these are the early ones without the canopy level light penetration although in all fairness they seem to be doing well.
Google Translate
Printable View
these are the early ones without the canopy level light penetration although in all fairness they seem to be doing well.
Google Translate
those are hps, those lights are crazy looking.
that grow is so nice.
and that is old tehnology really, those types of induction lights started with tesla two centuries ago!
The light penetration is the issue if you dont want to grow SCROG or similar hence why my guys new units look 10x brighter than that and easily pentetrate the canopy. Have jsut seen a picture my guy sent me of some untis he build for vegging in holland, he custom built this for them. The LED bars are 4ft long and have 1watt diodies with 20leds built into them, in my 8ft room i will have two bars on each side, maybe four, from canopy level up towards bud level. All with 660 diodies. and then two induction lights above. i think the light spectrum and quality of light i will create will create buds that are the next level.
A good question is how much light per square foot is beneficial before you should expand your area. There would be an answer for all different kinds of lights.
For nice growth. No popcorn buds.
Again traditional lighting measurements. Its hard to measure light per square foot if I am planning on utilising horizontal supplemental lighting. Saturated is the word I am happy with. A continuous spectrum above with horizontal LED lighting dialled in at high reds 660, 630. 20-40 leds at 1w running on a 4ft long strip. one at canopy level, one at mid level i think and until its setup and I get a light meter to it who knows? I think a setup like that as proven in the LED GROW SHOW would be incredible and put to shame traditional growing methods. Give me six weeks and I will have that room set up. Need to crop and move first!
yeah. To answer my question it depends on strain and growing style.
Moving sucks @ss. I feel your pain. In the end it is some how therapeutic but so much stress... Hiring movers is the only way to go.
Can you share specs / cost of your induction light? Khyber, any input here appreciated too.
You should start building it. I would love to see something built even a simple one. Post here what you are doing and I will build one after you.
Drowning in conflicting plant graphs
Is UV at all helpfull I have heard things about it. Would a reptile light be beneficial?
Does it fall in anywhere on another graph.
"Surely more light equals ore bud and more healthy plants."
Up until you saturate the leaf surface and start causing light bleaching. I'm already doing that with my LED lights, so much pure power in such a small area it's burning plants unless I keep them almost a foot away from the panel.
Turns out mrnobody knows the same guy I do, Muddy out in the UK. :) Yes, I'm known all across the globe.
Enjoy those induction (not the sulphur plasma I thought you were talking about) lights from him, I think those are the news ones using my new phosphor blend made for large pitches and golf courses. They'll pump mad output, and eventually we'll be using QD phosphor tech which will just make it so much better. And eventually, as I said, combining HID technology with induction technology will make HIDs that you won't have to change for years. But that's still in development, and still waiting on the right materials to be discovered.
i noticed that when i first got one of the UFO 90watt last year. Had eight blueberry growing underneath it but they turned into bushes and had to donate to a new home. they grew out to over 9ft tall and yeiled over 9oz per plant.
I have a question. If you could tie up lets say 50hps in one small room, a room where you would normally use lets say 2 x 600watt. if there was no heat coming off the lights would the plants like it? Would they like it better than, 2 or 4 or 6 etc or would they jsut crash? Has anyone experience of overfilling a room with light, real proper overkill and what are the results in comparison?
Always keep my LEDs a foot or so above my plants, find when they are really close they dont grow up. Their energy seems to go into padding out what is already there. Good for canopy level bud production in the future i think. i think as close as the LEDs can go especially in vegging the more bud sites appear.
The Growing Edge Magazine - Rays of Life
This is the most interesting article I have read in a while and i think ties everything together in this thread.
Poses quite a few more questions i Feel.
My office is a 12x12 room not including my closet. Assuming all 50 of those HID lights were in the kilowatt range, yes, either vertical or horizontal orientation of the bulbs would produce way too much light, and all but cacti would likely die off.
Even 170w of LED is burning my two large plants, and they're about 8 inches away from the panel. pH is fine, nute regimen is fine, plenty of air and CO2, both the same strain/genetics. The one on the right is closer and is burned more. I guess I'm going to have to use smaller hydro buckets next time.
Does anyone know what the light compensation and saturation levels are for cannabis? It is obviously dependent on other things such as co2.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnobody
The article did bring up my question on UV stating research is leaning towards the side that it is beneficial towards things such as development of flavors, colors, and fragrances.
