Quote Originally Posted by JoeBlow78
Nice work man, those look real nice.

I'm a huge fan of the CFL's mainly for power consumption! (even though I'm using HID But it was free) Its a hole different way of doing it really. I have spent weeks researching lighting alone and have made notes spread sheets etc. The main thing is to keep em real close. Great for the LST set ups. I like the idea of having a broader range of spectrum and with a bunch of smaller light sources working together its easily done.

Ive read a couple of comparisons concluding that they produce a bud with less density but otherwise the same. witch kinda makes sense when you ask your self this. What was the intensity at the bud sites when comparing the two? I'm willing to bet it was less with the cfl's. I say that because I think the comparison should limit the variables down to just the light source. Not the intensity being one of them because that varies with manufacturer alone never mind the technology that's emitting it.

Anyways I just try and run on straight facts and its hard to do sometimes with so many opinions, techniques, circumstances and so on based on who knows what half the time. I use a light meter and its pretty interesting what you can accomplish by focusing, adjusting and reflecting the same light source. Efficiency is a big interest of mine.

Note: Having said all of that I have to say this! I'm on grow number one!! The first time I seen a plant in real life was only a few months ago. Thus VERY inexperienced with this funny smelling green stuff.

I'll defiantly be interested in how your produce turns out. Update us on the results.:thumbsup:
I agree with you, research and opinions. But you know what they say about opinions. I listen to all opinions, then decide for myself. Joe, you might like to take a peek at this chart. Attachment 288550