1000w HPS covers an area of?

[tekneeqs]

Hi,

Just a quick question. What is the space to be used with a 1000w HPS light?

I'm asking because I was wondering how much of these lamps I'd need to cover a space of 11x10.

[invision]

a space that big would need 4-6 lamps i believe they do a 3x3 area

[BOYZNUS]

I HAVE 2 1000W HPS COVERING 18 PLANTS WITH A 6'X12' FOOTPRINT.

PLANTS ARE IN 3 GALLON POTS.

LIGHTS ARE 3' APART.

[BOYZNUS]

I ALSO HAVE A 1000W MH IN A 3.5'X6' VEG ROOM.

WHITE WALLS MAKES THE DIFF

[xcrispi]

it kinda depends on what type of hood or reflector your using .
are you trying to grow the entire 11 x 12 or is that just the rooms dimensions ? thinking big is cool but leave yourself enuf room to move around n work . my rooms 11 x 12 too and w/ cooltubes i think i can cover about a
6 x 10 ft. aera effectivly .
peace
crispi

[CaliJay]

Stop what your doing and read this and remember. I messed around trying to get more production out of my 1000s. After reading some threads saying their 1000s were at 10 inches and 18 inches I lowered mine. Also pumped up nutes to 1400ppm from 1200....End result fan leaves burned as fuck!
Did some research...If you have a good reflector you light should never be closer that 3 ft. It is pointless you have all the lumens you plant can take. Raise your hood and get better diffusion from refracted light and a larger footprint. 1000s are rated for 6x6 area. I use 4x4 tubs and the plants end up at 5x5. I use PL lights that have incredible coverage and light distribution. under the center of the light reads the same foot candle readings as the corner of the grow area.
If you feel like burning your plants lower your lights.

Disclaimer..you could run more airflow & keep the room cooler & keep nutes lower than normal & shut off Co2....etc but why? Your plants want uniform lighting and that is achieved through distance and refraction. That is an argument for running "less effecient" 1000s instead of 600s.

Drawback...height restrictions...

Good luck friends.. -J

[bejay]

in general most will cover a 4 by 4 or 4 by 5 area effectivly but it does vary with different reflectors as per the light being 3 ft away from the plants that is to far away, and while you should make use of refracted light by using mylar or something similiar on the walls.

[dusto2k3]

i flowre w/ a 1k HPS in a 4x4 (feet) area

[Garden Knowm]

The buds that are grown with a light 12 inches away from the canopy look nothing like the buds that are grown at 36 inches away..

If you can not keep the temp down or cool the canopy then raising your lights may be your only HOPE...

But if you want forearm sized buds and actually get your monies worth from your electricity bill, the lights often need to be no higher than 12-18 inches...

A 1000 watt HPS with no C02 should yield 2lbs... This requires adequate ventilation and perfect light proximity..

A 1000 watt bulb can do a great job on a 3 X 3 grow space....

After that, the lumens are being compromised...

and NOW you KNOWM

attached are 2 pictures of a grow room with 2 - 1000 watt HPS bulbs on a light mover that are never more than 4 inches from the canopy...

iloveyou

[dusto2k3]

Knowm, Why the hatchet zip-tied to the 2x4 with tape on the blade?

[Splifted]

I have a 1kw in a cool tube only like 12 inches above the tops of my plants. I just had to raise it to 18" tho, since the plants are bigger. Only 4 plants under my 1kw......that will change next time. 4 big plants tho, 2.5 months of veg w/ lots of LST'ing :)

[keeko]

Knowm, Why the hatchet zip-tied to the 2x4 with tape on the blade?

not positive but i think he uses it for balance?...could be wrong

[Racerx]

Stop what your doing and read this and remember. I messed around trying to get more production out of my 1000s. After reading some threads saying their 1000s were at 10 inches and 18 inches I lowered mine. Also pumped up nutes to 1400ppm from 1200....End result fan leaves burned as fuck!
Did some research...If you have a good reflector you light should never be closer that 3 ft. It is pointless you have all the lumens you plant can take. Raise your hood and get better diffusion from refracted light and a larger footprint. 1000s are rated for 6x6 area. I use 4x4 tubs and the plants end up at 5x5. I use PL lights that have incredible coverage and light distribution. under the center of the light reads the same foot candle readings as the corner of the grow area.
If you feel like burning your plants lower your lights.

