Lets argue lights

appleseed

appleseed

Active Member
My 250w MH died this morning. Changed the bulb. Dead. I'll look at it later, moved the kids into my sprouting cabinet for now. So I'm probably going to be getting a new vegging light set up. I'm giving heavy consideration to switching to florescents instead. I've burned my share of kids already but never with my 4 bulb 4' flouro. Leaves can lay on the bulbs.
It's all about PAR, right? 6500k bulbs seem to be easy enough to find. CFL are easy to place anywhere in my cabinet. I only keep around 7 veg at a time then I repot and move to flower.
I haven't even looked into LED because they just sound like a fortune.
So it's the eternal debate. HID are hot so have to keep them away from babies. Fl are less efficient and the light "falls off" faster. (I still wonder how the law of inverse square acts differently on CFL photons. More likely the lower initial lumens) but now that I have a couple plants under my belt I'm starting to doubt that HID is better for veg.
Anyone know PAR and what produces it well enough to shed some light on the subject? Personal preferences? Rabid opinions?
 
mygirls

mygirls

Medical Marijuana (MOD)
appleseed said:
My 250w MH died this morning. Changed the bulb. Dead. I'll look at it later, moved the kids into my sprouting cabinet for now. So I'm probably going to be getting a new vegging light set up. I'm giving heavy consideration to switching to florescents instead. I've burned my share of kids already but never with my 4 bulb 4' flouro. Leaves can lay on the bulbs.
It's all about PAR, right? 6500k bulbs seem to be easy enough to find. CFL are easy to place anywhere in my cabinet. I only keep around 7 veg at a time then I repot and move to flower.
I haven't even looked into LED because they just sound like a fortune.
So it's the eternal debate. HID are hot so have to keep them away from babies. Fl are less efficient and the light "falls off" faster. (I still wonder how the law of inverse square acts differently on CFL photons. More likely the lower initial lumens) but now that I have a couple plants under my belt I'm starting to doubt that HID is better for veg.
Anyone know PAR and what produces it well enough to shed some light on the subject? Personal preferences? Rabid opinions?
Click to expand...
as long as you can move the heat away from the tops of the plants you will be fine with hids. growers choice. you know as well as us that hids are better. i think so. heat has never been an ishuee at all. even when it rises to 100 degrees.
 
CLOSETGROWTH

CLOSETGROWTH

Well-Known Member
mygirls said:
my friend grew with cfl's and hade great looking plants with decent yields. you can grow with any light but i think hids are better.
Click to expand...
If you want a kick ass bulb..try the sylvania 430 hps. My second choice to a hortilux 1000 hps. If you get something smaller, you'll wish you would of done the upgrade sooner. Here's a picture of one plant grown under one of these bulbs. :weed:
 

Attachments

mygirls

mygirls

Medical Marijuana (MOD)
CLOSETGROWTH said:
If you want a kick ass bulb..try the sylvania 430 hps. My second choice to a hortilux 1000 hps. If you get something smaller, you'll wish you would of done the upgrade sooner. Here's a picture of one plant grown under one of these bulbs. :weed:
Click to expand...
i just bought a sun master bulb. i like this one so far. man how they are flowering so nicely now.
 
appleseed

appleseed

Active Member
I agree HID are more efficient and penetrate foliage deeper but I'm not sure they are better. I use fl only for sprouting now but I'm doing some research on bulb types that are in the best PAR for veg. I'm not giving up HID for flower. Bigger plants more power. Because young plants are so much smaller it seems like I can get better control without burn. Partly I'm thinking about this because I'm starting to try to work on my stretching issues. Seems like if I have my HID close enough to prevent stretch then I burn the kiddies.
 
mygirls

mygirls

Medical Marijuana (MOD)
appleseed said:
I agree HID are more efficient and penetrate foliage deeper but I'm not sure they are better. I use fl only for sprouting now but I'm doing some research on bulb types that are in the best PAR for veg. I'm not giving up HID for flower. Bigger plants more power. Because young plants are so much smaller it seems like I can get better control without burn. Partly I'm thinking about this because I'm starting to try to work on my stretching issues. Seems like if I have my HID close enough to prevent stretch then I burn the kiddies.
Click to expand...
this might give you an idea on how to controle the heat problem.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9OU49LESwfw
 
keeger123

keeger123

Well-Known Member
T5's for veg, HID's for flower, 400's, 600's, 1000, whatever... to conquer the excess heat, get a cooltube hood with inline fan for ur reflector. only way to eliminate heat at the source... and u wont regret it
 
G

growone

Well-Known Member
the longer i grow, the more attached to fluoro tech i get, not dissing hid, but here's an example of a vertical fluoro setup
i'd call the results good(not mine, another grower)

 
greensister

greensister

Well-Known Member
I use T12 Fluoros for clones and seeds.
I use CFLs (65k-50k+27k) for veg.
I use T5 Fluoros and CFLs (65k-50k+27k) for flower.