In urban garden issue 9 they state that Plasma International's sulfur plasma grow light produces almost no UV.
Is UV beneficial?
Has anyone experimented with supplemental UV lights?
What kinds of lights give off UV?
I read cfl's and MH do, but I do not know how much.
What about LED's?
How about sticking a lizard light in a grow room?
The light levels differ from strain to strain. I had a white widow that couldn't stand being anywhere close to the HPS while the purple kush and original hindu skunk I had just loved it. UVB is known to be beneficial in tomatoes for production of aromatic oils so I wouldn't be surprised to see it enhancing flavors and scents in other plants, on top of being beneficial for the production of your favorite desired cannabinoid. I've used T5HO lights with UVB output to supplement the lower buds on plants, and those buds were by far more potent than the larger HPS colas above. MH gives off some, as do CFLs, but mostly they use special glass that filters out the vast majority of non-visible light. Halogen lamps put off a fair amount of UV and are not shielded, and a friend of mine too cheap to got lights had me set him up with 3 40w actual CFLs and a 250w halogen he had in his garage. He got some very sticky and dank buds, smallish, about thumb-sized, but they were uber-dank. Lizard lights would work as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by demoreal
I just got this cfl for my grow to help out.
I love all this talk about lights but I am just waiting for the thread to start of someone building an LED. I might just try and build a small one first to see how it goes. If I do I will post it.
I think I am just going to use all lights.
An LED will be my next project.
If you want help building it I'll help you out. :) Be prepared to drop semi-serious cash even for a DIY project.Quote:
Originally Posted by demoreal
My friend grew with a Uv light at the start to add some heat to his grow room but the obvious problems with UV A and B light is that it is carceogenic. Would not be a great idea to have a grow room with too much.
I am also fascinated by the fact the a Metal Halide which gives out a distinct blue spectrum is still used to successfully flower with and there is an arguement that halide is better than sodium for flowering? Why? Has anyone tried using sodium and halide together in flowering? Reading about the very bottom of the blue spectrum and past visible light has really got me thinking about my lighting and also our so called traditional knowledge.
From the reading I have been doing the light that has been lacking from our grow rooms is the light that really denotes tastes, flavour, strength and growing habits. From what I have seen of Induction ights the bud produced looks and tastes similar to outdoor grown bud. Surely that can only be a good thing especially for those growing medicinal cannabis.
I am finding cloning is much easier under LEd too? They jsut take so quickly and stay looking perky all the way through. I actually thought that i would need to supplement the LEd in my cloning station with some CFL or some more of the spectrum but apparently not. Anyone have any science why this may be so?
I clone naturally, no gel, peet pots, distilled water. bio bizz all in one soil mix.
Again that looks so obviously down to the plants genetics and where it first started its life. I am sure the Kush were high in the moutains right near the equator loving the altitude and closeness to the sun, whilst the white widow comes from genetics from India and Brazil apparently. Lower altitude, different sun. It sort of goes along with what I am trying to say about recreating nature. I am still interested in moonlight though?
Also I am interested in challenging the 12/12 as that seems somewhat artificial too. I know its what we have settled on to makes things easier and more regimented but anyone tryed anything else? Heard briedly about light deprivation and training?
Also plants like critical mass named obvously because it cant possibly yield anymore. What would they do under different lighting? How did they get it to critical mass? How are genetics like that discovered and furthered and stabilised?
Oh the questions!
A CD spectrometer
As we can see from thees pictures the MEtal Halide has the most complete spectrum.
Interestingly the suns position in the sky changing the spectrum. So when the sun highers or lowers the spectrum changes and the plants react in a different way. Makes you realise that light movers are also something to be dialled into the next grow room.
My blue-dominant LED spotlights are ever so nice for cloning. 30w is all I'll ever likely need for my clone space. Again the reason for this is the inhibitory roles of other wavelengths of light. Using only peak wavelengths for photosynthesis promotes faster root development, as well as the particular blend - 460 + 660 seems to do the best for a dual-band cloning light.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnobody
The main purpose for a light mover is to spread the light around - think of chlorophyll as a solar panel+battery all in one. You can only charge the battery so far before it just won't take any more, so you move the energy source elsewhere until it can use that light again.Quote:
Originally Posted by mrnobody
And it's not the spectrum of the sun itself that changes, rather the atmosphere filters out differently due to the angle at which it hits the atmosphere - we know this property as Snell's law.
