#1 I am pretty sure green light goes deeper into the canopy via reflection off the leaves, bounces around inside the canopy! Makes photosynthesis more efficient from within the plant and not just on the leaves.
Seriously - What's the best LED setup?
- Thread starter loudnoise
- Start date
This is the age old story, people listen to a "pro" or "old timer" and then read the 1,000's of "articles"...I gave up and asked someone I trusted. I don't have a meter and don't care so I can't comment. I knew they were on sale because another thread I follow has experienced growers like @Chris Scorpio and @Amy Gardner say they "love them" and recommended them.
Sometimes you got to pull the trigger and just start growing. I had a budget and I went with the best "brand" figuring if I hated indoor grows someone would quickly snap it up versus a Chinese LED. My 200W @TimberGrowLights works well for my situation so I am one of their satisfied customers.
So, to answer the thread's question "what's the best LED setup?" There isn't one. It's what works for you, and that is different for everyone. Not everyone has the budget, space, or knowledge.
But, if I were to steer anyone to a LED company, it would be @TimberGrowLights and see what they offer that fits your budget. You won't be disappointed.
If you stop and think about it, commercial LED lights are usually compact to cut costs, both in materials and more importantly shipping. This has the unfortunate side effect of PAR rapidly dropping off as you move away from directly under the light. HID lights share this problem.
Timber, and some other companies are anomalies in the market. They ship larger fixtures (or kits) that spread the light more evenly, and cover a larger area. This eliminates the 'hot spot' directly under the light, and allow it to be placed closer to the canopy.
DIY COB lights do the same, and generally use COBs of the same class Timber uses. Using locally supplied materials to build the fixture frames cuts down on manufacturing and transportation costs. They also allow the addition of supplemental LEDs to improve the spectrum for growth, usually with deep red, and far red emitters.
Regardless of what your initial research says, I'd start with small scale grows, and not fill a large grow room with lighting until you've satisfied yourself that the light meets your needs. Lighting is the single most expensive item in a grow op. It's also the item the most money is wasted on.
Timber, and some other companies are anomalies in the market. They ship larger fixtures (or kits) that spread the light more evenly, and cover a larger area. This eliminates the 'hot spot' directly under the light, and allow it to be placed closer to the canopy.
DIY COB lights do the same, and generally use COBs of the same class Timber uses. Using locally supplied materials to build the fixture frames cuts down on manufacturing and transportation costs. They also allow the addition of supplemental LEDs to improve the spectrum for growth, usually with deep red, and far red emitters.
Regardless of what your initial research says, I'd start with small scale grows, and not fill a large grow room with lighting until you've satisfied yourself that the light meets your needs. Lighting is the single most expensive item in a grow op. It's also the item the most money is wasted on.
greensunshine
Active Member
You're right about green light being a good canopy penetration. Actually a very small amount bounces off the leaves, just a little more than other colors to give green appearance. Green, Yellow, and IR light are able to pass through the leaves and buds the best for penetration ability.
It's not really that those light frequencies pass through the leaves. Those frequencies, especially green is or are processed inside the plant. This means, red and blue are processed on the surface of the leaves. Green hits the leaves and the energy from it is moved into the stem and root structure of the plant. Basically speaking.... I hope this makes sense.
Klaus
Mayne
Well-Known Member
AND, which helps with CO2 uptake for the plant. Growmau5 and Greengene talked about it on a techtalk show. as to why green and yellow are very important.
PurpleGunRack
Well-Known Member
Just to clarify a little on the spectrum talk 
A lot of BS pseudo-science out there from the many LED pushers find its way to the back of somebody's mind and finds its way to a discussion thread and suddenly its a fact...
Many of the tests referred to are done: on a single leaf, only for a few days, just on vegging plants, not done on cannabis, only on one strain etc.
A a lot of research is yet to be done on photosynthesis in general and even more to be done specifically for growing cannabis.
Each color / wavelength range acts is a signal the plants pick up on and adjust to.
Photosynthesis occurs between 400nm and 700nm (PAR)
Green light produces photosynthesis and penetrates deep down the canopy, the leaves down here can use more green light for photosynthesis than the canopy leaves that are feasting on red and blue.