I also use bagseed and some MG products. You may all look down on me now.
 
jawbrodt

jawbrodt

Well-Known Member
I just recently switched back to fluoros, after trying both MH and HPS 400 watt systems.(400 watts of HID is my limit) I need to cover almost 4' x 4', and both the HIDs caused my plants to stretch quite a bit. When I switched to 6-bulb T8 lights, the difference was amazing, and two of them covered the area perfectly(at 400 watts). The stretching is gone, the stems are twice as thick, and they are now nice and bushy, like I've wanted all along. The only downfall of the fluoros, is if you plan to veg some large plants. With the 4' tube fluoros, you'll start loosing effectiveness once the plants get much over 18". I've found them perfect for growing inside, ending up with finished plants of 3' or less.

Unless I can afford to run multiple 600 watt HIDs, I'll never switch back to HIDs for vegging.
 
T

T.H.Cammo

Well-Known Member
In theory - LED's provide incredible PAR light, probably at least 80-90%, or so! As opposed to the 20% range that we get with HID's. In fact, you'd never know it from the results they give! I f you're looking for lights that give high PAR ratios, look for "Ceramic Metal Halide"! They give what appears to be 4-6 times the amount of PAR radiation IN WIDE SPECTRUM (all the way from Ultraviolet to Far Red), as well as the normal spikes for Chlorophyll-A&B! In other words - They have more "good" blue light than MH and more "good" red light than HPS, all from a single bulb!


And by the way, the Inverse Square Law doesn't work differently for flouescents. It's just that thier light is emitted from a much larger area (not a "point source") so thier light is much less intense to begin with.
 
M

mrmadcow

Well-Known Member
any opinions on LEDs? have been searching & found a 90 watt UFO for under $150.it claims to be equal to a 4-600 HPS and can handle a 4x4 area. am getting ready to set up a 3x5 room and was thinking about a UFO to veg and adding a 400 hps to flower.my local grow shop sells them for almost $400 and has very good results w/ a display in a 3x3 tent of tomatoes,they claim the manufactures claim of 4x4 a little overboard but swear by it for 3x3 or smaller.all research seems to show many LED setups are poor quality & prone to problems but the UFO seems decent.
 
appleseed

appleseed

Active Member
T.H.Cammo said:
In theory - LED's provide incredible PAR light, probably at least 80-90%, or so! As opposed to the 20% range that we get with HID's. In fact, you'd never know it from the results they give! I f you're looking for lights that give high PAR ratios, look for "Ceramic Metal Halide"! They give what appears to be 4-6 times the amount of PAR radiation IN WIDE SPECTRUM (all the way from Ultraviolet to Far Red), as well as the normal spikes for Chlorophyll-A&B! In other words - They have more "good" blue light than MH and more "good" red light than HPS, all from a single bulb!


And by the way, the Inverse Square Law doesn't work differently for flouescents. It's just that thier light is emitted from a much larger area (not a "point source") so thier light is much less intense to begin with.
Click to expand...
More surface area. Duh. At least that makes sense now.
 
appleseed

appleseed

Active Member
3 of the plants I had in veg were going to be moved to flower in a couple days so I just moved them. The other 4 went in my cabinet which has now been upped to 104w (400w equiv) of 5000k cfl. Found out my ballast is fine on my HID. Bad replacement bulb. I'm still thinking I may veg more with flouro. Bright as the sun in my cabinet now...
 
CLOSETGROWTH

CLOSETGROWTH

Well-Known Member
growone said:
the longer i grow, the more attached to fluoro tech i get, not dissing hid, but here's an example of a vertical fluoro setup
i'd call the results good(not mine, another grower)

Click to expand...

Thats a cool grow setup. Once Mj is Legal, Im building on of those for my living room. Bad ass :hump:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top