"Again the reason for this is the inhibitory roles of other wavelengths of light"
but is any light inhibitory? Whilst the root development may be better, are we not lacking something we dont know about? I know this appear all theory but i am trying to hammer out the holes in my head so in five/six weeks when i build my next room it is as good a I can do.
If there was all the light spectrum and extra blue, surely the plant would harness all the blue it needs as well as the other light it needs for cell development, taste development and mapping out the plants life cycle. I think the complete spectrum would add more building blocks to what is a new life?
If plants just lived under blue and red light they would look black to us because obviously they are not reflecting the green light, but that green light although very little is used, is used and that is through evolution. Plants used to be purple/red/orange thousands of years back because they did not use choropyl to photosynthesise. I think it was retinol although I may be mistaken.
What we are growing with LED is an articifial plant, even more artificial than traditional lighting methods and that can only be a bad thing. We are changing the plants genetic makeup and perhaps changing things for the worse. By altering plant cells and changing the way they use light we perhaps embrace new diseases, carceogenic properties and other underlying problems. In my eyes the same can be said for Hydroponics. Its an artifial way of harnessing life and evidence in other fields like mono cultures in crops shows this is a very bad thing.
If you look at Mr Nices grow rooms, a lot of them have open roofs and brick walls.
That spectrometer thing was cool. I am making one tomorrow. I am confused. Do the different wavelengths of light do different things to the plant? A leafy plant grown with lots of blue light is an example. If that is true.
You could build a lot of LED lights a few hundred of them, each a different wavelength. Grow identical plants under all the different individual wavelengths.
I guess my question comes down too...
We know plants use some wavelengths more efficiently than others but do the different wavelength contribute to different growth characteristics?
My experiment would tell you but it is not very practical. I do not know any other way to figure it.
I would say that the different wavelengths have a massive effect on the finished product. you only have to look outdoors for that. Plants use all that they can. If its only blue they will manage but they would be a million times better with continuous spectrum and added blue. Only blue I honestly believe changes the plant somehow, or deprives it so to evolves in some way. This relates to stress and stress creates mutations and cancer.
Ever noticed how some plants just die? Some genetics wont work under your lighting? If you eliminate the air, nutes, medium issues and you know everything is fine why is this?
If sunset is at 760nm somewhere around there then the red on the LED is not strong enough to replicate that. Perhaps a bad thing. Same goes for blue and dawn.
LEd grown cannabis seems to be tighter, with more resin, crystal and importanntly taste and strength. This can only be due to the extra red and blue wavelengths they have been receiving. Adding more continuous spectrum can only be a good thing.
The sun only tells you the what all the wavelengths do together. Not what each wavelength does individually.
Yes but the plants see all of those wavelenths as different unlike us.
Correct, so if they see them different is it possible that they use them different? Or is it just easier for the plant to use certain wavelengths?
This would more or less answer the original question of this thread.
"What we are growing with LED is an articifial plant"
I don't know whether to laugh or facepalm over this statement.
"but is any light inhibitory?"
Yes. You want to inhibit flower growth? Hit cannabis with any amount of lilght that will trigger photosynthesis. You wish to inhibit overall plant growth? Use an excess of green and yellow for terrestrial plants. We've known about this for at LEAST 50 years, the studies are published and out there.
"Yes but the plants see all of those wavelenths as different unlike us. "
Plants don't see, period. They respond by phytochemical processes. Light is light is light is light, period. Photons are photons, there is nothing special as you are attempting to point out, it's just that plain and simple. Get to my level in optical physics and photobiology and I think you'll be racing to edit most of your posts.
light is just photons so it does not really make sense that plants need the whole spectrum. So do plants just use certain wavelengths better than others. What about the experiments that were done and people claimed to much blue created a leafy plant. It just does not make sense. I am really lost. I do not think people really know exactly how it works. At least I do not get it. I am lost. I can't make up my mind.
Just like Rackitman said, "There is all this conflicting data out there." I think that is for sure true.
Hubris does not suit you well.Quote:
Originally Posted by khyberkitsune
I was at a hydroponics class last week. I proposed the led concept to our instructor. A man whom carries a PHD as a title. His exploits include 25 years in the agro-genetics division of a few different seed companies (corn,sow,cotten that kinda thing) as well as some time in academia. When I told him what I had read on the internet about 2 color grow lights....................................HE ROARED WITH LAUGHTER.
