This should be a sticky in the advanced method growing section. there is unbelievable information in this thread and anyone who really cares about cannabis cultivation would be fascinated with this like i was :thumbsup::jointsmile:
Printable View
This should be a sticky in the advanced method growing section. there is unbelievable information in this thread and anyone who really cares about cannabis cultivation would be fascinated with this like i was :thumbsup::jointsmile:
Yes sal.... Thanks for the answers. I enjoy reading every word you Type.
I know, laugh at me, laugh with me, as long as you are laughing.
I will show my week 5 pics this week end. Plants seem good.
I got a new plan of attack. When I post those pics I will explain my new approach. Please let me know what you think..:thumbsup:
I had a hunch that the spectrum being used had something to do with with the timing schedule. We currently are using a 400w 2k spectrum with very little blue in it. With the type of plant we are using we are flowering with 23 hours of light.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I'm just not sure we are speeding up the clock enough during the day light hours to keep on pace with the clock being slowed in the artificial darkness time. Is this a concern we should have?
Our next plan of attack address this issue a little I think. But I would be curious to read what you have to say about speeding the clock up during the day light hours just to slow it down during the martin nights.:rasta:
I had to trade down the 42W CFLs with 26W (getting hot in here!), and I took one of the red incandescent bulbs and put it at the bottom of the plants. I think this will increase the Red at the bottom of the plants and the relative Far Red at the top of the plants. I'm going to move the other red incandescent down there too. I'm also going to turn the night lights off two hours earlier in order to get more complete darkness and speed up flowering. The new schedule will be:
10 hours everything on
10 hours night lights on
4 hours complete darkness
I haven't seen any apparent change into flowering for the cheese or the BK. And the cheese is having a worse time with the roots, so I don't think it's going to make it through the end of the cycle. :-(
Oh yeah, thanks for reading, jimbob! It's as interesting to do as it is to read about, I'm sure!
Hi mother. I hope you and everyone here had a nice Thanksgiving. Ok here goes week 5 pics. These plants have now been flowering for 5 weeks but have only been under (martin night lights) for 4 weeks. In the first pic my uncle and I turned out the HPS 5 min's early and used the video camera's white light for the pic. The second pic is the same flower but when the red martin lights were on. We are about half way through flowering at this point.
So far this is what I've noticed using 4 weeks of RED martin night lights.
1. Martin nights can suppress stem elongation in the first two weeks of flowering (and for us it did).
2. Martin nights also increased the Trichome production (on our plants). There is alot more then
what would have been (up to this point) had we just been using the 2k 400w hps alone and natural darkness. It looks like a LED or CMH (ceramic metal halide) type of trichome production.
3. Yield increase so far.... For us the use of the red martin nights did slow stem elongation when we first started to use them in the second week. It looks like (martin nights) put the plants into flowering faster witch is contributing to a little more yield (not much, but a little). If we would have started the martin nights at the beginning of the flowering cycle (week one) then we could of increased the yield just a little more. Basically the WAY we used the martin nights has only contributed to just a little yield increase IMO.
I think increasing "our" yield using martin nights will come from a whole different source altogether.;) But (let it be known) because of the fact that red martin nights DID stop our plants half-veg half-flower cycle during the first two weeks. This in itself will contribute to more yield when combined with the proper yield increasing techniques under the martin method IMO.
4. Red martin nights I think are increasing the flowering metabolism rate in (our) plants. I just don't think my uncle and I are utilizing it properly, again JMO.
5. And just think, This is only half the reason for us wanting to use Martin Nights. LOL
Hi Mother, Sal, Dog, knna, Weez (and many others contributing on this topic.
I just finished the best LED thread to the end and what a read! ( I posted there but it seems that the momentum has perhaps shifted to this thread now)
These Martian nights sound like the future to me. (I'm already a UFO conspiritor so i love the name! :P )
The idea of a 24/12 grow sounds like it is and should be possible for us in the near future with a few more clues desciphered. It looks as though we already know that the Far-red wavelength is essential to balance the Pr / Pfr ratio. I took note of Sal's recommendation about Mother's initial set up in the "Best LED" thread. He had taken note of the 126watts of Far-red illumination that you had in mind for your set up and said that you would likely need what he specified was about twice that amount of( i think it was 250watts or so he suggested) wattage to balance with the competeing Red (660nm). It was something to that effect, please don't crucify me if i'm wrong. (I tried to find exact quote)
Am I mistaken in thinking that a 89% Red to 21% Far-red would be good during the day and inversely perhaps 89% Far-red to 21% Red during the Martian night time on a 24/12 flowering schedule. I could be way off here but i'm just postulating a bit. We know that the absence of the light in the blue (<500nm) has to do with making the trigger to flower happen. It seems like all that really leaves us to play with is our Red/Far-red ratios during day and night.
Anyway i've set up a new room in a new house (starting from seedlings for that matter to avoid mite or bacterial contamination from transplanted clones) I have previously built my own array and modified some high flux LEDs to run a small grow box (veg was great/ flower not so hot) as a precursor to spending some money on a Procyon lamp, which i finally did purchase. I am adding some seedlings to my grow as they germinate and form tap roots. At the moment only 1 really took off, but i've planted what appeared to be another good candidate today so hopefully i'll have a few plants to work with. For the most part my seeds should consist primarily of sativa breed and Northernlight's derivatives thereof. Notoriously i have a nack for germinating females, hope my luck holds here.
Mother i hope you don't mind another grower hitching his trailer to your thread. I will be doing my first attempt at a Marian night grow with the plants that i am starting here as well, and it would be good to keep us all in the same place for ease of access to the information gleemed here. I'll be awhile getting there late as i need to establish a healthy mother plant first, but i promise to do the experiments.
