Another reason to move away from HPS [Archive] - Green Grass Forums

Rusty Trichome

07-08-2010, 11:44 AM

Dutch Pimp

07-08-2010, 01:37 PM

It would take a PhD or a dumbass to read that pdf...I read it up to the sixth grade.....:detective1:

thepaan

07-08-2010, 02:24 PM

Gee. I thought it depended on the bulb. Some are full spectrum, some are for street lights or security lights, some are for growing indoors, some for aquariums... Most have so many friggin lumens, doubtful spectral bleeding is a problem worth a mention. Especially if results verify it's worthiness.

Perhaps you should get to the point. Explain why we should be as concerned as you seem to be...? I grow killer buds with my 1000w HPS, and have found no lighting system for indoor growing that even comes close to the performance of an HPS system. I'd love to see an example of this 'photodamage' you refered to. I'd also like you to look-up the degredation process of CBD to CBN, and it's effects on the psychoactive properties of the THC. Personally, I use the UV light to enhance this degredation further and quicker.

But I'm curious...what do you propose as a "better" choice?

I see you are easily inspired to bicker and difficulty inspired to discuss....

First, most street lights are actually LPS, not HPS. Second, I'm fairly certain all HPS spectral content is so similar that it is not worth distinguishing them. Any so-called HPS with a drastically different spectral content is actually high-pressure-something-else and/or metal halide.

I said nothing about being concerned. I am simply presenting new evidence for the this-light-vs.-that-light argument. in the hope of some intellectual conversation. Regarding that: I can agree that the quantity (or however you want to call it) of light is more important than the quality. Therefore I can agree that 1000W of HPS is far superior to 90W of LED. But still, it can't hurt to try to improve the quality of light. As you put it, referring to CBD, the quality of light can improve the end product.

In all plants photodamage occurs which primarily destroys a major part of photosystem II. This destruction inhibits photosynthesis, or slows it down. As everyone knows, it is via photosynthesis that the plant grows at all. So, paradoxically, light makes a plant grow slower but without light it will not grow at all. As we can see above, some wavelengths cause more damage than others. Most of this damage occurs in the UV wavelengths but there is also a peak just shy of 600 nm. This means that the damage to the photosystem is most severe at these wavelengths. There is a process to repair the damage but that process draws from the same energy pool which could be used for growth and then, as you asked, there is the point:

The highest quality light source shouldn't destroy any part of the plant which causes it to grow.

Rusty Trichome

07-08-2010, 11:00 PM

I see you are easily inspired to bicker and difficulty inspired to discuss....
Unless it was your paper you submitted, all you did was cut-n-paste an article. No questions or comments from you, pro or con.
It's not that I want to bicker, it's that I would like you to tell us what the fuck is your concern or issue regarding HPS lighting.

First, most street lights are actually LPS, not HPS.
Oh really...? Big mistake not knowing what you're talking about. Other's might just know as much or more than you. Perhaps your local lights are different, but here...HPS.

"High-pressure sodium (HPS) lamps are smaller and contain additional elements such as mercury, and produce a dark pink glow when first struck, and a pinkish orange light when warmed. Some bulbs also briefly produce a pure to bluish white light in between. This is probably from the mercury glowing before the sodium is completely warmed. The sodium D-line is the main source of light from the HPS lamp, and it is extremely pressure broadened by the high sodium pressures in the lamp; due to this broadening and the emissions from mercury, colors of objects under these lamps can be distinguished. This leads them to be used in areas where good color rendering is important, or desired. Thus, its new model name SON is the variant for "sun" (a name used primarily in Europe and the UK). HPS Lamps are favoured by indoor gardeners for general growing because of the wide colour-temperature spectrum produced and the relatively efficient cost of running the lights.
High pressure sodium lamps are quite efficientâ??about 100 lm/Wâ??when measured for photopic lighting conditions. They have been widely used for outdoor lighting such as streetlights and security lighting. Understanding the change in human color vision sensitivity from photopic to mesopic and scotopic is essential for proper planning when designing lighting for roads."
High Pressure Sodium lamp - Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_pressure_sodium#High_pressure_sodium)

Second, I'm fairly certain all HPS spectral content is so similar that it is not worth distinguishing them. Any so-called HPS with a drastically different spectral content is actually high-pressure-something-else and/or metal halide.
Hmm...lost me on that one. Going to have to show me the similarity in spectrums of HPS and a full spectrum HPS. Or perhaps a link to what the full spectrum HPS REALLY is. Not that I really care, as I will continue to use what I use. (cheapest HPS bulb available, on the day I need it) I'm personally not so anal as to require $150 bulbs that do nothing more than my $30.00 bulbs, so am comfortable with the possibility of "photodamage" regardless. Perhaps you could provide some pictures highlighting your concerns, as I have no problems at all with cannabis under HPS lighting. Never have.