Disclaimer..you could run more airflow & keep the room cooler & keep nutes lower than normal & shut off Co2....etc but why? Your plants want uniform lighting and that is achieved through distance and refraction. That is an argument for running "less effecient" 1000s instead of 600s.

Drawback...height restrictions...

Good luck friends.. -J

I 100% disagree with this statement. Every single ounce of my experience and everything I have been taught has shown me that you cannot go above 12" (16 if your having major heat issues that you just cannot solve right now). But 3 feet? Are you out of your mind?

2 identical rooms. One with lights 12" above the canopy. One with lights 36" above the canopy. Are you actually going to still say that the room with the lamps 36" above the canopy is going to produce the SAME amount of yield and JUST as big of nugs? No, your not...and if you do then your speaking from internet research and not personal experience.

In my opinion and from my own experience, you never want more then a 4x4 area on a 1000 watt. Me personally? I think you should never even go past 3x3 area. If your having trouble with burning your plants, then its not an issue of the lights being to close. Its an issue of you not providing proper ventillation, proper temperatures, proper circulation, and proper nutes. I let my plants get within 4" of my 600 digitals and they do not burn. If you want to go for a ton of smaller buds that will end up weighing less then by all means, lift the lamp way up to light more area. But you are drastically lowering lumens at an exponential rate and your losing watts/square foot and lumens/square foot.

In the 80s people lit 8x8 areas with a 1000 watt. This is the 21st century. :D

PS. Wanted to add that a lot of "ratings" are not for growing our specific plant of choice. When your growing peppers and tomatoes, its not nearly as much of an impact (but still an impact none the less) to have the light much farther away for a larger area. Also...if you get the light close and you dont like the light spread, then get a different hood that spreads it out more so you can utilize it better without losing lumens.

[Stylus]

I 100% disagree with this statement. Every single ounce of my experience and everything I have been taught has shown me that you cannot go above 12" (16 if your having major heat issues that you just cannot solve right now). But 3 feet? Are you out of your mind?

2 identical rooms. One with lights 12" above the canopy. One with lights 36" above the canopy. Are you actually going to still say that the room with the lamps 36" above the canopy is going to produce the SAME amount of yield and JUST as big of nugs? No, your not...and if you do then your speaking from internet research and not personal experience.

In my opinion and from my own experience, you never want more then a 4x4 area on a 1000 watt. Me personally? I think you should never even go past 3x3 area. If your having trouble with burning your plants, then its not an issue of the lights being to close. Its an issue of you not providing proper ventillation, proper temperatures, proper circulation, and proper nutes. I let my plants get within 4" of my 600 digitals and they do not burn. If you want to go for a ton of smaller buds that will end up weighing less then by all means, lift the lamp way up to light more area. But you are drastically lowering lumens at an exponential rate and your losing watts/square foot and lumens/square foot.

In the 80s people lit 8x8 areas with a 1000 watt. This is the 21st century. :D

PS. Wanted to add that a lot of "ratings" are not for growing our specific plant of choice. When your growing peppers and tomatoes, its not nearly as much of an impact (but still an impact none the less) to have the light much farther away for a larger area. Also...if you get the light close and you dont like the light spread, then get a different hood that spreads it out more so you can utilize it better without losing lumens.

BOO YAH!

[Garden Knowm]

not positive but i think he uses it for balance?...could be wrong

yes... not my grow... just one I filmed.. I would use a wrench.. not a hatchet.. LOL

[Garden Knowm]

I also want to say that CALI is a great guyt that gives GREAT advice and although are comments may seem opposing they really are just different growing styles..

BY NO means am I RIGHT...
nor am I wrong...

lol

iloveyou

[CaliJay]

Aww thx Gnome...

Ok....suckas, so you have inspiried me to once again check my fact on this one. In the interest of passing around reliable information I want to explain exactly where I got my info and let folks decide which info is more reliable. I also want to know if I am missing something?

OK...Jorge Cervante's "Marijuana Horticulture the indoor/outdoor medical growers bible" Is the best book I have read on the subject of MJ. I don't think anyone that has read this book would say the information is not reliable. The facts are given and he explains why things are the way they are.(can you tell I like this book?) Anyway... Page 179 gives exact specs on how much light is distributed to your plants.