One thing that i have been thinking about doing is purchasing another Procyon (I'm really impressed with the penetration levels the Cree LEDs produce) and modding and paralleling the two combined blue arrays and red arrays together. Knna will be please to hear that i agree with his statement that they are cranked up too much by default. Right now my 1 procyon lamp is sitting nearly 3 feet off the floor for my 1 little seedling. Its a waste and i could be turning it down and lowering the light instead. I am an electronics hobbiest and I enjoy modding and making things work better or more the way i intend them too. As well i would then gain the control i would need to establish a martian night with the procyon 100. Its too bad there are no Far-red Cree's or i would definately go that route, however i did find a good supplier of High powered Far-red Leds HERE. I'm getting on ordering them now. Could take awhile to arrive. I am supplementing my Procyon with a 40w CFL to help provide all the other spectrum during veggin 24hours ATM.
Sorry for the long post.
Mother let me know if you would prefer i start a separate thread. :)
Here are a few pics.
http://www.modvid.com/bedini/images/lamp.jpg
http://www.modvid.com/bedini/images/poppin_fresh2.jpg
http://www.modvid.com/bedini/images/poppin_fresh3.jpg
Thanks all. L8trs
hey dude, i don't know about mothers feelings if you post in this thread, but you should definitely start a grow log too. you can copy and paste the same stuff or just post your conclusions in mothers thread. i just think the grow log would be of the utmost benefit. that way there would be a start to finish, materials included, defacto guide...even if the method is still a work in progress.Quote:
Originally Posted by thedudeman
just something to consider.
-shake
Heya Shake. :)
I'll be brief in posting my particulars here from now on and mostly just be making comparisons to what is discussed here. Really just wanted to give this discussion a perspective of what i am seeing to compare to.
I'll be awhile before there is anything else to honestly report in my case. But your right an appropriate log will be gathered, compiled and presented. Perhaps in a different thread if prefered. :thumbsup:
no doubt dude! that will be perfect. when the time comes, put your log in the grow log section in the growing forum.
i look forward to seeing both. this is very interesting stuff. very interesting. i hope to contribute someday.
keep up the good work guys. and keep the info coming!
-shake
Hey Dude,
I don't mind hitchhikers at all. When it comes time for you to start a full grow, I'd recommend a separate grow log if only for clarity's sake, but until that time, more info is always welcomed here!
As for the Far Red emitters from Marubeni (or Epitex, or Roithner, or whomever) keep in mind that you're going to pay about $150 for an emitter that takes 5.4 Watts (electricity) and emits 1 W (light energy at 735 nm). I've been holding off on buying one of these or building some of my own until I know what level(s) of FR I'm going to need. Meaning a 1 W emitter is great until you need 10 Watts of emitted light. :-) That's my only caution there. I certainly think FR from LED is a good idea. I just don't know how good of a value it is for the time being.
And if you're a hobbyist/experimenter with electronics, you can build better arrays than the Procyon for cheaper by buying the LEDs yourself, can you not? I haven't built any LED arrays myself (yet) but it seems that buying 52x2W Cree LEDs and a driver is probably way cheaper than buying a Procyon and taking it apart. Just a thought.
89+21=110. You mean 79:21 or 89:11? Either way, reversing it between day and night seems a reasonable guess. Considering blue light, I am working from a different assumption though. I believe that the presence of blue light triggers vegging rather than the absence of it triggering flowering. I'm not sure I'm right, but consider it both ways and see what you come up with. :-)Quote:
Originally Posted by thedudeman
Hi mom. I'm with you, I think the blue light thing is confusing for me also.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
I keep going outside at fall time (outdoors now) and the outdoor spectrum is getting more blue and more blue each day that passes. Not to mention it also keeps getting shorter and shorter each day by about 2 min's. I think this is the reason for this, Without the strong blue outdoor spectrum at fall time we as humans would starve IMO. The strong blue spectrum is what gives our food it's bulk and our favorite plant it's large yield outdoors. I now think of blue in a whole new light. I think of the blue light as being the horsepower of the mix. I know that really doesn't help much but that's my mind set now on the blue light.. Mother nature can't be wrong can she..:thumbsup:
Hi Mom and Dog. ;)
Great to hear from both of you.
Mother, sorry for my poor math there. I always try to give 110% But it doesn't always work. :P On the level of modding the procyon you are right. Had i made this discovery of a possible Martian night earlier, i would have likely just started from scratch with cree's and drivers. Now that i have one Procyon i'm looking for a convienent way of utilizing it in this martian application. Also have plans to experiment with modulation of the pulse and gate in the frequency of the light. I have played with this on my home made arrays and there are some definate efficiency gains to be had in finding the right resonance in the circuit.
There are some interesting aspects to the penetration of light that can be obtained through frequency modulation. 660nm LEDs are being tagged as having a healing effect that can increase cell growth and repair in humans though dialing in a resonant frequency that different parts of our flesh respond to. There are lots of studys on this subject. I don't know enough to be an expert here at all i might add.
I am dying to have something to test on here! I could bring in some clones, but there will be a good chance of spyder mites coming with them. (drive me nuts) I guess for now I am forced to exhibit some patience and learn from your observations.
On the subject of the blue component, as long as we know that we don't need any in a Martian night, I feel pretty clear. That is the case no light above 500nm is required in a martian night?
Heya Sal, i don't envy your position in this. I believe you do have the answers we need. I understand your discrettion, but at this point I have to believe that we are still missing a pretty vital and substantial change in our experimental model that you can not disclose. I'm equating what your doing here to a warmer....colder....warmer (you know the one) game.
Peace.
And thanks for including me in this discussion. Great group here at Cannabis.com. :thumbsup:
Yes Mother i was refering to part of an explaination that Knna gave in the "Perfect LED Grow light" thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
I'm not positive of the context that he was using but i'm pretty sure he was refering to the nominal level of Red to Far-red during daytime lighting to achieve balanced photochrome levels of pr / pfr. I believe he was stating a phi ratio of .89 : .11 for normal daylight. ( I will attempt to find an exact quote)
My instincts are telling me that because we are already observing a response to an increase in Far-red to shorten the transisition to Flowering at night, then an increasing level of Far-red should prevail through out a prolonged Martian night if we are expecting to have the plant remain in a flowering state. *note* This is all purely hypothetical. I'm merely trying to think about how the plant might metabolize this light in nature. I'm just guessing that if we could have the Red / Far-red levels operate in an inversely proportional state at all times , then establish our optimal day time and night time levels and have them transisition over an 1hour peroid durning sun rise and sun set. This transistion would be executed at its mid point with one turn in the cycle of blue illumination (night/day).