But regarding the effects of UV light...if you are going to try and tell us the effects of UV light are undesirable, you are barking up the wrong tree. Some of us have found the benefits of using supplimental UV lighting (I use a reptile UV bulb, 7% at 8-12") and we use it with prior knowledge the damage it will cause the plant. Matter of fact, it's a result we intentionally strive for. There's a few threads regarding UV lighting here, if being a lighting guru is your thing, check 'em out. It'll help keep your foot out of your mouth when discussing lighting and it's effects.

The highest quality light source shouldn't destroy any part of the plant which causes it to grow. Plants repair themselves daily from a myriad of injuries and issues.

LED's.............not there yet, expensive if of quality.
CFL's.............limited effective range, good for growth phase when plants are smaller
Fluoro tubes...even less range, good for seedlings and fresh clones
Grow spots.....more heat than lumens, cheap but garbage
MH................deep range, ineffecient, more bulb heat than HPS
HPS...............deep range, versitile, cheap, reliable, effective...

As I previously asked...what's your point? What's your alternative? What's the grand solution?

Seriously, the plant is fine under HPS, and any incidental or potential damage is negligable. The most you have to worry about is letting the plants grow too close to the bulb, or dropping the reflector on the plants.

khyberkitsune

07-09-2010, 12:11 AM

"Oh really...? Big mistake not knowing what you're talking about."

Excuse me, sir. LPS outputs far more lumens versus HPS, which is why it's preferred in highway/parking lot/street/airport lighting. He most certainly DOES know what he's talking about.

Call my pal Jason Chambers of Memphis Concrete Cutting at (901) 365-9331. We used to install the things.

LPS = 180+ l/w, HPS = 140-150 l/w.

LPS is better for human visual purposes, or at least perceptibly brighter, which is EXACTLY WHY it's used in street lamps.

You only usually see HPS/MH in camera-recorded parking lots where color rendition is a requirement for video surveillance.

Really, Rusty, I also would have thought you'd know that LPS is used specifically because of the lower light pollution as well, which is why they're the *ONLY* choice of light used around astronomical observatories.

thepaan

07-09-2010, 09:52 AM

Unless it was your paper you submitted, all you did was cut-n-paste an article. No questions or comments from you, pro or con.
It's not that I want to bicker, it's that I would like you to tell us what the fuck is your concern or issue regarding HPS lighting.

Well, I actually did leave a comment in the first post - maybe you missed it since it was so short. Also, I don't really have any concerns with HPS lighting as I don't use them but I hear they make a nice dent in your power bill... which can be a real nuisance if it gets exponentially more expensive every 100 kW h like mine does. Lastly, could you calm down a bit? Your posts read like a script starring Samuel L. Jackson. It is not my intention to personally attack you.

Oh really...? Big mistake not knowing what you're talking about. Other's might just know as much or more than you. Perhaps your local lights are different, but here...HPS.

I didn't say you don't know what you are talking about. I simply thought you made a mistake. I make mistakes too.

Hmm...lost me on that one. Going to have to show me the similarity in spectrums of HPS and a full spectrum HPS. Or perhaps a link to what the full spectrum HPS REALLY is.

All right, now we are getting somewhere! Like I said, I've never used HPS so I may be talking out my asshole here but as far as I know, a full spectrum bulb or dual-arc bulb is actually a combination of MH and HPS. Then there is your standard HPS which might have other stuff in there but the output spectrum pretty much looks the same. The full spectrum bulb still has the yellow from the sodium vapor but also gets a broad blue and green fill in from the metal halide so the overall output looks more flat - but theres still a huge spike in the yellow. Compare attachments. Am I wrong here? Lets take this with a grain of salt until we can check some more. Specifically, what is the exact bulb you are using?

Not that I really care, as I will continue to use what I use. (cheapest HPS bulb available, on the day I need it) I'm personally not so anal as to require $150 bulbs that do nothing more than my $30.00 bulbs, so am comfortable with the possibility of "photodamage" regardless. Perhaps you could provide some pictures highlighting your concerns, as I have no problems at all with cannabis under HPS lighting. Never have.

I concur. If you are happy with your setup then by all means, keep on keepin' on. And it is true that HPS are sufficient but then, not using UV is also sufficient.

But regarding the effects of UV light...if you are going to try and tell us the effects of UV light are undesirable, you are barking up the wrong tree.

Nope. I had no idea about the UV. I was only referring to HPS in the original post as I assumed that UV was never included because it has to be intentionally and seperately added to indoor lighting. I do thank you for that tid-bit of info and I might be expanding my practices later.

Rusty Trichome

07-09-2010, 01:21 PM

Excuse me, sir. LPS outputs far more lumens versus HPS, which is why it's preferred in highway/parking lot/street/airport lighting. He most certainly DOES know what he's talking about.
Really, Rusty, I also would have thought you'd know that LPS is used specifically because of the lower light pollution as well, which is why they're the *ONLY* choice of light used around astronomical observatories.
You're joking, right? I back my statements with proof from WIKI, and you want to argue. Go find something to do, because frankly...you suck at 'bickering'. I know the lamps they use in this part of our county are HPS, because I've talked to the worker that goes-up and changes the damn bulbs.