The assumption is 140,000 lumens output by a 1000 watt bulb.(The Solarmax I use is rated at 147,000) The data shows that at 1 foot you get the full 140,000 l and it decreases as you get farther away. In a 16 foot area you get 62.5 watts/sqft which is arguably as much as is productive and you have reached diminishing returns. The line I was interested in was the 10,000 lumen line. Many say that 5500 lumens is the most MJ can use but Jorge and some others I have read say 9-10k lumens is max. The 1000 watt bulb delivers 10,000.....at 4ft away!!!! not 3 but 4 so anything over this is going to be overkill.

On page 177 notes about coverage and distance are given. It says that a 1000 watt bulb "delivers enough light to illuminate a 6x6 area well" Mr Cervantes goes on to make the point that anything closer than a distance of 24 inches and you risk burning foliage.

Page 187 details a "reflective hood study" that Jorge Cervantes did himself. Blacking out the entire room and creating a grid on the floor he took light reading at each intersecting grid point. The data he gathered revealed much variation in light intensity using different reflective hoods. The data did show that a good hood delivers 10,000 lumens in a wide pattern confirming his previous data.

I like this book because the information is not only presented but how the information was gathered is presented as well. On these boards many opinions are given without any attention being paid as to where the info comes from.

My opinion is formed from the data in this book as well as my own experience of burning my plants pretty bad after reading here that growers are putting their hoods at 10-18 inches. I lowered my PL air cooled sealed hoods to 15 inches and did the ever popular back of the hand test. I hung my humi/thermo meter at canopy height and kept the temp at 85-87 degrees because I'm running Co2. This setup began to curl leaf tips and burn entire leaves in 2 days. I didn't think the lamp would burn the plants if it was cool enough but it was burning them on a cellular level. Boiling and burstion the cells in the leaves. I moved the light and the leaves continued to brown and shrivel for 2 days as the ruptured cells dried up. (sad story huh? It's OK if you cry:D )

Sooo It seems to me that variations in setups could be the reason that our view differ on this guys. I don't know if you are using budget equipment but what I know for certain is that with PL hoods and Solarmax bulbs you can definitly have your lights at 36 inches and achieve a larger useable footprint. If you listen to my homie Jorge you can get 6x6. There is a question of penetration that still remains though.

I am interested to hear how you guys came to your conclusions about the topic. I will never stop learning and if there is something new out there I want to Gnome about it. Gnome? Stylus? RacerX? You have the conch;)

BTW- Jorge Cervantes advocates using 600 watt lights rather than 1000 to get better coverage for less dough. 600 watt lights allow you to lower your hoods closer to the canopy and save headroom.

Peace and Love in the quest for truth- Jay

[bejay]

there is lots of things that will affect lumens even glass in a cool tube or sealed reflector reduces lumen output, but at the same time it allows you to have the lights closer to the plants, even in a air cooled reflector without glass you should be able to keep the light no further than 2 ft away from the tops of the plants.
it is all about penetration really lets say you are adequetly lighting the top of the plant at 3 ft away what about the rest of the plant seeing how you can take a just rooted clone and thow it into flowering and still end up with a plant well over 1 foot tall thats if you grew sog what if you veged for a while and had your plants end up at about 3 ft tall are you going to get good light penetration with the light 3 ft above the tops no you will not.
in your original post you sayed you bumped up your nutes wich is probably what caused your leaves to curl instead of the lights being lowered.

[BlueBear]

Heat?
http://www.planetganja.com/highsociety/attachment.php?attachmentid=3659

Adieu

[Garden Knowm]

Whenever I walk past a BUSH I notice that not even the almighty sun can penetrate past 1 inch of dense foilage.. the center of the bush is always dark and has zero leaves..


iloveyou

[bejay]

the sun may not be able to penetrate foilage or shaded areas but it does not lose its intensity like a light for every foot it loses half of its intensity.
ok if you have 140,000 lumens at 1 ft away to begin with and you lose half its intensity for every foot away the light is and at 4 ft I get 17,500 lumens in a 16 sq ft garden with a 1000 watt lamp 4 ft away that would be 1094 lumens per sq ft.
there is a link below that explains lumens and lights in more detail.
http://www.hydroempire.com/store/hydroponic-light-photosynthesis.php

[Garden Knowm]

YES BEJAY i agree!!! even more reason to keep the light CLOSE..

iloveyou

[CaliJay]

Studies prove the plant can only use 10,000 lumens. That was the point I was making. Why place the light closer even though it won't penetrate when you can get a wider footprint by raising it? You could then add more plants or spread apart the ones you have? I still have not seen any information other than opinion from anyone?
Please take the time to show your sources of info rather than continuing the myths.