This is the model i am preparing to develop. Please, anyone advise if this is in conflict with our general understanding of how a Marian night works.
Its another beautiful day! :stoned:
Peace!
:wtf: Opps. i wrote photochrome. Meant to say Phytochrome.
:stoned::stoned::stoned:
Hi everyone. I was going to save this but here it goes. My uncle has been flowering a clone under an old 250hps unit he has for the past three weeks and get this. He is using this light cycle..... Are You Ready!!!!!...... 6 hours on 6 hours off and 6 hours back on again then 6 hours off. LOL... This is his light cycle for 24 hours. To my surprise the clone is flowering normal as can be.. He also is doing another clone under some t5's on this silly schedule. 3 on 3 off 3 on 3 off for the first 12 hours and then this light schedule repeats itself. Talk about funny. This plant is also flowering but the leaves look kind of different. I think it's the light coming on and off so many times doing this to the plant (not sure though). This light schedule is not to economical for an HID light IMO... You think..lol
What this has told my uncle and I is that plants calculate light in a 24 time frame. It don't matter to the plants what time of the day they recive it's light source just as long as the light on time doesn't go over the time frame for flowering. Did that make sense.
Didn't make sense to me at first ether..LOL SAAALLLLLLL help..
Sal.... Have you ever seen this light. I saw it on ebay and the auction was going to end in 3 hours so I just used the old copy and paste mode for every one here too see;). Is this some sort of martin night type led light?
By the way the price WAS $2,500 wow.
Vancouver Island Innovations Ltd.
Suite 159 H - Hillside Ave
Victoria B.C. Canada
V8T 2C1
Ph # 250 883 8825
Time Manipulation: From a 24 hour day to 18 hours, that is an extra crop a year!!!
PPF (photosynthetic Flux) or PAR (photosynthetic Active Radiation) 450 watts
Power Consumption: Currently the Mark 4.2a is running just under 500 watts The Mark 4.2a is 110 or 220 capable with the specs at 110 amps x 4.5 volts , and 220 amps x 2.25 volts
Delivering Power: Over 1100 Lumen Watts of light, outgrowing a 1000 Watt M/H in three weeks what a M/H could do in 4.5 weeks. WOW!!!
Coverage: 4' by 4' square, that's 16 square feet . Hang the light 18" - 24" away from plants.
Expected Lifespan: Mark 4.2a 100,000 hours,
They are available in two versions of light colour spectrum coverage at this time, the "Blue" or a Growing light and a "Red" Flowering light.
Blue Light: Current tests prove that the 60% blue and 40% red spec light an excellent light for vegetating plants. The tests show an average increase of 30 % growth, with more than 50 % less in power consumption than the competition, the traditional Metal Halide (1000 Watts).
Red Light: Current testing is being done to compare the efficiency of the 85% red, and 15 % blue spectrum for the flowering cycle.
These Black and White images above are showing the light spectrums of the High Pressure Sodium Lights, and the Mark 4 Light Emitting Diode is the last image.
The Mark 4.2 a LED Light of Today is even stronger, take a scroll down and see tests of what the Red and Blue lights are emitting now.
Light Cycles: The Mark 4.2a is computer controlled. This is a feature never before found in a grow light. This Exclusive LED Technology allows for detailed control of the energy stimulus your plants experience in every way. These models offer built in timing cycles for propagation, vegetative growth, transitional phasing to flower light cycles, or alternatively a traditional ??switch? to flowering cycles. The Mark 4.2a also uses a LED control to stimulate the infrared found in nature, and to operate specific infrared light cycles which stimulate morphogenic metabolic activities related to fruiting and flowering. This device equipped with Infrared LED lighting technology, it is able to speed up the time clock from a 24 hour day to a 18, 20, or a 22 hour day. This means a farmer could get one or more crops in per year.
The Mark 4.2 products are offered with a 2 year Manufacturers Warranty. Extension on the Warranty is available.
How to load a program:
To initiate program immediately beginning light cycle, hold the on button until double or triple flashes.
Load program to initiate at next light cycle, hold the off button until double (or triple) flashes.
Rotary switch programming
Programs 0 -> 15, switch positions 0 -> F load with DOUBLE flash.