High pressure sodium lamps are quite efficientâ??about 100 lm/Wâ??when measured for photopic lighting conditions. They have been widely used for outdoor lighting such as streetlights and security lighting. Understanding the change in human color vision sensitivity from photopic to mesopic and scotopic is essential for proper planning when designing lighting for roads."
High Pressure Sodium lamp - Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/High_pressure_sodium#High_pressure_sodium)

You keep beating a dead horse with the bullshit, and all you'll do is keep getting shit all over yourself. Here, in my little county, HPS is the lighting used. Sorry if you have a problem with (solid) the evidence I posted backing my statement, but you have posted nothing to back your statement. If you're going to get good at this 'bickering' thing, read-up and show your proof. Right now, you look like you're grasping for retribution for past arguments. Rather ineffectively, I might add. Perhaps you could submit your understandings to WIKI, and have them change their definition and description of HPS lighting.

Just to keep the conversation on-track...I never said the other lights aren't used, but I did point-out and prove what is used. Dispute that point, or back-off. Plain and simple.

-------------------------------------------------------

I use bulbs from 1000bulbs, Walmart (when I was still doing 400 watters) or whichever grow store that has 'em online for a good price. As I said...frankly, I don't give a damn. If it ignites, and lights, I'm fine. I'm not a commercial grower in need of that extra 10 lumens per square foot to make my bottom line and I'm not at all worried about any of the concerns you've posted regarding the degradative effects of light on plants. But I do grow killer meds, and try to concentrate on the gardening issues that matter.

Proper lighting is essential. Perfect lighting is anal. (there's no such animal)

Dutch Pimp

07-09-2010, 02:13 PM

All right, now we are getting somewhere! Like I said, I've never used HPS so I may be talking out my asshole here but as far as I know, a full spectrum bulb or dual-arc bulb is actually a combination of MH and HPS.

chinese-made dual-arc bulbs have an extremely limited life span...if they make it... that far?

...all chinese crap is geared toward 240 volt operations...cause that's what they use...:smokin:...no 120 volt...anywhere in China

Rusty Trichome

07-09-2010, 04:22 PM

Tell me...is there a difference between full spectrum and dual spectrum? (Please research before you respond...this get's old after a while...)

Rusty Trichome

07-09-2010, 07:14 PM

Sorry Dutch, I wasn't refering to your post...:thumbsup:

Weezard

07-09-2010, 09:09 PM

Aloha guys.

Rusty.
That's another sig,-worthy quote.:thumbsup:

"Proper lighting is essential. Perfect lighting is anal. (there's no such animal)"

If not for our predatory power prices, I'd be using HPS instead of da led also.

But, da rainbow chasers are fun to watch, and every now and then I learn sumpin'.:cool:

Aloha Da paan,
Welcome to da debate club.:D

If you can calmly counter Rusty's comments with cited facts, your position is solid enough to withstand anyone, anywhere, anytime.:)

Personally, I line my ducks up before I run dem by R.T.:D
(He'll just eat any stray ducks.:(:D)
Eat yer goat too, if ya let 'im get it.:)
Bottom line? we all learn sumpin':thumbsup::thumbsup:

Carry on, it's quite entertaining and informative.:cool:

Weezard

Rusty Trichome

07-10-2010, 12:10 PM

Mmmm...goat stew with newbie duck sauce.

Just the thought makes my woodie splinter. :jointsmile:

thepaan

07-10-2010, 01:17 PM

Tell me...is there a difference between full spectrum and dual spectrum? (Please research before you respond...this get's old after a while...)

You are a child. How about this since it saves everyone a lot of time: Tell us which bulb you are using and I will either a) tell you which bulb is not an HPS or 2) tell you which bulb has an output spectrum almost identical to a generic HPS. Here: multiple choice in case you get stumped easily. Which one of the following are you using?

A) Philips Master Son
2) Hortilux Super HPS
C) Osram Plantstar
d) Sunmaster Super-HPS

pepurr

07-10-2010, 01:28 PM

You are a child.

That is a good way to make friends, NOT!

thepaan

07-10-2010, 01:39 PM

I use bulbs from 1000bulbs, Walmart (when I was still doing 400 watters) or whichever grow store that has 'em online for a good price. As I said...frankly, I don't give a damn. If it ignites, and lights, I'm fine. Proper lighting is essential. Perfect lighting is anal. (there's no such animal)

My apologies for not reading the entire thread before replying. So, what I'm getting by this is: you use a gerneric bulb but your sure the output spectrum is different (a la "full spectrum") than the rest of the HPS on the market. The only 1000W HPS on 1000bulbs.com not on the previous attachment is the Pulsrite - but I'm sure it looks JUST like the rest.

