more light sockets for the longer lasting lower wattage CFL's I had to go with higher wattage bulbs that were only good for 8000hrs.

Yes there are 8765 hours in a year but I thought we were talking about a bloom room where the lights are only on for 12 hours a day so if your going to burn the bulb untill its dead then yeah a CFL grower could get 2 years of blooming out of a bulb. So after this 2years for a 600w HID your still cranking out 80,000 which would still be 2227 lumen per sq ft for this guys space. Not to mention the fact that if you are going to replace your lamps at 2 years this guy would be buying 24 CFL bulbs for arround $300 total and 1 HID bulb is only $100. The HID will cost you more money to start with but if your ballast doesnt take a shit in the first 2 years your ahead of the game.

TTO, How are you doing man? Looks like were butting heads again ROFL.. I am going to toss you some +rep on this one because you have made me sit down do the math however I am still a firm beliver that the HID lamps are more efficient replacement/cost wise. The problem this dude will have is keeping that 600w lamp cool in that small space without turning his grow room into an Easy-Bake oven so the CFL's may very well be this guys best choice.

 

[chalkie]

Would a 450HPS with a cooled cap create an alarming amount of heat? I plan on bringing in a few of my habaneros this fall so im working on a little room for them. I wouldnt normally need to build a room for em but my pets are a pesky breed lol. Im going to keep 5 plants in around a 3'x5'x7'. Just a few decent fans outta keep it under control no?

 

[Syriuslydelyrius]

Would a 450HPS with a cooled cap create an alarming amount of heat? I plan on bringing in a few of my habaneros this fall so im working on a little room for them. I wouldnt normally need to build a room for em but my pets are a pesky breed lol. Im going to keep 5 plants in around a 3'x5'x7'. Just a few decent fans outta keep it under control no?

You will want constant airflow through that cooled reflector when the lamp is on but yeah with the proper airflow its should be easy enough to fit that area with a 450w bulb.

 

[chalkie]

You will want constant airflow through that cooled reflector when the lamp is on but yeah with the proper airflow its should be easy enough to fit that area with a 450w bulb.

Thanks Syr....unfortunately I need to keep my overhead low cause im not exactely getting much of a savings/profit from this but it would still need to be done properly or not at all. Guess ill oreder my lamp and give a few test runs after my walls are built, might even keep it for a few years if all works out. Again thanks for the response =)

 

[Syriuslydelyrius]

If this has helped then click the icon on the right hand side of screen (next to the post# of my post) that looks like a scale and add to my rep. If this is going to be just a 2 year thing then enough CFL bulbs to provide the proper lumens maybe the way to go and be less cash to fork out at once and alot less heat to deal with. Your just basicly keeping these going untill you can put them out again in the summer right? so if thats the case you dont need an extreem amount of lumen coverage

 

[trombon84]

I grow with CFL's right now. I have around 40.000 lumens in a 3x2x6 closet. I have CFL's everywhere in that closet and I still feel that the plants can use a lil more. I plan for my next grow to buy a 400w HPS on top of what I have now.
So, I think that the best light is a HPS.

 

[AeroKing]

I'd just like to add my view of penetration when it comes to lighting size and bud density.

The phenomenon I speak of is called "light pressure".

Light pressure is directly correlated to the intensity of a single source of light. In other words, a 10 x 100w bulbs could create the same amount of light as a 1000w, but could never create the "pressure".

In growing, light pressure means the ability for light to "push through" plant matter and continue on to provide other leaves... usable light.
(Ever notice leaves aren't 100% opaque?)

It is my current theory that the overall density(and of course weight) of a bud is directly affected by the lights ability to penetrate deeply into the bud.

I believe that a bud grown under smaller lights, no matter how many, can never be as dense as a bud grown under a single higher intensity light.

I've heard folks say that there bud is "dense" when grown under CFLs or T5s, but that is a relative opinion.

Well, anyway, that's just my view, so do with it what you will...

...Another point of consideration for you to ponder.

h.p.s from start to finish.
skip the cfls and the mh.
(not reqd imo).

cfls suck.
my last grow was started with cfls and moved to hps for flowering but this time i used hps from start to finish and its 100% better and faster and the plants did not stretch as much going with the hps as they did under cfls and the growth rate and plant development is second to none.
i will never use cfls again(waste of time).

This is interesting. I have two (roughly)2' x 2' x 2' mothers under four 4' Blue T5s. Internode spacing is tight (less than 1") even at new growth at the bottom of the plants.

In my flower box, I ran 2 600w HPSs on a 4' x 5' footprint. The internode length averages over 3". The lamps have never been further than 12" from the canopy. They are in aircooled hoods.

They are the same strain. Temp in both boxes is steady 75-80'F and they share the same consistent nighttime temp.

I've even noticed stretch at one point when I'd swapped from a mix of blue and red T5s to all red.

It becomes apparent to me that to avoid stretch, you should incorporate some blue light.