Switch Position Program
0 slave mode (momentary main bank on, push both switches; momentary IR on, push off switch)
1 24 hours on
2 22 hours on 2 hours off
3 20 hours on 4 hours off
4 19 hours on 5 hours off
5 18 hours on 6 hours off
6 17 hours on 7 hours off
7 16 hours on 8 hours off
8 15 hours on 9 hours off
9 14 hours on 10 hours off
A 12 hours on 12 hours off
B 10 hours on 14 hours off
C 24 hours off
D 24 hours, mains off, 24 hours Infrared on
E Demo, triple flash cycles with IR flashing 1/2 seconds
F Demo: 5 minute cycle: 2 minutes on, 1 minute of IR, 1 minute of dark, 1 minute of IR; Cycle again
Programs 16 -> 31, switch positions 0->f load with TRIPLE flash
0 18 hour day @ 12 hours light; 6 hours darkness, IR flash 1/2 sec on 1/2 sec off
1 18 hour day @ 12 hours light; 6 hours darkness, IR flash 1 sec on 1 sec off
2 18 hour day @ 12 hours light; 6 hours darkness, IR flash 2 sec on 2 sec off
3 18 hour day @ 12 hours light; 6 hours darkness, IR flash 4 sec on 4 sec off
4 20 hour day @ 12 hours light; 8 hours darkness, IR flash 1/2 sec on 1/2 sec off
5 20 hour day @ 12 hours light; 8 hours darkness, IR flash 1 sec on 1 sec off
6 20 hour day @ 12 hours light; 8 hours darkness, IR flash 2 sec on 2 sec off
7 20 hour day @ 12 hours light; 8 hours darkness, IR flash 4 sec on 4 sec off
8 22 hour day @ 12 hours light; 10 hours darkness, IR flash 1/2 sec on 1/2 sec off
9 22 hour day @ 12 hours light; 10 hours darkness, IR flash 1 sec on 1 sec off
A 22 hour day @ 12 hours light; 10 hours darkness, IR flash 2 sec on 2 sec off
B 22 hour day @ 12 hours light; 10 hours darkness, IR flash 4 sec on 4 sec off
C 24 hour day @ 12 hours light; 12 hours darkness, IR flash 1/2 sec on 1/2 sec off
D 24 hour day @ 12 hours light; 12 hours darkness, IR flash 1 sec on 1 sec off
E 24 hour day @ 12 hours light; 12 hours darkness, IR flash 2 sec on 2 sec off
F 24 hour day @ 12 hours light; 12 hours darkness, IR flash 4 sec on 4 sec off
Nice find Dog. Had a look at the pictures. I really, really wish i had 2499.00 to spare atm. :P
Wow.
Ya I know :wtf:....Quote:
Originally Posted by thedudeman
What about the little guy.:rastasmoke:
Mother....This light has some clock info for ya.. Also it looks like this light is not using the Martin Method from what I can tell. But put this light and the martin method together and......BAAAMM.:giggity:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
We see the pattern of vegging up on leaves and roots before flower and then flowering out the yeild that these resources can produce. This is the norm.
As a Short Day Plant (SDP) Cannabis NEEDs long nights of uninterrupted darkness (natural or artificial) to flower and TRADITIONALLY up until now days were for photosynthesis.
I don't worry at all about how long the day is, the night keeps me worried enough night and day.
I do worry about the magnatude of the day in terms of Blue for root growth. To my perspective an equal number of KWH of Blue (500nm-) light during a "Day" to the KWH of Red (500nm+) light in a 24 hour cycle, is a ballanced spectrum (not that you need this ballance personally).
I speed the clock day and night for yield, for potency and thrills. I'm not trying to cram 24 perceptual hours into 24 virtual hours (anymore, been there done it, no need to keep doing it for flamboance sake, beautifull but expensive parlor trick). I'm just trying to sneak you 12 perceptual darkness hours into 24 virtual hours, because it's something everybody else can do to. (We put ourselves in the average growers shoes to figure out what they need from us. What we can do doesn't matter if others can't use it.)
Hate the game. Hate the players. I do.Quote:
Originally Posted by thedudeman
Look on the bright side, we'll probably go bust like most, having already gotten dissed on the Nobel Prize things are decending nicely, even had a backer ask if we could give him money (before he invested???).
I prefer the lab sans rat race.
But at least we still believe in Halloween, when you know people are putting you on.
Dogs nightbreak results (RED HOT). Mothers 24/12 run (colder) was the HARDEST LESSON (RED HOT).
And life would be easier if things weren't mixed. The hardest lessons make everything else easier ect. ect. (Warm this way, but cooler that).
Separating things helps (you), fixing the spectrum(s) then dialling the timers one step at a time. +Interval halfing saves steps.
The patent office has it's game, and it's awaiting game. So we wait, but we wait well. Till then, I console myself with offering Artificial Darkness to humanity, if only as food for thought.
We play the delay game and hope that some will use what they can NOW, maybe even try an option or two. The problem for you is too many choices, our problem is biding time in a market were "steal first" is corparate Americas only rule.
So while we're stuck in the provisional utility progression, you might want to check 24/12's last post, consider that 24 hours is enough to park a long Artificial Darkness night with some daylight to spare (even for 660nm).
At this point we have given you all you need to figure the first level out, which is how to make AD work on a 24 hour day to day cycle. Dog's first Nightbreak tests were successful (50 years ahead of his time, he saw it). If nothing else you have this, but mothers data is very important in that it demonstrates caution is still warranted.
These are not Martian Method Timers, we have disgarded timers over 24 hours as being too hard for the general public to schedule their lives arround. (You can use the Martian Method with 48+ timers, but we leave certain things like this to the more advanced home experimentors.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
Such extended timers were used originally to measure 660nm AD Time Factors, but running a 4 day syncroed mega timer isn't attractive to anything but an experimentor.
There was a link in one of the posts to a FAQ about extended days that relates nicely to this.
Gotta run.
Take Care, Sal.
Where can I get an Uncle like this...
The lower amount of Blue in the spectrum and subcanopy effects will let you get away with certain things more than others. We don't rely specifically on these effects, but they all count in the final clock tunes.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
We still think the long night convention holds (at least for the blue durations and lack thereof). But, hey, If you come up with something better than what we have, we'll retire and you can be king weirdo (the pay stinks, here take the funny hat, TAKE IT!). :pimp: :thumbsup:
We base our system on 660nm lessons, and we use 6/6 - 3/3 type schedules for vegging, but tend to use only one Blue duration per 24 hours. 660nm being the hardest spectrum to flower Cannabis under, everything else works better, we account for this but avoid dependence on it.
Blue intensity and duration are factors, but above 10 Watts/foot, Blue should be fully triggering "day" for the plant, unless genetics are of the autoflowering or ultra early nature.
I would test samples for potency and morphology, I'm revegged some big fluffy looking buds, that had no potency, but still looked coverred in trichomes (full of low potency resins).
If this is the same plant that was flowering under 23 hours 2K a day, genes could be a factor.
I think a normal flower type Cannabis plant would reveg under that spectrum.
Either way the results will be interesting. (If 6/6 flowers well, you can have Earth, we'll stay on Mars.)
