Light ???

churchhaze said:
The thing is that members in the led section have been testing various spectrums for years now, and it turns out that nothing beats 3000k 80cri white.

Cree_XLamp_CXA3050_chart.jpg


That warm white 3000k 80cri spectrum has been producing over 1gpw in just about everyone's setup.

As a side note, there are about 10 people in the LED section doing experiments with 730nm leds to manipulate darkness periods and R:FR ratio. The discussion on light here seems way less advanced.
Click to expand...


I love reading in the LED section. Lots of factual info and intelligent people. Real conversations going on. It's beautiful over there...
 
Cree and bridgelux in the last week both released new lines of their flagship cxa and vero cob lines, the cxb and an upgraded vero.

In the next few days, the price of vero 18 will likely drop from 12.50 a piece to 9 dollars a piece to compete with the 60% efficient monsters that were just released. When that happens, it will become a sin to recommend fluorescent ever again. The era of excited mercury in a thin glass tube has come to an end.

This is the modern veg box, minus the aluminum foil... lol That's 40W of total power dissipation there and will easily replace 80W of t-8, and these aren't even the new beasts on the market. These are 47% efficient at the current they're being run at (350mA).

No reflectors, no lenses.

IMAG0192.jpg

IMAG0151.jpg
 
Last edited:
RM3 said:
I would be more apt to use a 10,000K MH

this is a Solistek 600 watt 10000K MH

View attachment 3355435
Click to expand...
which is better, 7,200k or 6,400k? 2,000k or 2,700 k? im looking at a xtrasun 400 watt mh 7,200k or a reg 400 watt mh at 6,400k..never used xtrasun brand before but its cheap, and ive used hortilux and other high priced brands and swiched them once a year. then tryed cheaper bulbs and switched every6-8 months w/ no change in yields, so ive stopped using the higher priced bulbs altogether as i can get 3 or 4 cheap bulbs that last 2 years rather than 1 high priced bulb that lasts 1 year of growing.. i know de is the way to go, but i would have to get all new equipment, not an option right now...

oh, i wanted to let u know in my 4'x6' area i was running 2 600 watt hps alone, sice then ive added 4 4' t5 6500k bulbs 2 on each side of the hps's and i must say the added blue is keeping nodes closer w/ less stretch in flower...i also think crystal production is increasing, just by looking, no real evidence..but i also added a new strain this run, lemon kush which has simply overgrown all my other plants,i dont like it, way to stretchy w a foot between nodes..but the other strains i ran w/ just the hps have responded well to the added t5's..
 
my only problem w/ led is that it keeps improving, thats good but not worth investing in a light that will be outdated in a year or 2..i think led lighting will be great, but not worth the money when in a few years you will want the new ones..look at all the guys who bought led's 3-4 years ago, most are garbage now because the new ones are far superior...ill wait till they are lower priced .. ill be waiting awile im sure!
 
This is all very true and valid, but 3-4 years ago, people had the information they needed to realize that it was only 25% efficient, vs a fresh 600W HPS lamp, which is 35% efficient, and quickly tapers after use. I didn't even bother with LED back then, although it was fun to watch others experiment.

But since there are 40-60% efficient white lights on the market now, using your logic, wouldn't HPS be considered garbage now? On the contrary, HPS is still pretty amazing at 30-35% efficiency because of it's startup cost, and proven effectiveness.

By efficiency, I mean the total power output in light over the power in. (W/W)

Sure, you might feel stupid when the price falls after you purchase, but as long as you get above 35% efficiency, the light will have reason to exist.

TheChemist77 said:
my only problem w/ led is that it keeps improving, thats good but not worth investing in a light that will be outdated in a year or 2..i think led lighting will be great, but not worth the money when in a few years you will want the new ones..look at all the guys who bought led's 3-4 years ago, most are garbage now because the new ones are far superior...ill wait till they are lower priced .. ill be waiting awile im sure!
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
The purpose of the thread was to help growers better understand how to use light more effectively, which is an advanced topic. It has turned to a discussion about lights themselves, which I have merely followed. I am not yet ready to switch to LED, though I do agree it is the future.

Pot grown under the tubes is more potent, that is being seen by several growers that have made the change, one is doing a side by side T5's vs a 600 HPS and the tubes are winning every time in potency but not in yield which is expected

I would rather have a few one hit buds over a lot of 10 hit buds but that is just me
 
RM3 said:
The purpose of the thread was to help growers better understand how to use light more effectively, which is an advanced topic. It has turned to a discussion about lights themselves, which I have merely followed. I am not yet ready to switch to LED, though I do agree it is the future.

