Canachris
Well-Known Member
is there any disadvantage to slowly transitioning from 18 hrs of light to 12 hrs. I usually cut down to 16 for 2 days then 14... you get the idea. any thoughts
Going from 18/6 to 12/12
- Thread starter Canachris
- Start date
None whatsoever, that's how I transition too except I wait 3 or 4 days between drops
What is the advantage of slowing the transition? I always assumed the limbo between switching and seeing pistils was a critical time. No light leaks etc.
It allows time for the 'florigen' hormone to build up so that when you hit 12/12 she's ready to flower profusely, otherwise you're effectively vegging under 12/12 for the first week, or until she turns
I believe sudden darkness exacerbates stretch
Plus it saves a bit of power
I go from 17 hours on to 12/12 overnight.
My Blue Dream clones from clones will show the first pistils/stigmas on day 5 just like the original mother plant from seed did. I originally had 3 Blue Dream seeds and all 3 plants showed in 5 days. The real test would be to do a 50 or more with one method and another 50 or more with the other method and see what the difference is, if there is a difference.
This sort of question has come up many times and there are those who step down the schedule and those who do the change in schedule overnight.
My Blue Dream clones from clones will show the first pistils/stigmas on day 5 just like the original mother plant from seed did. I originally had 3 Blue Dream seeds and all 3 plants showed in 5 days. The real test would be to do a 50 or more with one method and another 50 or more with the other method and see what the difference is, if there is a difference.
This sort of question has come up many times and there are those who step down the schedule and those who do the change in schedule overnight.
Delps8
Well-Known Member
I can't think of a benefit.
My question - if gradually reducing light levels is a benefit to the plant, how far should we take the practice? If three days is good, why not do seven, or 29?
All other things being equal, the yield of a crop is directly correlated to the number of mols the plant has received over its life. When you reduce the amount of light it has received, that reduces the amount of glucose it can generate, among other things. That will tent to limit.
The loss in mols is a simple math problem and it won't be a big loss - it's akin to having a few days of heavy overcast, right?
To my mind, knowing that it will reduce growth and, lacking a stated, valid reason to reduce light levels, I don't see a reason to reduce light levels.
The attached paper was one of the many sources of research that I've read over the past few years that have influenced my opinion about grow lighting. I'm a strong believe in "turn it up to 11" and run my plants at or very near their light saturation point though I did slack off a bit in the early part of my current grow.
Light from two days ago.
The leaves were "praying" so I dropped input wattage by about 10%.
Cannabis
Just my tuppence.
JiggiLotus
Well-Known Member
definitely a light whore 
What?
Someone say whore?
Someone say whore?
Chrondocious
Well-Known Member
I've tried it, and noticed no difference then just flipping. I don't like messing with my timers too.
Wastei
Well-Known Member
The result is less stretch during flower. You may finish a couple of days earlier but may also loose some potential yield from not filling out the grow space.
- Thread starter
- #11
Canachris
Well-Known Member
Less stretching, I want more stretch. I find it makes it easier to spread the branches apart. and yes it is a pain in my
Agreed with @Roy Growin for a slightly more robust reason, with supporting documentation from a Druid
Chrondocious
Well-Known Member
I like the stretch too. Utilize it.
Trump
Well-Known Member
Is there any comparative or science fact that can back this up? I'm not disputing it but I'm not seeing any sort of studies backing up these claims.Agreed with @Roy Growin for a slightly more robust reason, with supporting documentation from a Druid
The reasoning sounds reasonable but that's the thing. It SOUNDS reasonable but is it really? I've made many mistakes growing due to, what I had deemed as "reasonable" conclusions only to find out that I was completely off base or didn't take into consideration other factors.
Nope, apart from the secret Druids book @Keffka has, experience, and taking tips from mother nature
It's just what I do, doesn't mean you have to try similar if you are not sure of the reasoning
We all grow great meds different ways, nothing is concrete with growing plants, just how you like it
Wastei
Well-Known Member
+1 There's a lot of assumptions without any proof or facts backing up the claims. I have a hard time reading texts with end quotes like "Got it?!" The person who wrote the text sounds overly sure about his reasonings without leaving anything out to speculation.
There's pros and cons with anything you do in a artificial growing environment and that's what we do, manipulating environmental measures to meet our demands on growth characteristics and set goals. Saying one way produce way more or a stronger product without putting every other aspect and factor in to consideration only leaves a lot of questions.
Trump
Well-Known Member
It looks like the text was taken from a book that the Rev was involved in so it has some credibility but I'd like to see if his claims are fact or opinion.
Delps8
Well-Known Member
"I'll take appeal to authority for $100, Alex"
In nature, PPFD varies every day from 0 to about 2000µmols in about six hours and then drops to 0 six hours later.
In nature, the light spectrum changes from very red heavy to "sunlight" in about six hours and then changes to red heavy about six hours later.
Therefore, cannabis has a very hard time growing in nature.
Q.E.D.
It’s the third edition of TLO I quoted from, just came out the other day. Rev has been growing this way for decades and has managed to help many of us produce far higher quality flower than any of us had seen before, especially from synthetics. Almost all of what he has written has worked out exactly as he’s said for me. The big thing I didn’t agree with of his was tea usage and he doesn’t even use those any more. That and a disagreement about containers.
He was ahead of the curve on many things so I tend to trust his judgment until given reason not to.
Nope, apart from the secret Druids book @Keffka has, experience, and taking tips from mother nature
It's just what I do, doesn't mean you have to try similar if you are not sure of the reasoning
We all grow great meds different ways, nothing is concrete with growing plants, just how you like it
Bingo. Follow it if you want to, doesn’t matter much to me, I just believe in sharing information. I prefer to go in the direction of Mother Nature since she’s the subject matter expert when it comes to plants. It’s not for everybody, nothing is and that’s okay.
Revs work has yet to steer me wrong, which I cannot say the same for the internet or forums.