Also we've done a lot of testing with HID, and HPS is less sensitive than MH, but it still wares out the bulbs faster to run more than one start-up per day (bulb lifespan is defined in regards to number of start-ups predicted).
Also we've leaned away from multiple Blue durations and intervals for vegging and flowering due to Hermie considerations, but I still beat mine up plenty while testing potential moms and dads for breeding stock.
Take Care, Sal.
Ok, I think I understand, but we still want to know how to speed up the clock. It's one of the final pieces of the puzzel..LOL.. I know, I know, just like my uncle says (damm Kids). I seen your new 24/12 post on martin nights slowing down the plant.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I guess a good question now should be. Is that light above correct. IR and not FR for the plant clock?
Sal... We will all be waiting for sure. I will be glad to help you out in any way I can...Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
This will be my next question sooon.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Yes sal.... I went and checked your 24/12 page out. Thanks for the post:thumbsup:. I think I understand a little better now. More then likely I shouldn't need to fill all of the martin night with artifecial light. We should be able to have plenty of time to shift the spectrum and have natural darkness in the same 12 hour cycle... OH my, did I just give away a clue:jointsmile:Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
OMG that's crazy 48+ timers LOL. I though the 10 my uncle has now was insane. WOW 48Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Yes, I posted that link. "That's what this light is doing". Ok I see... That makes sense now.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Ya I told my uncle (you try that 6 on 6 off then 6 back on stuff) with a new MH light and chances are that plant probably won't flower that well if at all. Bag seed, not a chance IMO. That 250 hps is about 15 years old. It came out of the rookie closet. It probably has 5% blue left in it. LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I got to show him this post. His eyes are bad so I'm going to have to print this out for him.. You should see the funny hat he wears NOW. OMG lol lolQuote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
You can guarantee he won't come up with something better then you and your partner have..
I'm taking note on this...."Blue (intensity) and (duration) are factors"Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
just like outside.
ultra early nature.... This is the type we are working with..Borderline autoflowering/early.
Not sure the light is going to last long enough with this abuse to test any of it. I wouild expect it to be junk anyway the light is 15 years old. JMOQuote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
This we need to talk about soon...Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I think we are right on the edge now.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
No way, I'm going to Mars also !!!! Earth, well you know.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
It will be interesting to see as well. But he was just trying too see if it would work. It had something to do with an article he read a long time ago in a HT magazine about the plant using all 24 hours of the light then possessing it for the next day. Way to much for me to explain lol. Like you said looks can be deceiving.. But so far It looks ok. The t5's do look like the plant is starting to morph or something.
Yes I would think it's not very economical to turn on and off HID lights that many times a month. I bet that bulb he is doing that to might not even last the whole 10 weeks lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
This is funny. I said that to him.. "I bet this plant turns into a hermie"....He called me a rookie...He hates Hermie'sQuote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Sal..... I'm one who believes very firmly that the more you give the more you receive.. I 100% believe you "shall receive" my friend.. Thanks for your time. I truly mean this. :thumbsup:
Some people take guitar lessons. Some take drum lessons.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
I want to take 660nm lessons. Were do I sign up.:rasta:
I did some thinking about what i was talking about making the red/far-red ratio reversely proportional from day to night and it stinks. Just cause its night doesn't mean the plant changes the way it metabolizes the light it recieves.
I think i was just missing the point that the relatively small amount of Far-red you need (ie: 15-20% for instance) just becomes more difficult to provide without involving a background spectrum. (no blue at night of course or revegging could result)
Sorry if i was missing the boat there. I've posted at Sal's site (finally got back there) And read until i really got the jest of what he was saying.
Thanks Sal for your help. Really appreciate it. :):thumbsup:
I have a new conception of how the light spectra interact with the plant. (My new best guess.) More information from all of you (dude, dog, sal) has made me re-arrange my puzzle pieces again and the picture makes a lot more sense, so hopefully it??s actually a better understanding... :)
I think the conception of ??triggering? any biological process was getting in my way. If it really is ??all relative? then grouping light spectra and plant processes makes the most sense to me. For light, I??m thinking blue (~300-500nm), red (500-700?) and far red (720?-800?) and for biological processes, I??m thinking vegging (leaf, branch, root, etc. development), photosynthesis (energy-making), and misc. (various other processes that include ??flowering?).
(Note: Pr is phytochrome that is only sensitive to Red light, and Pfr is phytochrome that is only sensitive to Far Red light. Each one changes to the other upon being exposed to light that it is sensitive to. Additionally, Pfr naturally converts to Pr in darkness until some equilibrium is reached.)
If I guess what effect each spectrum of light (B/R/FR) would have on each biological process?
Blue:
Vegging: increases (perhaps by co-opting something? Because it seems exclusive)
Photosynthesis: increases
Misc.: prevents flowering (via vegging?)
Red:
Vegging: little/no effect?
Photosynthesis: increases
Misc.: decreases (Pr/Pfr competition?)
Far red (or complete darkness):
Vegging: little/no effect?
Photosynthesis: little/no effect?
Misc.: increases (Pr/Pfr competition?)
I picture each of these processes running at a faster or slower rate, depending on spectra. This is why I think the idea of triggering was getting in my way. To get the plant to flower, it only needs sufficient ??flowering activity? (I??m thinking rate and duration), but since blue light prevents it, the plant needs nighttime for that to happen. At night, the plant can??t perform photosynthesis so it can flower for a while, but eventually runs out of energy, which it re-charges during the day. This all takes place at a natural rate based on the sun, so this is the baseline I??ll use for comparison. The idea of speeding up or slowing down the plant??s perceived clock is the speeding up or slowing down of the rate of these processes relative to what the plant naturally expects (or requires, as in Blue light??s absence being necessary for flowering). During the day, the plant usually receives a certain ratio of B:R:FR, that varies over the seasons but is relatively stable day-to-day. We flower at 12/12 because that??s how long darkness takes to produce the level of flowering we are happy with. HPS works better than fluoro even at similar intensities because there??s way more FR in HPS, meaning the misc. processes are running faster all day and have a ??head start? into the night.