I have been looking at pics of a lot of commercial grows with huge dense buds and the lights are ALWAYS about 36 in from what I can tell from the photos.

BTW BJ...I admit that the nutes probably had something to do with the burning foliage. I believe I reversed the flow of water and drew out moisture from the plant at the same time as lowering my lights. It is possible that had my nutes been correct the plants would not have burned. I am a noob and am just trying to make sure I learn the lesson so I at least get something out of my screw up :0(

Love -Jay

[CaliJay]

the sun may not be able to penetrate foilage or shaded areas but it does not lose its intensity like a light for every foot it loses half of its intensity.
ok if you have 140,000 lumens at 1 ft away to begin with and you lose half its intensity for every foot away the light is and at 4 ft I get 17,500 lumens in a 16 sq ft garden with a 1000 watt lamp 4 ft away that would be 1094 lumens per sq ft.
there is a link below that explains lumens and lights in more detail.
http://www.hydroempire.com/store/hydroponic-light-photosynthesis.php


BJ you should check the math.

Page 179. Marijuana Horticulture - Jorge Cervantes

1000w 140 lumens per watt.

1foot(30cm) 140,000 lumens
2feet(60cm) 35,000
3feet(90cm) 15,555
4feet(120cm) 9999( this is your target. anything more is wasted)

That is assuming you are not using a Solarmax or hortilux bulb which would be more lumens.

10,000 lumens to your canopy at 4 feet. The light is also gives you better light distribution which equals a more even canopy.

4x4 = 16sqft, 1000w / 16sqft = 62.5 watts per sqft.


BJ please explain your grow show and it might explain your take on the subject? Are you closet growing? The facts are there for you all to see.

Gnome? any data to support your point to keep lamps so close?

Bear...Can you repost the link?

Jay

[BlueBear]

Well, CJ, I think that you are considering this in a logical way because of the fact that what your saying does make since, but at the same time, IMO you have to remember that you can easily find more documented grows in one day over the net than someone like ED or Green have seen in 2 years of going to places and though there knowledge is great, some of the principles are more general than specific IMO.
I think that when you look at the 100 of grows on the different boards and follow the grows where people are getting the kolas as big as your head that you will see that indeed they are faithfully bringing lights as close as possible. For every 1 grow that you might find where a person is getting killer harvests with lights 36 inches away you could find about 20 or more where there getting them with the lights closer. Also, I believe that you may achieve similar results with some different growing styles having lights further away than 12 to 18 inches, but the knowledge that is needed to make up for the difference most do not possess, along with the other equipment that is needed to supplement the factor of the lights not being as close. Fore instance, look at tranables grow, he has the lights over 18 inches away I believe, but as you know by now he has all of the bells and whistles and a bucket of knowledge to go along with it and that is why his thread is the longest active thread around here, but do a quarter of people growing have his knowledge or equipment or the ability to use it if they did?? I think not. His grow is not typical in some ways, he even caught some slack over on OG for his style, but he proved them wrong as you can see with his results. But again, the man has his stuff down, but at the same time, in order to do a grow like him, with plant count numbers you are automatically put into the federal sentencing guide lines and would be facing a 10 year minimum for 2 of his tables and that doesn't include mothers and fresh cuttings. So using one grow to compare to dozens of other grows like the Crusty buckets where you can pull 3 pounds per plant with vertical lights sitting right on the plant, or KFB pulling 4 LB's off a plant or a BC grow I just read where they pulled 20LB off of 9 K of lights with 12 plants in a room that was 12x13 with some of the lights almost touching the leafs does not necessarily prove your findings in the way of real life experience, but rather more theory IMO, and I am not trying to knock the light studies, but rather pointing out real deal results.
I remember you stating before that the friend who was mentoring you and gave you your clones was getting about an ounce per plant under a 1K in a ebb and flow and maybe getting a little under a LB, or maybe it was less, I can't remember and don't want to mis represent you, but any how if something like his yield with a WW cross is that low then I think you are perhaps used to seeing a different style of growing than some of the more advanced and yeh, sometimes anal growers. I mean, GK has a thread that has been floating around for almost a year where he showed I think 3 plants being grown out in MG with a ph of 8 for a while and I think only 3 watering for almost the first 3 weeks under CFL's and I believe the yield was almost 1/2 a LB and if someone in hydro with 16 or more plants can hardly double that then,,??? I will leave the rest to your imagination.
Shallow Hal has a thread on here entitled, "What's in the flower room? And he is getting a ounce per plant throwing them into flower almost as soon as their rooted and I believe that his area is maybe 4x4 and he can put a couple dozen or more plants in there under 2 600W's if I understood him right, and he doesn't have any thing fancy going on in the way of inviermental controllers, not even a hydro grow, but rather coco.
In summery, I guess that I just want to say that, experience does play a large part in growing, if people see there nuggs getting fat and tight with lights close and didn't see that when they were further, what should they do?? If people see 100's of grows where people are dropping the lights right on the plants and getting killer harvests, what would they try? I love you CJ and am not trying to knock you around just putting my thoughts out there and don't necessarily expect them to change your views, but figured that my opinions were as viable as anyone else's on this thread so I put them out there.
Adieu and in the famous words of GK, Iloveyou