So it is as I said: HPS = most damaging to plant growth artificial visible light source available (except maybe an amber LED...).

Dutch Pimp

07-10-2010, 03:48 PM

I like 400 watt Hortilux HPS light...:thumbsup:..never burned or damaged a plant

...but, I prefer a 400 watt CMH bulb ...for my small, personal grows

http://boards.cannabis.com/indoor-lighting/133316-ceramic-metal-halide-bulbs-hps-ballasts.html

Rusty Trichome

07-10-2010, 06:53 PM

You are a child. Been called worse. Hardly original, but I guess you work with what you've got.

How about this since it saves everyone a lot of time: Tell us which bulb you are using
I'm not interrested in saving you time. But I am interrested in making you get your head in the game, and answer a simple question that you keep deflecting. Like is there a difference between Dual spectrum (commonly Dual Arc) and Full spectrum?

Since you seem to avoid research or taking your whiney ass over to a bulb retail site to see if you can distinguish between the two bulbs, I'll do some of the grunt work for ya... (or were you unable to find the answer...?)

The one I'm currently using is here:
My full spectrum bulbs.com (http://www.hidhut.com/catalog/full-spectrum-1000w-hps-bulb-p-292.html)
Inside the glass envelope is one long ceramic (or titanium for all I know) filament and support wires.
I might re-purchase, I might go with the standard rather than full next time. Depends on what's on sale. Each has it's own strength and detractors. Dual arc (dual spectrum) bulbs I avoid.

Here's an example of a Dual spectrum (dual arc) bulb:
Unnecessary and overpriced growbulb.com (http://www.hidhut.com/catalog/1000-watt-hortilux-super-blue-dual-arc-lamp-p-1342.html) (sorry Dutch...it was just on the next page and easily accessed )
Inside the glass envelope is one semi-long ceramic (perhaps) filament and one MH pillow, or packet, (or whatever the heck it is) and all the support wires for both. Tiz a MH/HPS combo in one bulb.

As far as my experience takes me (around the block once or twice) the inner workings of the Full spectrum bulbs do not have the MH pillow addition, like you see in the Dual arc.
You are asking me to compare apples and oranges, and I tire of that game easily.

If this is not what you are refering to, then spell it out. I really am trying to understand what you're getting at. I'm losing my patience in the process, but that's not unusual these days.

As far as the spectrum chart goes...were my goals to have my hobby all-encompasing of time, effort and cash, and were I so anal about the minutia that I'd overlook the benefits of keeping it simple, and were I to not trust that tens of thousands (an estimate to infer actual knowledge) of indoor gardeners have had and continue to have success with a system or a piece of equipment, or a product's effectiveness, I'd keep along the same path as yours. Dewlling on something that is truly inconsequential.
We're talking about 110,000-140,000 lumens or so, (which BTW...my plants love) not a concentrated million watt laser.

If you fail to learn the benefits of doing what works for very experienced gardeners all over the world, you're doomed. And if that is the case, why do you need our validation...?

Me...? I use what works and I use it well. :jointsmile:

A couple of pictures to illustrate the two bulbs...

seventhchild

07-10-2010, 07:11 PM

"Our results show that photodamage to PSII by
sunlight is primarily associated with UV and yellow
wavelengths (Fig. 5), "quote from PDF many growers feel that UV light changes/modifies the guilty/quanity of their medicine for the better. i myself flower under HPS until the last few weeks. i then finish with a MH. been doing it like this for a loooong time because it improves the smell , taste ,high. i have always thought that the blue from the MH caused these changes but have recently read that MH puts out a lot of UV rays so maybe its the UV? I also use the cheap bulbs and am quite pleased with the results. but i guess im rambling .will filtering out that yellow peak make my plants grow noticeably faster? will adding more of this yellow have an affect for the positive?when will my lunch be ready???

seventhchild

07-10-2010, 07:21 PM

do the LED growers grow awesome buds with N0 UV OR YELLOW ?

neceros

07-10-2010, 08:14 PM

do the LED growers grow awesome buds with N0 UV OR YELLOW ?

So I hear.

irydyum

07-10-2010, 08:42 PM

Awesome, in this case, would be a completely relative term. I would like to think so, but my personal experience included, I feel my HPS buds are more worth my time. LED is great technology but it's only true application ATM is in micro grows. My opinion only.

Weezard

07-10-2010, 09:04 PM

do the LED growers grow awesome buds with N0 UV OR YELLOW ?

Yes!

Aloha,
Weeze

thepaan

07-11-2010, 01:47 PM

Been called worse. Hardly original, but I guess you work with what you've got.

I'm not interrested in saving you time. But I am interrested in making you get your head in the game, and answer a simple question that you keep deflecting. Like is there a difference between Dual spectrum (commonly Dual Arc) and Full spectrum?

