Unless it was your paper you submitted, all you did was cut-n-paste an article. No questions or comments from you, pro or con.
It's not that I want to bicker, it's that I would like you to tell us what the fuck is your concern or issue regarding HPS lighting.
Well, I actually did leave a comment in the first post - maybe you missed it since it was so short. Also, I don't really have any concerns with HPS lighting as I don't use them but I hear they make a nice dent in your power bill... which can be a real nuisance if it gets exponentially more expensive every 100 kW h like mine does. Lastly, could you calm down a bit? Your posts read like a script starring Samuel L. Jackson. It is not my intention to personally attack you.

Oh really...? Big mistake not knowing what you're talking about. Other's might just know as much or more than you. Perhaps your local lights are different, but here...HPS.
I didn't say you don't know what you are talking about. I simply thought you made a mistake. I make mistakes too.

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

Not that I really care, as I will continue to use what I use. (cheapest HPS bulb available, on the day I need it) I'm personally not so anal as to require $150 bulbs that do nothing more than my $30.00 bulbs, so am comfortable with the possibility of "photodamage" regardless. Perhaps you could provide some pictures highlighting your concerns, as I have no problems at all with cannabis under HPS lighting. Never have.
I concur. If you are happy with your setup then by all means, keep on keepin' on. And it is true that HPS are sufficient but then, not using UV is also sufficient.

But regarding the effects of UV light...if you are going to try and tell us the effects of UV light are undesirable, you are barking up the wrong tree.
Nope. I had no idea about the UV. I was only referring to HPS in the original post as I assumed that UV was never included because it has to be intentionally and seperately added to indoor lighting. I do thank you for that tid-bit of info and I might be expanding my practices later.
thepaan Reviewed by thepaan on . Another reason to move away from HPS As it turns out, photodamage has an action spectra. It looks a lot like an HPS plus a UV light to me.... http://www.plantphysiol.org/cgi/reprint/153/3/988.pdf Rating: 5