Oh, snap! Look what showed up last night!!!

buyyouabeer

buyyouabeer

Well-Known Member
TheGreenGreek said:
That is not what the engineers are saying.
Click to expand...
Both style of lights work just fine. I have both types side by side right now; a TImber 3SAML QB based lamp and a TastyLED T3-2100 with 3x COB 3590 running at 75W ea lenses removed. The Tasty casts three distinct shadows while the QB based fixtures has very subtle and faint shadow lines. This shows how the more diffuse lighting penetrates better by coming from multiple angles.

Tasty side.
20180912_135644.jpg
Timber side.
20180912_135727.jpg
 
TheGreenGreek

TheGreenGreek

Active Member
buyyouabeer said:
Both style of lights work just fine. I have both types side by side right now; a TImber 3SAML QB based lamp and a TastyLED T3-2100 with 3x COB 3590 running at 75W ea lenses removed. The Tasty casts three distinct shadows while the QB based fixtures has very subtle and faint shadow lines. This shows how the more diffuse lighting penetrates better by coming from multiple angles.

Tasty side.
View attachment 4197562
Timber side.
View attachment 4197563
Click to expand...
So the Timber is getting more light thru?
 
buyyouabeer

buyyouabeer

Well-Known Member
TheGreenGreek said:
So the Timber is getting more light thru?
Click to expand...
I think it penetrates better, however I have grown some great stuff under the COB based Tasty and still use it. I was just trying to show you how the diffuse lighting gets down there, it is all good and you will be happy with your choice.
 
TheGreenGreek

TheGreenGreek

Active Member
buyyouabeer said:
Both style of lights work just fine. I have both types side by side right now; a TImber 3SAML QB based lamp and a TastyLED T3-2100 with 3x COB 3590 running at 75W ea lenses removed. The Tasty casts three distinct shadows while the QB based fixtures has very subtle and faint shadow lines. This shows how the more diffuse lighting penetrates better by coming from multiple angles.

Tasty side.
View attachment 4197562
Timber side.
View attachment 4197563
Click to expand...
Quoted from Dan at TimberGrow

"QB's are good for low height areas and vertical (stacked) farming. Each diode on a QB emits at 1/3 of a watt, whereas a COB can emit at 100 watts. You get much more photonic power under a COB than an individul diode - a QB being roughly 12x9" emitting the same power as a 1" diameter object. Furthermore, you can put a reflector in front of a COB and tighten the beam angle from 130° to 90°, further enhancing that effect."
 
buyyouabeer

buyyouabeer

Well-Known Member
TheGreenGreek said:
Quoted from Dan at TimberGrow

"QB's are good for low height areas and vertical (stacked) farming. Each diode on a QB emits at 1/3 of a watt, whereas a COB can emit at 100 watts. You get much more photonic power under a COB than an individul diode - a QB being roughly 12x9" emitting the same power as a 1" diameter object. Furthermore, you can put a reflector in front of a COB and tighten the beam angle from 130° to 90°, further enhancing that effect."
Click to expand...
I don't think this really address the subject of light penetration.

Have a look here (note greenhouses use diffuse lighting for a reason): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4559655/

"Diffuse light exhibits a lower extinction coefficient than direct light (Urban et al., 2012; Li et al., 2014a) although the effect depends on solar position (Morris, 1989). This indicates diffuse light penetrates deeper into the crop canopy. Such phenomenon occurred due to the properties of diffuse light that scatters in many directions and thus causes less shadow, while direct light either concentrates in a beam or casts a shadow in the canopy, which results in the upper leaves being brightly illuminated and lower leaves in deep shade, or strong sunflecks at a given canopy depth."
 
Last edited:
TheGreenGreek

TheGreenGreek

Active Member
buyyouabeer said:
I don't think this really address the subject of light penetration.

