Proof that LED lights are much more efficient than HPS and MH?? thoughts??

This video compares the red and blue spectrum outputs of a 330W LED, a 400W Metal Halide and a 600W HPS and shows evidence that the LED gives out the most essential lighting spectrums even at a much lower wattage.

Could this be the proof we need? Any thoughts?


[video=youtube;DAw13w9eFxY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DAw13w9eFxY&feature=related[/video]

Not to sound know it all ish, but this is really something we already knew. We know the necessary wavelengths that plants like, and are even narrowing down the supplemental wavelengths as well.

The problem is intensity which translates to penetration. In this we have not enough, which results in the necessity to scrog and be a bit aggressive with lower trimming, or suffer popcorn buds, or the intensity is entirely too focused/much which has resulted in stunted growth and bleaching.

It seem LEDs are working great, and are indeed very efficient, what we need is to lock down the correct relation of power, diffusion, and spectrum. Combine that with falling costs, and led is moving forward where hps is slowing to a halt. Though there are some very neat HID innovations coming out.

I would give led another two years, especially with the recent silicon chip advances. Things should get interesting.

Even with the spectral data, we are left wondering why if the desired light is so much more abundant in LED that a 600w system is so set it and forget it where as the led requires such attention to penetration issues and optimal placement. I think were close but not quite there to replace HID on a large scale. The spread and penetration of HID is just so great.

oh dont worry I knew all this as well, I'm just very pro-LED and I wanted to prove to the 'haters' that LEDs do produce more substantial light than HPS and MH
A lot of people argue that it's all about the lumens, and that makes LEDs terrible, i just wanted to prove then wrong haha xD

I think it is nice to see hard data. Wish I could get a nice spec. Couple of knocks on it would be distance from the source is set up to benefit the LED, and RL placement of an HID at that height would waste a ton of light.
Would like to know what the top number on the laptop was as well. PAR output in µmol maybe?
First post, btw, so be gentle. Interested in LED as I get bored easily and love the technology. Not fun cooling down the HPS either.

The other thing you might want to consider is how outdated and ill-adapted we are at measuring plant-usable light. We get close with uMole measurements, but it still is lacking.

im not saying that hps is more efficient, just that we dont get the whole story.

Hey Spaunn,
Personally I feel like we are going to come full circle in the sense that we will eventually be trying to replicate a high altitude sun within our indoor set ups. Plants have developed for MILLIONS of years to use the suns energy even though they don't use some things as much as others, they use a little bit of everything. Eventually we will have LED lights that are very similar to ceramic metal halides, just much more efficient, and possibly you will be able to swap out percentages of spectrums to adjust to vegging or flowering *this has been done but definitely not perfected. Big 10w LED chips that use Kelvin color spectrums (ex. 2700k or 6500k) along with the additional specified peak wave length diodes (ex. 440nm and or 660nm). Personally I also feel that something like the XLENS technology, Penetrator tech it looks interesting it's just too damned expensive, which in reality is similar to a franel lense, will be utilized to capture any and all wasted energy to redirect it back towards your plants. We are currently missing: Focus, Power, and Adjustment. Once all of those problems are fixed it will only be a matter of years before something even more efficient is created, but for a good 5 years we will all feel like the shit for jumping into the LED market. The focus and power will give us the penetration to really maximize yields (accuracy) and the adjustment will allow us to maximize the genetic potential of the plants (precision). That's just my opinion though, and hell what do I know. I'm just a crazy human.
Sincerely,
ILove

doesnt matter how u slice it...i own and use both........the hps always without fail produces more..as for potency ,its yet to be decided....this is what 1 kno!...try 260 actual watts of led subed with 150 hps sunmaster,,,the buds on the hps side primarily grow bigger than the ones on the led side of the plant....i think where led shows its worth and return on the buck is in the veg chamber...its on 18 hrs a day (or more)....my led suck less power and do an amazing job of vegging..that is were they will go after this grow..

does any one think otherwise(referring to the tittle)? i love HID and would never change for flower but i would definitely build some LEDs (not buy those expensive LIES) to suppliment my flower and veg. i definitely think it can be used as a single source but is this the most efficient? not for yeild on big plants so i think if you want to cut wattage in half by using led as a supplement light soure like say 1400w room replace 400w with a 200w led would be perfect both reduce heat and elec and still get the big yeilds off big plants

polyarcturus said:

does any one think otherwise(referring to the tittle)? i love HID and would never change for flower but i would definitely build some LEDs (not buy those expensive LIES) to suppliment my flower and veg. i definitely think it can be used as a single source but is this the most efficient? not for yeild on big plants so i think if you want to cut wattage in half by using led as a supplement light soure like say 1400w room replace 400w with a 200w led would be perfect both reduce heat and elec and still get the big yeilds off big plants

Click to expand...

....................like