[Garden Knowm]

Adieu and in the famous words of GK, Iloveyou

WORD :)

[Racerx]

I think of it the same way as hydroponics. Hydroponics are not natural, and you will never find that situation in the natural. There is far more dissolved oxygen and nutrients available to the plant then what would ever occur naturally. This is why the hydroponic plants grow at such an accelerated rate...because MJ can take more then what soil gives it. Light is just the same In My Opinion. Of course you can reach a point of diminishing returns when it comes to light, but in general...if you can take care of the heat...then the more the merrier.

I think you also are not taking into account that while Cervantes book is great...he obviously knows his stuff...but hes an old timer. Have you EVER EVER met an old timer that grows close to the canopy? Have you ever met an old timer that uses CO2 and environment controllers? Fancy air cooling? Ive met a lot of growers, and a lot of them older people, and they are all pretty set in their ways because it works well. Some of them even pull a decent yield (2lbs+ per light), but I promise you... none of their buds come close in size to what I see around here. The stuff that younger people are growing is out of this world, because they are more apt to spend the cash on the newer equipment, etc. Aircooling is really only a thing of the last 10 years...and I will argue that its only in the last 7-8 airs that its really caught on. So when Cervantes says that you risk burning foliage at 18" away? I mean you obviously know that PLENTY of people have their lights far far far closer then that without a hint of burning (me included). With a good room temp, a nice strong fan, an oscillating room fan, and a glass aircooled hood...you can get inches away. Does that mean you get better buds with 6" away compared to 10" away? I wont argue that small of a detail but you get my point. But 12" versus 20"? I will definitely argue that one.

Here is my reasoning behind it. I know already that having my lamps very close will not burn my plants, so there is no inherent risk. All I am risking is LESS product. Well I already know from personal experience that that is not true. But lets say for arguemental sake that having the lamps 12" away gets the same amount of product as 36" away. But with the lamp 12" away, you have 20 big fat colas and some nice side nugs, but with the 36" away lamp, you have tons and tons of smaller buds. Well...same amount of product, except everyone likes big top colas better and no one wants to sit around for weeks trimming tiny little branches and buds when you can be done in a few days trimming big kahunas. Well thats not the case...cause Ive experimented enough to know that not only will I get bigger colas with a close lamp...Ill get more weight too.

Trainwreck is great for writing...joint did me well. hopefully there arent many spelling mistakes. And remember, like others have said. Im not "right". Its my opinion...but I think your being shown that the information your basing your claims upon...are simply outdated. 100%.

[2MC5]

250 watts will cover 5-12 squar feet

400 watts will cover 8-20 squar feet

600 watts will cover 12-30 squar feet

1000 waats will cover 20-50 squar feet

hope i helped

[BlueBear]

Hey, here is a thread where the guy pulled 40 OZ's off of 2 600W's with one month veg and kept the lights approx 4 inches away from tops. Thought that it might be inspiring for the close light school of growers.
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=19455&highlight=POG
Adieu

[ericwt]

Thanks BlueBear. That was cool. The guy is a growing god. I am inspired!:)

[BlueBear]

Yeh, he is on his P's and Q's, and with only 3 plants.
Adieu

[CaliJay]

IMFG!!!!!!!!!!! Can someone please take this knife out of my back???:D

Just playing Bear and thanks for the link. As previously stated I am a noob and by no means have any skill.(see my current screwed up grow details)
I am most interested in learning the facts so I was hoping someone could bring out some science or data that would show why close lighting is effective and how light burn is preventable.
I guess I will have to live with "it just is" so that is OK by me if it means solid nugs.
Some time has passed and I am now entertaining the thought that the lights may have only played a very minor role in my burning the girls. I think if anything it just accellerated the process.