Since you seem to avoid research or taking your whiney ass over to a bulb retail site to see if you can distinguish between the two bulbs, I'll do some of the grunt work for ya... (or were you unable to find the answer...?)

The one I'm currently using is here:
My full spectrum bulbs.com (http://www.hidhut.com/catalog/full-spectrum-1000w-hps-bulb-p-292.html)
Inside the glass envelope is one long ceramic (or titanium for all I know) filament and support wires.
I might re-purchase, I might go with the standard rather than full next time. Depends on what's on sale. Each has it's own strength and detractors. Dual arc (dual spectrum) bulbs I avoid.

Here's an example of a Dual spectrum (dual arc) bulb:
Unnecessary and overpriced growbulb.com (http://www.hidhut.com/catalog/1000-watt-hortilux-super-blue-dual-arc-lamp-p-1342.html) (sorry Dutch...it was just on the next page and easily accessed )
Inside the glass envelope is one semi-long ceramic (perhaps) filament and one MH pillow, or packet, (or whatever the heck it is) and all the support wires for both. Tiz a MH/HPS combo in one bulb.

As far as my experience takes me (around the block once or twice) the inner workings of the Full spectrum bulbs do not have the MH pillow addition, like you see in the Dual arc.
You are asking me to compare apples and oranges, and I tire of that game easily.

If this is not what you are refering to, then spell it out. I really am trying to understand what you're getting at. I'm losing my patience in the process, but that's not unusual these days.

As far as the spectrum chart goes...were my goals to have my hobby all-encompasing of time, effort and cash, and were I so anal about the minutia that I'd overlook the benefits of keeping it simple, and were I to not trust that tens of thousands (an estimate to infer actual knowledge) of indoor gardeners have had and continue to have success with a system or a piece of equipment, or a product's effectiveness, I'd keep along the same path as yours. Dewlling on something that is truly inconsequential.
We're talking about 110,000-140,000 lumens or so, (which BTW...my plants love) not a concentrated million watt laser.

If you fail to learn the benefits of doing what works for very experienced gardeners all over the world, you're doomed. And if that is the case, why do you need our validation...?

Me...? I use what works and I use it well. :jointsmile:

A couple of pictures to illustrate the two bulbs...

So a dual arc bulb is not the same thing as a "full spectrum" HPS. Who cares? You use an HPS so have become defensive stating that "full spectrum" bulbs are somehow different. I tell you now: They are not different enough from a generic HPS to matter and anything that is actually different is not actually HPS.

Anyhow, I guess it was a mistake to think that any of you cared to improve your undertanding.

Rusty Trichome

07-11-2010, 04:07 PM

Well...if you want to put it like that, I'll put it like this:
For starters, usually it's a good idea to know the subject matter and have practical experience before telling someone with both they are wrong. You can worry all you want about the similarities in light spectrum with different bulbs, or you can accept that it (HPS) works just fine. All three types of bulbs (dual arc, full spectrum and 'regular') each have their plusses and minuses.

Were we not concerned with growing the best meds possible, we wouldn't be here dispelling rhumor, inuendo and bullshit. Were there any possibility of consequential damage, do you think anyone on any cannabis board would recommend it's use? Get a grip, and pull your head out. It is SERIOUSLY nothing to worry about, and your consistent slamming of the equipment has become laughable. What next...a warning that sunlight might be damaging to our cannabis plants...?

You keep repeating the chant about damaging light and spectrums, but you offer no alternative, and obviously are not absorbing the material offered. I've asked you this question before, but I'll try one last time.
What is your alternative?

seventhchild

07-11-2010, 05:20 PM

. What next...a warning that sunlight might be damaging to our cannabis plants...?
"Our results show that photodamage to PSII by
sunlight is primarily associated with UV and yellow
wavelengths (Fig. 5), "quote from PDF..................ok so the article does say that but sometimes what is seemingly bad to cannabis is good for the grower.
we cut back / remove nitrogen during flowering = leaf dies,stress a bud to get hermies=femmed seed, provide extra UV =resin changes.........these methods have evolved over the past 40 years because we exchange info and try new things. i will soon be adding far red light to my grow to see if it has an affect not because i feel my smoke "isn't good enough" but only because i'm curious by nature. now i'm curious about this yellow light damage....what is its affect on pot? good/bad? pure LED growers could tell us rather quickly....any volunteers ?

seventhchild

07-11-2010, 05:28 PM

forgot to point out what most of us already know....potency is mostly genetics .you will only get small /subtle changes by manipulating your light spectrum .correct me if you feel different but lets try to stay on subject.

Rusty Trichome

07-11-2010, 06:38 PM

So seventh, what are you talking about? We are on subject, but it seems you want to change the subject to...genetics vs enviornment? I agree with the genetics being the cornerstone, and you can't get quality from crap...but it's not the only factor. Any gardener can screw-up a garden, regardless of the quality of the genetics you start off with.