Speeding up the plant??s day means making the processes that happen during the day happen faster, which is vegging and photosynthesis. Since they already get a large amount of Blue and Red light, it??s hard to make that go much faster except the misc. processes provide some important benefits that are limiting factors (I remember sal saying something about the plant??s equivalent to heem).
??Speeding up? the plant??s night means making the misc. processes happen faster (because that??s what naturally happens at night), but the limiting factor is still energy. So if we introduce Red light, it provides energy but slows down the misc. process, so we have to add Far Red to compensate, or allow for some total darkness. The closer the light is to 660nm, the more it suppresses the misc. processes (because Pr is most sensitive at ~660?) so the shorter the wavelength the better, down to around 500 because that will increase photosynthesis while minimizing the decrease of the misc. processes and avoid increasing the vegging process.
The key to the Martian Method would be finding the right balance. You want enough vegging to support the plant, enough photosynthesis to drive everything (presumably as fast as possible), and enough of the misc. processes to provide necessary things (perhaps hormones?) critical to flowering.
I could (and probably should) go on explaining what I'm picturing, but it??s late and I??m tired and should have been doing more pressing things the whole time. :-/
Also, please keep in mind that in order to convey my level of certainty on all of this, I'd have to write "maybe" or "perhaps" or "could be" on every sentence. That's very tiresome (so I don't) but that's what I would have to do... And as always, I??m sure this is an oversimplification. :)
I read this statment originally on the Perfect LED Grow by physicsnole
And i have not seen any direct reply to this statement. Would this work?
Quote:
Flower with shorter Nights
There are another pair of pigments involved in things here - phytochrome-R and Phytochrome-FR. Phyto-R is most sensitive at 660nm Red, while phyto-FR is most sensitive at about 730nm Far-Red, hence the R and FR naming (IE, JUST 735nm and very near wavelengths, but nothing under 710nm or so). With 735nm far-red/near-infrared emitters available then it's possible to flower cannabis with 15 hours 'daylight'. How? Why? Well, the plant senses that critical 12-hours-darkness that triggers flowering in cannabis because a critical amount of phytochrome-FR has slowly, naturally, reverted to phytochrome-R during the dark cycle. But during the 'day' 660nm red light converts the phyto-R into phyto-FR, while far-red 735nm light more slowly converts the phyto-FR back to phyto-R. So we run all lights for 15 hours, then run nothing but 735nm for another two hours and finally 7 hours darkness.- artificially driving much of the phyto-FR back to phyto-R without waiting 12 hours for the natural reversion- so you can actually flower with shorter nights.
That's 30% more light per day reaching the plant, the result is that we can pump 25%-30% more energy into the plant each day - that means 25%-30% more growth - during the flowering cycle. Pushing even longer is probably possible, with sufficient intensity of 735nm alone during some portion of the 'dark' cycle. Several experiments have already documented this effect.
Not ruling out IR effects, but FR seems to be the better one to go with at the moment (Martian Science changes with progress).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
I think it was "in the same 24 hour cycle...", I am typo king after all.
Trading slower AD spectrum time for ND/SID time, looks like the best starting place for first timers. Even the Martian NightBreak Test trades 15 for 15 minutes to start with. Once people get that you can't just trade hour for hour with different forms of Darkness, we think they'll get what they need to enbrace the power of the information here.
Another hurdle is that 12 hours of SID to us, looks like 10 hours SOD (Standard Outdoor Darkness) to the plant, but people are caught on 12 hours darkness (12/12) and uncomfortable with other (too) COMPLICATED methods or schedules.
(Write a book they tell me... ...like I'm too bored or something.)
Thanks Dog. I'm stressin on this one a lot. It's a tightrope.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
12 hours Standard Indoor Darkness (SID) with no Far Red is approximately the same as 10 hours Standard Outdoor Darkness INCLUDING Far Red.Quote:
Originally Posted by AfricanAlien
735nm Far Red alone is the fastest darkness spectrum, so it takes less time than other spectrums to produce the same number of genetic clock ticks (i.e. 12/12 like results).
I wish more peolpe were familiar with 14/10 to 10/14 schedules.
Speeding up the Darkness to get 12 hours of "work" done in 9 to 10 hours works, but putting more DAYTIME light on the daily clock by using more energy at night is not as energy efficient as optimizing the night hours for Photosynthesis in our view.
So yes it works, but it trades time for energy and produces less per watt. Luckily these type of night speed effects can be done with lower intensity Far Red than ballancing out against Red/Orange/Yellow spectrums.
A intense Far Red burst gets things rolling (at Nightfall), but then lower levels of Far Red can be used to maintain the phytochrome populations at Far Red saturation for the rest of the night (or so).
Good Post AfricanAlien. Thanks for sharing that one.
Take Care, Sal.
Thank you. That was the answer I was looking for..Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
No not a typo on your part at all. You did say 24 hours. I was Just speaking about the plan of attack next time for my uncle and I. Me typed before me explained (hate when that happens). We want to maximize our HID experience using the martin method (that has a nice ring to it). I know we will be different then most here. But I think alot of HPS growers like my uncle and I could gain from the martin method. Heck I think all growers will gain from this method. But with that said. HID growers don't have the ability to run individual light spectrums (so to speak) we could but that's just adding to the wattage I would think. LED growers will. T5 growers can do it much easer then HID growers by using different Kelvin temp tubes and with blue and red tubes ect.. Both of those type of growers have a spectral advantage over the single light source HID growers IMO.. BUT I think the martin method can change some of that. For example...We are using the 2k HPS bulb and red martin nights to flower now. BUT our plants are NOT flowering under a 2 k spectrum at all. It's more like 1,100 K if that IMO. When the 200w of red inc.'s were on it seemed like it was about a 500 K (do they make that strong of warm k bulb lol)... I believe one of the best parts about the martin method for HID growers will be shifting of the 24 hour k spectrum using martin nights. Now one might ask. Why would I want to use red light or any other color light at night to shift my 24 hour spectrum? You might also ask. Why don't you just add it to your day time spectrum and be done with it? Well Heat, Heat, and more heat and of course the best part. You would miss out on the MARTIN AFFECT...The Martin Effects can do all kinds of fun stuff.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
1. Combats stem elongation in the first two weeks of pre-flower (slamm the plant right into flowering) and gains you some time by virtually eliminating some plants two week pre-flower time. (ours did)
