115 watts per square foot

[OregonsDank]

I plan on using around 115 - 120 watts per square foot during bloom in a room 4x4 or 4x6.

Is this way overkill for very high quality mary jane?

OregonsDank Reviewed by OregonsDank on 09-30-2006. 115 watts per square foot I plan on using around 115 - 120 watts per square foot during bloom in a room 4x4 or 4x6. Is this way overkill for very high quality mary jane? Rating: 5

[tekneeqs]

As stated in one of the most thorough grow books, "Near 50w/sq. ft. a point of diminishing returns is reached, and the yield of the garden is then limited by the space the plants have to grow. For maximum use of electricity and space, about 40w/sq. ft. is the highest advisable".

[OregonsDank]

so just 1000 watt MH for veg , then a 1000 HPS for bloom

[tekneeqs]

that sounds perfect, as far as lighting goes.

[u.g.u]

I run 50 wsf now but I remeber reading somewere that 75 was the point of dimishing either way 115-120 is way to much.

[BlueBear]

75W is good, and yes there is a point of regres, but it is still a questionabl topic. Remember some serious growers are dropping a 1K light on one plant for tramendous results. Now if they put a 600W on the same plant who is to say that they wouldn't have the same or better results. But for a 4x4 a 1K is perfect in my opinion.
Adieu

[Zandor]

The real questions are what the quality of the lights and color spectrum is. Plus it's more about par-watts or usable light to the plants.

How many lumens and what color is a better way to look at your lights then just watts.

Light coverage is just as important 1000w will be good coverage for about 4x4 but a 4x6 the ends will have less light.

Just something to think about.

[qdavid]

What Zandor said. If, for example, you use 4 cfls. Is the wattage really 4x150W (incandescent equivalents) or 4x42W (the real rating)? Lumens, color, and overall coverage of lights are the keys.

[harris7]

What Zandor said. If, for example, you use 4 cfls. Is the wattage really 4x150W (incandescent equivalents) or 4x42W (the real rating)? Lumens, color, and overall coverage of lights are the keys.

try not to use the incandescent equivalents. They dont mean anything, all they are is a marketing thing so people can replace the bulbs in their house and buy ones that are the same brightness. When we talk about HPS we dont say their incandescent equivalents because everyone knows they have higher efficiency.

so, if you are trying to figure out the Watts/sq ft you must use the actual watts. and each different light as a different optimum. I prefer to use the lumens/sq ft.

[qdavid]

try not to use the incandescent equivalents. They dont mean anything, all they are is a marketing thing so people can replace the bulbs in their house and buy ones that are the same brightness. When we talk about HPS we dont say their incandescent equivalents because everyone knows they have higher efficiency.

so, if you are trying to figure out the Watts/sq ft you must use the actual watts. and each different light as a different optimum. I prefer to use the lumens/sq ft.

Yuh, I know. I was just trying to explain by example. Maybe somebody else didn't know that. But thanks. Use your MG and HPS, but not everyone does use those types of lights. What was your question?