Please sex me up.

I'm not skilled at looking at preflowers yet, but I think I got the hang of it a few weeks ago, when they were borderline ready to sex.

Is it pretty common that (generally) females will be more bushy, and males will be more tall and sparse, kinda more like a sativa as opposed to an indica? I want to yank the males, but I've got 4 males and 1 female if my calculations were correct.

The first 3 photos are of 3 different males, but the 4th alleged male looks the same. The last 2 are of the female (I think). I've got no macro pictures, but here's their lankiness or lack thereof. It just seems like the amount of new foliage or shoots is too great in the female comparatively, that it can't be a coincidence. Oh yeah, they are from seeds from the same plant of BBxNL.

Yeah, they look a little trashed. This was about 5 minutes after I watered/fed them, after they were extremely wilted, after some of them grew into the light and got burned, during my lack of looking in on them for a few days. I actually watched the results of thirsty plants drinking. The leaves started stretching back to normal within a minute of watering. I vow to do better at this.

Sexy opinions please.

I can't get a very close-up view of it, but the two circled areas to the right kind of resemble fat calyxes. I know you've already determined it to be male, so are these just the new shoots you were talking about?

(Hopefully the photo will attach. I spent 10 whole minutes trying to figure out how to make a circle in Photoshop...)

I see stipules but no pistils on those photos, maybe give them a bit more time under 12/12 before trying to sex them.

Paht Hed,
They haven't had any 12/12 time, and I was hoping to avoid that hassle by presexing.

Mr. C,
I see what you are talking about, but notice how on the 3 that I think are male, nothing much more than that ever comes out of that spot. On the other hand, the one that I think is female, new plants are practically coming out of that spot.

Both of you,
Thanks for looking.

Anyone,
Is there nobody who can confirm or deny that it is common for females to produce more foliage than males as they are growing up? I'm thinking that since the one is vastly different than the other 4, it can't just be coincidence. Or can it? 5 seeds, same mother, same conditions, 1 bushy, 4 tall and lanky.

na not yet. give it more time. :rastasmoke:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Opie Yutts

Paht Hed,

Is there nobody who can confirm or deny that it is common for females to produce more foliage than males as they are growing up?

---

Generally, females are short and squat with side branching that make them appear more like a bush. Males tend to grow straight up with less side branching, and yes, less dense foliage. When I start from seed the males are usually a few inches taller than the girls by the time I'm ready for repotting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Clandestine

(Hopefully the photo will attach. I spent 10 whole minutes trying to figure out how to make a circle in Photoshop...)

---

ms paint also has a nifty paintbrush tool and will load in about 2% of the time it takes for PS.

just 2c

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hybridlove420

ms paint also has a nifty paintbrush tool and will load in about 2% of the time it takes for PS.

just 2c

---

This is very true. But you can't do this kind of artistic craziness with MS Paint! (Plus, I was bored. :jointsmile:)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Perp

Generally, females are short and squat with side branching that make them appear more like a bush. Males tend to grow straight up with less side branching, and yes, less dense foliage. When I start from seed the males are usually a few inches taller than the girls by the time I'm ready for repotting.

---

Thanks. That's what I thought.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by hybridlove420

ms paint also has a nifty paintbrush tool and will load in about 2% of the time it takes for PS.

just 2c

---

That all depends on the version. The latest photoshop, I might as well get it started opening then go have dinner or something. Photoshop 7 loads in about 5 seconds.

Depending on your morals, all fully functional apps are free via the web within a couple days of being released.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mr. Clandestine

artistic craziness

---

That's pretty cool. I think I'm getting hypnotized or something. Sometime just start applying all manner of filters to your image and watch what happens. It makes some darn interesting stuff, you get to learn what things do, and you can always undo.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Opie Yutts

That's pretty cool. I think I'm getting hypnotized or something. Sometime just start applying all manner of filters to your image and watch what happens. It makes some darn interesting stuff, you get to learn what things do, and you can always undo.

---

That's pretty much what I did to come up with those images. No method to the madness, really. A little Difference Clouds here, some Plastic Wrap there, a few other random filter effects & layering, then Voila! - polychromatic insanity! If I make something cool with it later I might turn it into an avatar.

I've got a slightly older (legal) copy of CS2, and on my Vaio it'll open up in just a few seconds. On the home PC (a 10,000 year old HP), it takes much, much, MUCH longer. Luckily, I rarely have to use that infernal contraption.