2. Adds to the trichome production (on our plants it did).
3. Red light stimulated flower production IMO
4. Can work in garden when martin night are on (always a bonus).
5. (one of the most important IMO) Martin Nights can shift the plants 24 hour K spectrum (this will allow us to use a much higher horsepower light "more blue" during our day time) but make the plants think it's still growing under a much warmer Kelvin temp without adding heat to the day light time(alot of math going on to make this work correctly and efficiently IMO).....
6. Speed up the plants clock (when I figure that part out)
7. 8. 9. yet to be determined LOL.
Sal .....#5 we will need help with.. How much martin light and how long should the light be on with the specific bulbs we plan on using.. Next time :)
I need to read this and re-read this lol...Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
So the plants indoors with (SID) and no far red is running approx 2 hours slower then outdoors? Dammm it...Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
So what's 12 hours (SID) with far red? :)
We have flowered under 10/14 but got lower yields also we have vegged under 15.5/8.5 that was ok I guess.... I'm not sure if that's what you were referring to.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Waite a minute here. I need to absorb all this.. I think this is MY first over load...LOL..... I need to do Just like Meatloaf says "let me sleep on it"Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
As always sal you leave me wanting to ask alot more ?'s :smokin:
Sal: you and your team have already done an invaluable service through your inventions and spreading of knowledge. I hope the capitalist complex rewards you, and if it does, so much the better, but if not, you must know that if you look at the scale of the change this knowledge will produce, you've already contributed to others to this point far more than most will in their whole lives, and that's only set to increase as we figure things out and as you are able to publish. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Now if you'll humor me, I'd like to answer the questions following my new working theory post utilizing the info from the theory to "try it on for size" and see how it relates... This is my "mental" way of fitting pieces together to "use what works and discard what doesn't." I'm posting this for everyone to examine and poke holes in, so don't be shy. :D
And this is what I found out the hard way when my plants started re-vegging. I replaced a relatively fast spectrum (SID) with a combination of Red and Far Red via red incandescent bulbs (same as Dog's uncle) to figure out that while the Far Red was helping with flowering (by speeding up the misc. processes) the Red in the bulb directly counteracts with the Far Red (with respect to phytochrome function), significantly mitigating the effect. Adding only RedInc bulbs does help though, because it speeds up photosynthesis to provide energy to the misc. processes anyway. The reason you can't run them all night is that the relative speeding up via the Far Red and the relative slowing down via the Red balance out at a point that is slower than complete darkness.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
The increase in Far Red at sunset and the presence of Far Red during outdoor darkness (not sure if this is all night or just for a while) serve to speed up the misc. processes enough that outdoors the plant needs only 10 hours to do the work that it takes 12 hours to do indoors, hence:Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
Because Far Red speeds the misc. processes more than even total darkness does.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
My guess is because that while Blue light is present, the plant is geared toward vegging so that's what the photosynthesis energy is largely used for, rather than put toward flowering. If photosynthesis is added during the night, the vegging processes can't steal the energy so it's available for flowering.Quote:
Originally Posted by salmayo
True, but I wouldn't feel too bad about your "spectral disadvantage" because you currently have a daytime source that provides significant Far Red, so although it's more useful at night, it still helps you during the day. :thumbsup:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
My guesses as to why these effects occur (assuming Dog is talking about what happened after he and his uncle added Red fluoros to the night cycle):Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
1,2,3: Not sure about the stem elongation, but shortening the pre-flower time, the increased trichome production, and stimulated flower production is probably due to the extra available photosynthetic energy provided by the Red light.
4: Yes, I found this out too, and it is a nice bonus :D
5: More Blue means more vegging/photosynthesis and more Red means more photosynthesis so overall the plant should have way more available energy, however it decides to use it.
6: The Red actually slows down the clock with respect to night time (an all-Red night is waaaay slower than a completely dark night) but at the same time, the extra Red provides more photosynthetic energy that is available to the misc. processes that come directly afterward, so they are more productive. (More detail on this in a bit)
If you add the same amount of Far Red that mother nature does, then it would seem to the plants like around 14.4 hours.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
SOD naturally provides Far Red (and therefore is more productive)
SID does not (and therefor is less productive)
If a 12 hour indoor night looks to the plant like a 10 hour outdoor night, then the time factor is 1.2 (12/10) based on the outdoor levels of Far Red light. Assuming those same levels are replicated indoors, the time factor would be the same, so 12 hours with Far Red would seem like 14.4 hours (12 x 1.2)
I believe you get lower yields this way because of a lack of photosynthetic energy near the end of the dark period. The 14-hour night provides plenty of time for the misc. processes to work, but they run out of fuel so by the end of the night time, the plant is basically stalled. This might also be a good reason for a sun-up period as well. If you turn on the Martian lights just before sunrise, you can add the energy the plant was lacking yet still have a period with high levels of available "misc. process product" such as hormones, enzymes, Pr, etc. Of course they'll get used up pretty quickly, but that's about the time you're transitioning into day!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
Dog, I definitely agree there! I've been overloaded many times already, and the two things that seem to help me are sleep and a perspective change. :stoned:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
You and me both, my friend!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogznova
I'm still in the process of trying to figure out which spectrums have which effects, and I haven't yet brought in the idea of synergy between the spectrums, but I'm convinced that synergy is actually the most important feature of the Martian Method.