Pot grown under the tubes is more potent, that is being seen by several growers that have made the change, one is doing a side by side T5's vs a 600 HPS and the tubes are winning every time in potency but not in yield which is expected

I would rather have a few one hit buds over a lot of 10 hit buds but that is just me
Click to expand...

...and there's guys like me who want it ALL, want it NOW, and want it CHEAP. And, let's not forget in stock!
 
churchhaze said:
In my opinion, this thread is very misleading, and doesn't really focus on any of the advanced aspects of light, in fact everyone seemed to glaze over when discussing phytochromes, which technically should be one of the only things being discussed in this advanced thread.
Click to expand...

Not me. I have quite a few posts where I've raised the topic of phytochrome hormones, photomorphogenesis and all you hear in "Advanced" is crickets.

I'm a simple man. There's nothing easier than raising or lowering a HID on a dog chain attached to a metal water pipe, grabbing a light meter and doing a few tweeks here and there.

There's something else folks won't talk about because they so hung up on spectral analysis. As long as you have reds and blues in sufficient amounts, which a regular HPS has, the plant doesn't give a hoot.

Just like with the high tech corporations pushing their "must have" devices with newest upgrade soon to be released, I won't be sucked into a bunch of marketing bullshit by the hydro/lighting industry. It's a racket.
 
Last edited:
RM3 said:
Pot grown under the tubes is more potent, that is being seen by several growers that have made the change, one is doing a side by side T5's vs a 600 HPS and the tubes are winning every time in potency but not in yield which is expected
Click to expand...

Riddle, not trying to be confrontational but that dog don't hunt. I have yet to see any scientific proof using standard university lab type empirical procedures replicated at least 3 times which reflects any truisms in your statement about HPS vs T5's. Sorry, but I aint buying into ANY anecdotal evidence or conjecture, especially when it comes to a pot forum. I consider you one of the few credible and responsible growers, but.......
 
Uncle Ben said:
Riddle, not trying to be confrontational but that dog don't hunt. I have yet to see any scientific proof using standard university lab type empirical procedures replicated at least 3 times which reflects any truisms in your statement about HPS vs T5's. Sorry, but I aint buying into ANY anecdotal evidence or conjecture, especially when it comes to a pot forum. I consider you one of the few credible and responsible growers, but.......
Click to expand...

Well, you're right nothing scientific as yet, just a bunch of stoners getting high and reportin their take on it. But that grower that is doing the side by sides is using clones from the same mom and is going to have them lab tested once finished. It will be a start towards empirical proof that the dog does indeed hunt :)
 
Uncle Ben said:
Not me. I have made quite a few posts made where I've raised the topic of phytochrome hormones, photomorphogenesis and all you hear in "Advanced" is crickets.

I'm a simple man. There's nothing easier than raising or lowering a HID on a dog chain attached to a metal water pipe, grabbing a light meter and doing a few tweeks here and there.
Click to expand...

Same, simple is so much easier and less stress inducing lol. I did the whole "anecdotal experiments" with Plasma/LEDs/HIDs/Fluros ---PAR/PUR/photosaturation.. blah blah blah its endless.. In the end of the day, I realized things were so much simpler just under the sun, literally~
 
RM3 said:
Well, you're right nothing scientific as yet, just a bunch of stoners getting high and reportin their take on it. But that grower that is doing the side by sides is using clones from the same mom and is going to have them lab tested once finished. It will be a start towards empirical proof that the dog does indeed hunt :)
Click to expand...

Let's hope it doesn't turn out to be a toy poodle. :mrgreen:

Even though your reference is far from a properly conducted study it will be interesting. Keep us posted amigo.
 
cannawizard said:
Same, simple is so much easier and less stress inducing lol. I did the whole "anecdotal experiments" with Plasma/LEDs/HIDs/Fluros ---PAR/PUR/photosaturation.. blah blah blah its endless.. In the end of the day, I realized things were so much simpler just under the sun, literally~
Click to expand...

Nothing like growing in the sun but it never fails, there are some really tough moments with outdoors growing namely high prevailing winds for me (in spite of a windbreak) and seasonal storms. I had one storm snap a 4 cola trunk right down the middle. SplitCrotchSend.jpg
 
Uncle Ben said:
Nothing like growing in the sun but it never fails, there are some really tough moments with outdoors growing namely high prevailing winds for me (in spite of a windbreak) and seasonal storms. I had one storm snap a 4 cola trunk right down the middle. View attachment 3356204
Click to expand...