I think y'all are underestimating the cannabis plant. Not only has it lasted many thousands of years, it has seen shitloads of different climates, CO2 levels, earthquakes, droughts, floods, terrain elevation changes...and all we have to do is keep it's conditions in a certain range. (not like orchids, that demand a hot, humid envirornment for example) Even the femming process shows the determination of the cannabis plant to survive extreme conditions. If not, we wouldn't be able to stress nanners into the females, and calyx's in the males. It's a latent expression of emergency reproduction, being forced-forward to an overt expression.

Things to ponder while you're dicking with spectrums...
Is shifting light spectrum in one direction or another a benefit, or is there another price to pay for this shift? (growth habits, disease resistance, stress tolerance...) Especially during the growth phase. How much of a shift works or doesn't work? How many specific wavelengths are there between ultra violet, and infra red? Are all these wavelengths covered when using LED's? If not, is it a benefit, or a curse? Does shifting the spectrum have any genetic repercussions long-term? Should you go with something that's been proven, or keep looking for a non-existant "better option"?

How many different wavelengths do LED's come in? How many of those are affordable? Which combination(s) are most beneficial during growth phase? How about for flowering? How about for seed-set and seed maturation? How do you know the LED's are perfectly within advertised range?

Is there a "sweet spot" of spectrum combinations...? Yup. It's called the sun. Add or subtract from that, and your plants will adapt, but at what cost? (if any)

I'm not at all saying it's bad to experiment. I do it often. If you have the time, money, growrooms, time, knowledge, money and time to pull it off and find the "perfect" LED combination...have at it. It's worthwhile if you can successfully pull it off, and likely you'll get some positive rep points for your efforts. :cool:
But quite frankly, I'll stick with a proven winner (HPS) till the industry comes-up with a better mousetrap.

In adding UV light late in flower I know the exposure risks, (to my eyes and skin) but I also know the effects on my plants, and welcome them. Were I to listen to the PSII paper, I'd be talking out of my ass touting "proof" of photodamage, and I wouldn't be enjoying the benefits, and I wouldn't have the hands-on experience with the UV spectrum that I have. Experiment away (safely)...but keep plant biology and physiology in mind, or you are likely wasting your time.

seventhchild

07-11-2010, 07:45 PM

even though the OP said' I am simply presenting new evidence for the this-light-vs.-that-light argument" the PDF he links to states that certain wavelengths damage plants which to me raises the question "is this damage good or bad?" not "what bulb has more/less of these wavelengths?". that UV causes damage is well known as is the fact that many growers consider this to be a good thing and add it to their HPS growroom that subject is already been covered in countless threads .so... how will the addition/removel of this yellow spectrum affect growth ?Rusty i'm glad ur happy with ur HPS/UV setup . i'm happy with my HPS/MH setup . a few decades back i was happy with my 20 bulb eight foot fluorescent setup but out of curiosity i gave those streetlights a try........

seventhchild

07-11-2010, 08:40 PM

Things to ponder while you're dicking with spectrums...
Is shifting light spectrum in one direction or another a benefit, or is there another price to pay for this shift? (growth habits, disease resistance, stress tolerance...) Especially during the growth phase. How much of a shift works or doesn't work? How many specific wavelengths are there between ultra violet, and infra red? Are all these wavelengths covered when using LED's? If not, is it a benefit, or a curse? Does shifting the spectrum have any genetic repercussions long-term? Should you go with something that's been proven, or keep looking for a non-existant "better option"?

Is there a "sweet spot" of spectrum combinations...? Yup. It's called the sun. Add or subtract from that, and your plants will adapt, but at what cost? (if any)

did you really ponder these things when you dicked with your HPS spectrum by adding UV ?many growers feel that UV is a non-existant better option . UV light has been scientifically proven to damage living tissue do you have some links to scientific data that say this is a good thing or is it just your opinion ? i am not opposed to adding UV but it seems to me that your being a little ANAL about this little ol thing.after all we are farmers not scientists .

Rusty Trichome

07-12-2010, 01:24 PM

Actually, I thought long and hard before attempting the use of UV, which is knowledge I gained from Marijuana Man quite a few years ago. (8 years ago...on pot-tv...The Grow Show) His video's are still available online for those that wish to witness the effects of UV, the degradation of CBD to CBN, the interraction of terpines and cannabinoids, and stupid unreasonable shit like that. Not a scholarly paper, but I'll follow his lead much sooner than an abstract on a single non-cannabis example.
Perhaps you should contact Marijuana Man himself, and let him know he's wrong. I'll be the one behind you pointing and laughing at your inability to learn and unwillingness think for yourself. And wallah...another parrot is born, and apparently his job is to parrot other's bullshit forever. If you had first-hand experience, we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Listen...I have first-hand experience with the UV you folks seem to want to keep pushing as a detriment to our gardens. Whatever. You can keep your data sheet, you can keep your "facts" and you can keep your ignorance. Good luck with that tactic. :jointsmile:

But if you want to learn why it's used, look-up the Marijuana Mans Grow Show, watch his video's from 2001-2003, and get back to me. Because till now...you guys have been shooting blanks in the usable information shoot-out.