Consider the 15-minute Red night break test. Why would adding 15 minutes of much slower night time produce better flowering results, but adding it in all night produces a vegging plant?
I think this is because of some of the effects and counter-effects mentioned above. Adding the Red light reverses Pfr->Pr conversion (meaning it induces Pr->Pfr conversion), and Pr is necessary for flowering (part of the misc. processes). But, this happens only for 15 minutes and during that 15 minutes, a significant amount of photosynthetic energy was produced and is thereafter available for the rest of the night process to do even more work. Once the light is off and Pfr->Pr re-commences, the misc. processes will also re-commence, with the difference being the higher level of available energy.
On the other hand, if you add it in all night, the misc. processes have all the energy they'd need but they never get activated because of the suppression effect of Red on misc. processes.
This is my working guess, so please critique as you see fit!
I'm also taking my own advice... Yesterday I adjusted my flowering schedule again:
10 hours daylight (everything on)
7 hours Martian night (half of the Red LEDs and all RedIncs on)
6 hours SID (no light whatsoever)
1 hour Martian night (a daybreak period)
I also chopped the cheese plant. It was already at the full height of the cabinet and it hadn't even begun flowering, and the root problem got worse. In chopping it, I found out that the root problem was that it was rootbound (from being so tall) and putting it in a bigger container is not really an option so I guess that all worked out for the best.
Hi mother. I am getting different results between the red INC.'s and the red CFL's for some reason. I just wanted to put that in here now before I answer your AWESOME post above. This folks is the best thing about having a mother. They explain things in such a way that makes you feel like you actually understand it. I'm still confused a little but I think when I answer above mother will be able to put me in the right direction..LOL:thumbsup:
Photosynthesis is used to produce the results dictated by the Blue Clock, but Red/FR affects the clock speed (reading). Flower signals (mRNA) are produced at the end of the night (12/12), and the functions signalled are executed during the day and night (with or without immediate photosynthetic activity).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mother
I always seems so simple once you understand BOTH the basics available to you at this time - Artificial Darkness Characteristics AND (Spectral) Time Rates. And you hit upon a very interesting point, SID is just that THE INDOOR STANDARD, and we have made it THE INDOOR DARKNESS TIME RATE STANDARD, e.i. THE TIME FACTOR OF SID IS 1.00 (100%). AND, your quantification of SID Based on SOD was practically the standardized method we use, but base things against SID not SOD (for the sake of Indoor Growers). So, roughly, we state that 12 hours (standard) SID being equal to 10 hours SOD gives us a Time Factor for SOD of 10/12= .8 (it takes .8 times as long as SID to do the same time work), the same answer, slightly different context. The Time Rate for SOD is 1.2 times that of SID. TIME RATE AND TIME FACTOR ARE INVERSELY related. We us Time Factors because they are easier to interpret for slower than SID spectrums, i.e. TIME FACTOR is how many times slower, whereas Time Rate is how many times faster.
So for any spectrum, to get a number of SID HOURS of work done,
REAL TIME = (SID TIME)*(TIME FACTOR).
(Note that slower Artificial Darkness spectrums with Time Factors larger than 2, cannot put 12 hours of SID activity in under 24 hours! BUT, using spectrums with Time Factors of less than 2, makes 24 hours day Martian Method growing possible. (Static Example, Dynamic is better but probably too complicated for average users.).
Giving you SID as a standard did mean much by itself, but you used relavence to quantify other Time Factors in relation to it, and in the process you have not only quantified a second spectrum time factor (time rate) against a know standard (we use SID, you used SOD), but you also NOW HAVE A STANDARDIZED SYSTEM OF QAUNTIFYING ANY SPECTRUM'S TIME FACTORS (i.e. time rates).
Consider this a major breakthrough in your progress, since NOW you have numbers that can be caluculated and summed to produce target timing schedules. (I how have a Afghani Crack Bubble Hash celebration excuse!)
10 hours daylight (everything on)
7 hours Martian night (half of the Red LEDs and all RedIncs on)
6 hours SID (no light whatsoever)
1 hour Martian night (a daybreak period)
Given that you want the equivalent of 12 hours SID, we can subtract out your actual SID time of 6 hours, so you only need the equivalent (AD) of 6 more SID hours. So, if you are making the spectrum fit the schedule, you'd need an AD spectrum with a Time Factor of arround 8/6 (AD/SID needed in hours), = 1.333. Photoperiodically/Photomorphogenically a larger AD time factor will give you veg results, while an equal AD time factor gives you optimul flowering, and a smaller AD time factor will induce ceasence (and then death) (from too long a night).
Excellent observation on the pre-flower time shortenning! I find myself forgetting about stretch as preflower, and without stretching the concept of preflowering losses a lot of significance, other than in terms of how long the early flowering processes take to convert to full flowering.
Self observation: I've already breached the Tech Gap to the point that I'm so comfortable with advantages of the Martian Method, that I'm already taking such advantages for granted (they now are expected, trusted).
OH my Friiiigggin God.. I know I ask for it.. I have know clue... I'm now lost for a few days...LOL:wtf:
Lets start here. How come SOD with far red is not the same time factor as SID with the same amount of far red. How come they are different? let's say the time we are measuring in both (SOD) and (SID) is 12 hours for this example.
[quote=salmayo]Given that you want the equivalent of 12 hours SID, we can subtract out your actual SID time of 6 hours, so you only need the equivalent (AD) of 6 more SID hours. So, if you are making the spectrum fit the schedule, you'd need an AD spectrum with a Time Factor of arround 8/6 (AD/SID needed in hours), = 1.333. Photoperiodically/Photomorphogenically a larger AD time factor will give you veg results, while an equal AD time factor gives you optimul flowering, and a smaller AD time factor will induce ceasence (and then death) (from too long a night).[QUOTE]
How did we flower with an (AD) time factor of 11/2 ? ......With alot less blue or no..
If plants outside are running .8 x faster then indoors. How do we speed up our indoor plants .8 to match outdoors. :)