The simple fact that led take 2-3 week longer to finish should let us all know that something is missing. There is room for investigation, all the answers are not yet know. And most importantly there is no perfect.
"Hubris does not suit you well. "
Never has, never will. I'm upfront and in your face, beating around the bush is for cowards.
"HE ROARED WITH LAUGHTER."
He roared with laughter, ignoring EVERY OTHER PUBLISHED STUDY THAT PROVES OTHERWISE FOR THE PAST HALF-DECADE?
What a waste of PHD. Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach.
"The simple fact that led take 2-3 week longer to finish"
Umm, where do you get that? My 9 week strains finish at 8-9 weeks, as typical. You know the *EXACT* same nonsense was said about CFL grows, as well?
In my experience, anyone who roars with laughter usually do so because they are confronted with information that does not conform to their learn experience and/or challenges their methodology. All to often this is internalize and interpreted as a personal challenge. Occasionally, though, it is because they have direct experience upon which to base their contempt. In this case, I'm guessing the former.
As for hubris, I too am an upfront kind of person. Better to hit me with what you got so I can learn from my errors. I do the same by others. Further, I always recommend that people not try to interpret the "tone" of comments made in email or on line. It is the source of too many unnecessary flame wars.
For me, LEDs offer a solution to a grow situation that can not tolerate heat due to lack of external venting options. I can not comment on 2 or 3 weeks extended grow time but even if that is the case, so be it. For me HID is just not an option.
Well, you still have to have SOME ventilation, even with LED. Without air refreshing, you're going to suffer greatly.
Very well said. :thumbsup: And noted.Quote:
Originally Posted by bigsby
I too, am a more "in your face" kinda guy.
"What a waste of PHD. Those that can, do. Those that can't, teach. "
Dude.......So he disagrees with you ...he must be a moron. He left the industry because he enjoys teaching. Thus I found myself in his class. Well actually I am only in the class cause a first timer friend wants to go hydro..I am a dirt kinda guy but that is neither here nor there.
Moreover since this was a hydroponics class and not a grow pot in you bottom dresser drawer class, his comment and opinions hold more water. Cucumbers will not grow properly without green light for example...(a fact bandied about on this forum regularly). So since he is teaching a class on growing everything(hydroponically) there is an example where a 2 color light would not work properly. :jointsmile: I am sure that an extensive study would find many more examples of terrestrial plants that have specific wavelengths of light required for one phase of development or another.
The number of people on this forum alone commenting on UV light and its effects on resin production should give other readers pause.....
khyberkitsune the tone of your response...speaks volumes...however your insist are invaluable. I look forward to some more spirited debates in the future.:jointsmile:
"So he disagrees with you ...he must be a moron."
You want to say where I said that? Don't put words in my mouth that were not said. That's the lowest form of bullshit known on the planet.
"Moreover since this was a hydroponics class and not a grow pot in you bottom dresser drawer class, his comment and opinions hold more water."
Oh, pardon me, but if you check some of my other posts, you'll quite firmly note that I do far more than cannabis. Oh, wait, I'll just save you the trouble and repost the pictures here. This is my Australian partner's test shed, and then a couple of pictures from my own personal garden.
He left the industry, that's a shame. No wonder he laughs at the idea of two-color growing. Too bad it's here AND IT WORKS. If it weren't worthwhile, why would NASA be looking so heavily into the technology? I think your PHD teacher needs to open his eyes a bit more, or at the very least adjust those side-blinders to be a bit wider to allow for some peripheral hindsight.
You think that little blurb in my signature is just for grins? No, sir, I do REAL HORTICULTURE. If you think I'm going to waste a formal horticultural science education on a single variety of plant, I've got a couple bridges to sell to you.
Damn Khyber, those pictures say it all, eh?
I do have room-to-room ventilation that will draw sufficient "fresh" air and I crack a somewhat remote window so I am not ventless, though I'm quite sure someone with more skill than I could do a sealed grow with C02 added, no? In addition to my ventilation challenges I also can't stomach the idea of an HID burning my house down. Yes, I could set it up to be as safe as possible but it only takes one freak accident to burn it all down... I wouldn't be able to leave the house or sleep at night. It would be on my mind all the time.
On a side note, my best profs in both undergrad and grad were the adjuncts that held full time jobs and taught one or two course per semester after hours. They brought the real world into the classroom in a way that the full time profs never could.