Weezard

07-12-2010, 07:32 PM

Aloha, Y'all

Re UV:

"Light is also used for information transfer within the plant. Photoreceptors on plant leaves send signals that control many physiological and morphological responses inside the plant. In fact, there may be as yet undiscovered plant responses to light. These sorts of complex interactions between light and various functions within plants has led scientists to consider how we can further improve and influence plant growth by manipulating or filtering light to achieve better responses from crops. For example, UV light is not a significant part of the radiation spectrum in terms of photosynthesis. However, research indicates that it could be a factor in the development of flavors, colors and fragrances in some plant species. So in the future boosting such desirable characteristics as color or aroma in cut flowers or other active compounds in certain plants with use of UV wavelengths may become possible."

For the article:

The Growing Edge Magazine - Rays of Life (http://www.growingedge.com/magazine/back_issues/view_article.php3?AID=180134)

Good info on the saturation point as well.

Love dat google.
Weeze

Rusty Trichome

07-12-2010, 09:18 PM

Nice find. I skimmed over it, and it seemed well written, but I've only got a few minutes before wife gets back. Will most definitely chek it out though. :thumbsup:
WTG Weez...:thumbsup:

seventhchild

07-17-2010, 07:37 PM

a very good article WEEZARD , relevant and on topic. heres a copy and paste from it " Plants respond to light in ways that are more complex than most growers first realize. What's more, each plant species seems to have its own individual response to light-day length, spectral quality, duration, intensity. Further, research into light-plant interactions continues to uncover previously unknown details about the effect light has on plant growth and development." I sometimes forget that what seems obvious to me is unseen by others so i shall repeat myself "I AM NOT OPPOSED TO THE USE OF UV LIGHT" arguing its pros/cons is beating a dead horse.RUSTY put down the stick and stop being such a hypocrite.when growers found how well hid's produced flour's were discarded.........this is the same fate that will befall HPS/MH in time...it is the LED user that can research the effects of different light combos does yellow increase calyx size? does orange change thc/cbn ratios ? is it red or far red that increases bud size the most ?this is what interest me .IMHO the op titled his thread wrong and got this discussion off to a bad start.after reading the PDF he linked to the only question i have is "WHAT AFFECT DOES USING/REMOVING THE YELLOW SPECTRUM HAVE ON CANNABIS"?

Rusty Trichome

07-18-2010, 12:45 AM

RUSTY put down the stick and stop being such a hypocrite.when growers found how well hid's produced flour's were discarded.........this is the same fate that will befall HPS/MH in time...
Hmm...a hypocrite...?

The first lighting I remember seeing in an indoor op were mercury vapor, but that was back in the IDK...mid 70's?. Didn't even hear of fluoro lighting till the 90's, which, for your information, fluoro's are still used to this day in many forms.

I have always kept an open mind when watching the development of the LED's, which I repeat, are not there yet. Yield, initial cash outlay and spectral inadequacies are often cited as problematic. So if you have to purchase an HPS to suppliment the LED's 'more compact' yield, why would I recommend anyone to spend all that cash for something that can't quite finish the job?

If this steps on somebody's LED-nazi approach, oh well. But most in here don't have the cash nor experience to be risking their meds on an unproven and unperfected piece of equipment. In other words, I will not recommend the LED's over the HID's.

The best I'll go, is yes. You can grow cannabis using some brands of LED's. If they are the correct spectrum, and you have enough cash to outlay, and if yield isn't a primary concern.

I can appreciate your intensity, but what is your goal? 1% more THC? 2% more CBD's? 8% more trichomes? 4% more CBN's? Since you are apparently experienced enough to play around, I say go for it. Perhaps you'll someday get out of cannabis that which you are seeking. Personally, I'm more than satisfied with what I grow and how I grow it. Another satisfied HID customer.

For the general membership, I recommend a watch and see approach.

I believe the yellow spectrum is absorbed and converted by the chlorophyll B pigments, but would have to double-check.

canniwhatsis

07-18-2010, 01:10 AM

Fun read. :rolleyes:

THContent

07-18-2010, 12:13 PM

I am gonna have to back rusty on this... Seems that paan can't come up with any reason to move away from HPS, just throws up charts with bs saying the light damages photosynthesis... Really now? I guess the plant's love to get damaged because my plants are greener and bigger everyday, and smell very nice, so to me that is a reason to stay with HPS...

Another thing, the paan, you never mention a better alternative. Why, I am guessing because there isin't one short of using natural sunlight.

My firm belief is you came here to start bs and argue points that don't even make any sense whatsoever.

And seventhchild, the topic is geared toward why we should drop HPS... Not about which lighting source is outdated and whatnot, Rusty is using valid points and people keep trying to change the topic somehow. Stay on topic, why should we away from HPS???