Have a look here (note greenhouses use diffuse lighting for a reason): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4559655/

"Diffuse light exhibits a lower extinction coefficient than direct light (Urban et al., 2012; Li et al., 2014a) although the effect depends on solar position (Morris, 1989). This indicates diffuse light penetrates deeper into the crop canopy. Such phenomenon occurred due to the properties of diffuse light that scatters in many directions and thus causes less shadow, while direct light either concentrates in a beam or casts a shadow in the canopy, which results in the upper leaves being brightly illuminated and lower leaves in deep shade, or strong sunflecks at a given canopy depth."
Click to expand...
The thing is, QB, HPS, Blurple or COB will not penetrate past the leaves. Its what can get thru the open spaces between leaves and to the lower nodes. Also, QB still have center mass hot spots. QB still requires them to be much closer to the top of the canopy. I think I will stick with COB. I am seeing good stuff coming from them
 
Big Green Thumb

Big Green Thumb

Well-Known Member
TheGreenGreek said:
The thing is, QB, HPS, Blurple or COB will not penetrate past the leaves. Its what can get thru the open spaces between leaves and to the lower nodes. Also, QB still have center mass hot spots. QB still requires them to be much closer to the top of the canopy. I think I will stick with COB. I am seeing good stuff coming from them
Click to expand...
And you think cubs don't have a hot spot? Cobs, qbs, and strips all work well and you will be happy with any of them, but I feel qbs and strips offer more even lighting across the canopy.

Here is the latest 20180912_102524.jpg progress of my scrog under the qbs. I'm running the qbs at 180 watts. I will be happy if I can get 1.5 grams per watt this grow!
 
TheGreenGreek

TheGreenGreek

Active Member
Big Green Thumb said:
And you think cubs don't have a hot spot? Cobs, qbs, and strips all work well and you will be happy with any of them, but I feel qbs and strips offer more even lighting across the canopy.

Here is the latest View attachment 4197607 progress of my scrog under the qbs. I'm running the qbs at 180 watts. I will be happy if I can get 1.5 grams per watt this grow!
Click to expand...
Maybe I need to stop listening to people. It seems I am being given a lot of wrong information. Not saying you. I mean in general.
 
Big Green Thumb

Big Green Thumb

Well-Known Member
We are splitting hairs saying which is "best" between qbs, cobs, and strips. I don't recall seeing any scientific studies that provides conclusive evidence as to which is better, nor evidence supporting penetration advantage between lighting technologies. What we DO have is scientific data that states the efficacy of different lights. I.e., lumens per watts, umoles per joule, etc etc.

Also, I would trust timbergrowlights' opinion. They have been at the forefront of lighting tech.
 
TheGreenGreek

TheGreenGreek

Active Member
Big Green Thumb said:
We are splitting hairs saying which is "best" between qbs, cobs, and strips. I don't recall seeing any scientific studies that provides conclusive evidence as to which is better, nor evidence supporting penetration advantage between lighting technologies. What we DO have is scientific data that states the efficacy of different lights. I.e., lumens per watts, umoles per joule, etc etc.

Also, I would trust timbergrowlights' opinion. They have been at the forefront of lighting tech.
Click to expand...
Yea I went with their recommendation and changed from 300w QB to 300w COB fixture. It was cheaper for the already built and they gave me the difference back plus 2 pairs of free ratchet hangers. AAA+ service.
 
Humple

Humple

Well-Known Member
Big Green Thumb said:
We are splitting hairs saying which is "best" between qbs, cobs, and strips. I don't recall seeing any scientific studies that provides conclusive evidence as to which is better, nor evidence supporting penetration advantage between lighting technologies. What we DO have is scientific data that states the efficacy of different lights. I.e., lumens per watts, umoles per joule, etc etc.

Also, I would trust timbergrowlights' opinion. They have been at the forefront of lighting tech.
Click to expand...
I agree - "best" is relative to the needs of an individual grow. COBs, boards, and strips can all be configured to achieve diffusion and uniformity. One may get you there for less money than another, and the cost of a fixture is certainly a factor in it's value.
 
TheGreenGreek

TheGreenGreek

Active Member
Humple said:
I agree - "best" is relative to the needs of an individual grow. COBs, boards, and strips can all be configured to achieve diffusion and uniformity. One may get you there for less money than another, and the cost of a fixture is certainly a factor in it's value.
Click to expand...
Cost of my fixture made sense. I don’t have the extra time at the moment to build identical or better for less. Trust me, I’m all about saving money. But “time” is a more important currency to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top