Keeping with the theme of not wanting to lead anyone the wrong way I can give you all a bit more info on my situation back here at the ranch... I have had no growth from my plants for 12 coming up on 2 weeks. I finally lifted one of the root balls from its pot and confirmed that I totally fried the roots. Maybe someone can help me confirm what happened but in light of my discovery I am thinking that never flushing the coco and the close to 1500 ppm of solution in week 4was just too much. I was seeing numerous defeciencies and it had my head spinning as how to fix it. Now I think the defeciencies were from the roots not being able transfer the nutrients to the foliage.

After I burned them I flushed and then gave them 1/2 strength solution. I flushed again 4 days later because there was no improvement and lower the nutes to 1/4 strength. The plants are suspended at this stage. The leaves are still drying and curling slowly but they are not drooping so I figure they are transpiring water. I would love to hear from anyone with some insight. I have written this grow off but I really want to learn from it.

Love you all and Like I always say...don't forget to drop those lights down!!

-Jay

[BlueBear]

J, your the man bro, love you dog. Well, on to more important things, what brand coco are you using? This can play a big role in coco grow problems, also for the most part it is best to grow with coco spacific nutes. Not all coco is pre flushed and can affect the grow in the long run if not thurowly flushed from the out set.
Did you feed with every watering? You are using an ebb and flow table, it can be tricky recerculating water when using coco, that is why alot of people go run to waist with coco. How often did you flood , more than 2 times per light cycle? Did you use the coco slabs, or fiber in baskets?
PS, I am doing some coco runs right now with GH coco, not pre flushed, but so far so good, but IMO Canna coco and coco A and B nutes are the best.
Most popular at this point are the Advanced Nutrients Monkey Juice www.advancednutrients.com/landing_pages/monkey_juice_grow_AB_landing.html and Kanna's Coco A and B www.aquaculture-hydroponics.co.uk/product.aspx?productID=1398.
We can start here and then try to figure some stuff out.
Some coco Porn, so don't give up hope, http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=40816&page=1&highlight=coco
Adieu

[BlueBear]

Hey J, perhaps you should start a new thread on this, perhaps in the plant problem section, but it's up to you, if you do, just post a link on this thread to it IMO.
Adieu

[xcrispi]

damn bear ,
knocking down huge yields w/o having trees . thanx for the link and turnin us on to another cannabis site . mmmmmmmmm more brain food .
your cuz
crispi

[Garden Knowm]

nice link bear

what strain was the biggest plant?
Did he say that he started from seed?
I am going to guess he did start from seed..

cheers

[BlueBear]

Hey GK, I don't think he started from seed, but then again I can't remember. One thing I do know is that he vegged for 4 weeks and the fatty is Pot of Gold. Here is the thing though, he has this tech that I never herd of and none of the people on his thread had either. He pinched the plant at like the sixth node then again at the 10 or so and then right befor flower when the plant was 19 inches or so he topped back to 12 inches, he said that is what gives him the strait monster multable fat toppers.
I can still hardly believe it.
Adieu

[Weed4Life]

This is a learning thread I must say. I have only read 8 posts and learned I have to fix my cooling method of my light to glass. Thanks Garden Gnowm for inspiring me to want to grow forearm size colas, and I believe I can grow atleast 1 plant like that under a 400w hps. Right now I am using B.C. Hydro starter kit and I like the results, no burn when applied right. I have 4 plants under 400w and my grow room is 4'(L)x2'(w)x5'(h) and the plants are about 3-1/2ft tall atleast. On this next grow I am starting I think I am gonna seal the grow room better because it is stinking in my spare room.
Hey Garden Knowm, can you tell me if there is anything special or perticular item I would need to grow buds like that? I want some huge buds. Thanx.

[Garden Knowm]

HEY bear

I have 2 - 600s in the basement.. I am eager to fire them up.. put them over 4 plants in 5 gallon buckets... top the shit outta them.. ahhehehehhe

iloveyou

[BlueBear]

I can't blame you at this point. What could you pull if close to his meth with 4, 50 OZ's in 3 months with 4 plants? The dude should right a book if he can do that every run and just put a bunch of fansy terms and pics in it, LOL.
Adieu