Seems to me this entire thread has no good points to move to any other light source. I will stick with my HPS and you can use your arguments to grow your plants.

seventhchild

07-18-2010, 05:02 PM

the OP's title and comment in his first post is aimed at the PDF he linked to..........the PDF is the reason this thread exists and should be what we discuss not" whats the best bulb?"[like rusty i use the cheapest] or "when/will HID's be outdated?[only HPS/MH in my room for now]. I do not seek 1% more THC 2% more CBD's or 8% more trichomes but knowledge and information. i already know that UV can have beneficial affects on some verities of cannabis. i also know that it can be useless on others and dangerous to work with:beatdeadhorse: ........................this is what i consider " on topic" Rusty " I believe the yellow spectrum is absorbed and converted by the chlorophyll B pigments, but would have to double-check."THANKS RUSTY . could any of you LED growers blast a bud with some yellow during flowering to see if it makes a difference in cannabis ?

Weezard

07-18-2010, 08:27 PM

"I will stick with my HPS and you can use your arguments to grow your plants. "

Love dat! Thanks.:thumbsup:

MHO?

Yellow light is not harmful, it is just less efficient.
(Or effin efficacious, if yer picky 'bout dat kine t'ing):D
Plants can up, and down convert to get what they need, but that comes with a cost.

That is not a big problem, just use more of it and the gals will grin and grow.
Might even be able to use green light, but it would take a metric shitload of it.:)

I've found that it takes almost twice the power usage for hps not including ballast and cooling.
And that is the main reason I use LEDs.
Power is north of half a rock per KWH here and it's a long term expense! :(
The expense of leds amortizes in one grow on da Islands.:cool:

Your milage will most likely vary.

In places where electricity is still relatively cheap, It might take 4 or 5 grows to amortize the cost of LEDs
(Even home-built, they ain't cheap)

If that were my situation, I'd simply use HPS/MH and just crank up the wattage for equivalent growth.
(Might feel jus' a little guilty 'bout da waste, but da good bud he'ps wit' dat, yah?).:jointsmile:

Aloha, Y'all
Weezard

kennebbiss

07-19-2010, 10:47 PM

YouTube - kennebbiss's Channel (http://www.youtube.com/user/kennebbiss)

Check out my youtube channel and you can see it progress from Veg to Flowering. It's looking real good.

seventhchild

07-24-2010, 03:59 PM

Yellow light is not harmful, it is just less efficient.

well...the scientists who conducted the test found yellow and uv harmed the plant they were growing . does this damage occur in cannabis ?in the case of UV we can safely say YES but MJ counteracts or responds to UV in a way that many growers find beneficial. does yellow[600nm] cause a similar response in pot ? I don't know...maybe/maybe not but if someone could point me to a narrow band light source centered at 600nm i would be willing to run a trial to find out.I don't need mega watts just something to hang between 4 18" buds as a supplement.

Weezard

07-24-2010, 08:12 PM

well...the scientists who conducted the test found yellow and uv harmed the plant they were growing . does this damage occur in cannabis ?in the case of UV we can safely say YES but MJ counteracts or responds to UV in a way that many growers find beneficial. does yellow[600nm] cause a similar response in pot ? I don't know...maybe/maybe not but if someone could point me to a narrow band light source centered at 600nm i would be willing to run a trial to find out.I don't need mega watts just something to hang between 4 18" buds as a supplement.

That's what I like to hear!
If we are not sure, we try sumpin an' see what happens.
Goodonya!:thumbsup:

Dang!
You made me go slog through that entire turgid, repetitive, PDF!
There's 10 minutes wasted.

A critical read of that PDF, indicates that wheels may get spun to no avail.:D

It starts out with what I consider to be a a weak statement for their case. (bolding is mine)

"primarily associated with UV rather than photosynthetically active light wavelengths."

Then another weak statement;

"Interestingly,
our result showed that the quantum efficiency of
photodamage has a small but apparent peak at yellow
(600 nm) wavelength in the visible light region"

Then they admit that other studies found no yellow peak and they offer several hypothesis for their conflicting results.":wtf:

"The spectrum
of photodamage efficiency shown in Arabidopsis
intact leaves had no visible light peak (Sarvikas et al.,
2006). The difference with our results may be due to a
different content of leaf pigments (the leaf used in our
study might have higher amount of photosynthetic
pigments or lower amounts of green-yellow absorbing
pigments such as carotenoids and phenolic compounds).
Further studies are necessary to verify this
hypothesis.":wtf:

This is not good science, my friend!

I would not waste any resources chasing the transient "pip" described in this paper.
You will note that they attempted to disable the plants, "damage control" .
Unless you have some lincomycin or chloramphenicol laying around, cannabis will simply repair any "damage", should any occur, and we will be none the wiser, yah?:)

In short, this is a non-issue.
Might even be a fnord;)

Aloha,
Weezard