Yup, even with well placed windbreaks, 50+mph winds will do a number on cola heavy ladies, duct tape is an outdoor growers best friend with all those snapped branches/stems~
 
a senile fungus said:
cant-tell-if-comment-was-supposed-to-be-a-compliment-or-if-its-s.jpg
Click to expand...
If sarcasm itself was the goal I could have put it exactly like you did. I especially liked the "it's beautiful there..." part, nice touch.

It wasn't though. Not that enthusiastic about the led forums but I agree there are some good growers and smart people there (e.g. gg and churchhaze) and as long as you're a member of the same church or just a visitor... It's a little easier with a more exact science like electronics and lighting though. Can't argue math. Well..

churchhaze said:
By efficiency, I mean the total power output in light over the power in. (W/W)
Click to expand...
Which is nice on paper but doesn't necessarily mean something in practice. I don't care about how much light in total I get from a watt but how much gram of bud it produces, and then the difference in efficiency doesn't seem to line up with those percentages. It being a common argument from led growers and manufacturers only makes me more skeptical.

churchhaze said:
and quickly tapers after use.
Click to expand...
Quickly is also very relative to the cost, and the better ones produce more light after a year than some do new. I get the impression whenever a comparison between LED and HPS is made the LED is the best possible (sometimes even merely exist in labs) and the HPS is some average cheapo streetlight bulb with a $10 hood.
 
With only red and blue, it is not possible to provide enough total radiation to larger plants without bleaching the top leaves. It's like trying to cook a 2 inch rib eye steak with a hot cast iron on the highest setting the whole way through. To get enough total power of just R+B, you will fry the top of the plant while leaving the center raw. Most people gave up on the Red + blue only fad years ago. It actually is more complicated than just hitting plants with their 2 favorite colors. White has been proven to be way more effective with just about every journal I've seen. I've never seen a R+B grow and been thoroughly impressed by the results.

Obviously a lot of people have tried the failure combination of red+blue. It didn't matter how much R to B was included, white always yielded more.

I think what you are doing is using logic to prove your conclusions here, which works most of the time. I used to think more R+B was all plants wanted and kept trying to tune my spectrum accordingly.

HPS spectrum is actually really good for producing marijuana flowers. It's not just bombarding the plant with photons, but its also a better spectrum for flowering than any MH of the same intensity. That implies it's the spectrum of HPS that's so special.

R+B only grows always end up behind schedule, and yielding very little.

IMO, HPS spectrum should be emulated, not avoided, until it can be beaten with something that produces better results.

Uncle Ben said:
As long as you have reds and blues in sufficient amounts, which a regular HPS has, the plant doesn't give a hoot..
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Efficiency is one of the few numbers that means exactly the same thing on paper and in reality. You could take a kil-o-watt meter to measure how efficient your driver is. In that case, greater efficiency directly translates into a lower energy bill, even though nobody thinks "my driver produces awesome bud". An 80% efficiency driver will cost more to run than a 90% efficient driver.

Efficiency is one of the only hard quantitative arguments that CAN be made about LEDs in my opinion. All the other arguments you hear in favor of LED are about secret spectral sauces, how there will be more resin, how flavors are better, and other qualitative properties that were observed just by smoking or looking at the weed.

There are a few ways to find efficiency of a light source. You could put the light source in an integration sphere and find the total output power in watts, then divide by the power in. Efficiency is always unitless, because it's always W/W and W cancels out.

It's important that people do not confuse the words efficiency, efficacy and effectiveness. Most people do misuse the word efficiency. Efficiency is not how many grams your light will produce.

Sativied said:
Which is nice on paper but doesn't necessarily mean something in practice. I don't care about how much light in total I get from a watt but how much gram of bud it produces, and then the difference in efficiency doesn't seem to line up with those percentages. It being a common argument from led growers and manufacturers only makes me more skeptical.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Most people who buy leds, even now, refuse to listen to the advice of the forum experts and end up buying lamps that are less efficient than HPS, often R+B arrays which is not recommended for flowering.

For about 80% of the people that ask which LED system best fits their budget, the answer is 600W HPS. If you know you can't win, don't try. It's embarrassing to everyone!

They never listen. Believe me, I think we're actually on the same page here. Personally, I'd rather use a 600W HPS even over the beloved area51.

The combination of the high 30-35% efficiency, the great spectrum for flowering, and the low startup cost, it's almost impossible to beat HPS. Simply "going led" isn't going to cut it.

Sativied said:
I don't care about how much light in total I get from a watt but how much gram of bud it produces, and then the difference in efficiency doesn't seem to line up with those percentages
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top