Also triggers the undergrowth to do something to get out of the shade.
Far Red / Infra Red produces no photosynthesis, but acts as an important signal, but only very little is needed and only at specific times during the daily cycle.
The sun puts out a massive amount of UV, this doesn't mean we try to replicate this in our grow room, but a tiny amount of UV-A / UV-B at key points during the day/grow could make a difference, we have to make more testing in these areas rather than accepting some total truth from a growlight salesman.
UV-B(said to increase resin production) might have different effect on different strains and be worthwhile in one application and a waste of money in another.
A lot of BS pseudo-science out there from the many LED pushers find its way to the back of somebody's mind and finds its way to a discussion thread and suddenly its a fact...
Many of the tests referred to are done: on a single leaf, only for a few days, just on vegging plants, not done on cannabis, only on one strain etc.
A a lot of research is yet to be done on photosynthesis in general and even more to be done specifically for growing cannabis.
Each color / wavelength range acts is a signal the plants pick up on and adjust to.
Photosynthesis occurs between 400nm and 700nm (PAR)
Green light produces photosynthesis and penetrates deep down the canopy, the leaves down here can use more green light for photosynthesis than the canopy leaves that are feasting on red and blue.
Also triggers the undergrowth to do something to get out of the shade.
Far Red / Infra Red produces no photosynthesis, but acts as an important signal, but only very little is needed and only at specific times during the daily cycle.
The sun puts out a massive amount of UV, this doesn't mean we try to replicate this in our grow room, but a tiny amount of UV-A / UV-B at key points during the day/grow could make a difference, we have to make more testing in these areas rather than accepting some total truth from a growlight salesman.
UV-B(said to increase resin production) might have different effect on different strains and be worthwhile in one application and a waste of money in another.
Mayne
Well-Known Member
PGR,
Great freakin post bro,
Great freakin post bro,
PurpleGunRack
Well-Known Member
If you need help choosing/building a growlight just ask away, or better yet start a thread about it explaining your situation and goals 
It certainly has lots of power, and a high penetration ability. OtOH... They do make 1,500-watt HIDs. One assumes that they have even more power and penetration ability. I don't know about the double-ended 1,000-watt HPS lights, but I remember reading that 600-watt HPS are more efficient, watt-for-watt, than single-ended 1Kw SE ones.
Like with so many other things, what light works best cannot really be answered without taking into consideration factors such as strain(s) being grown, growing style, and even the CO₂ and temperature levels in the grow room.
Entirely possible, I suppose. But this brings to mind a question: The most powerful grow light product I could find on Heliospectra's website was a 630-watt device. Did your friend make sure to use enough of their products that the (gross) wattage was the same between the two grows?
Another thing, although I am quite "in the dark" about it, is that some LED products, for whatever reason, appear to cause some nutritional issues, either not present or not present to the same degree with HPS, that might need to be addressed in order to really tell how well the LED product is (capable of) performing. Does your friend have enough experience with LEDs to understand this?
In LED light, you mean? My completely uneducated guess would be 5,000 (actual, as in consumed) watts worth, spread evenly across the canopy. More, perhaps, if you intend to grow landrace sativas.
BtW, some of the best grows I have ever seen were pictures of... I think the guy went by the user name of Heath Robinson. He used multiple HIDs in a vertical setup. His grams per watt numbers were crazy, maybe even around 2.0. Such a setup would be quite difficult to mimic with LED devices, seeing as how they only output in one direction. Which... Well, like I mentioned, the type of lighting (and how much of same) that works best for you depends on your chosen growing style (et cetera).
So... It costs a little more than it would to buy an ounce of cannabis, lol? While way too rich for my blood (as is a small steak from the grocery store
), when looked at in this light, it hardly seems like an unreasonable expense. Especially considering the fact that such a tool would presumably be helpful for experimenting with different lighting - or even different placement of one's current lights - for many years down the road.EDIT: You are wishing to set up a grow space of 100 square feet. A bad choice when making an equipment purchase - or even a significant nutrient mishap - could easily cost you more in lost yield than a $500 PAR meter, I would think.
My green light take is based on recent research done by scientist Bruce Bugbee. Also Christopher Sloper, author of The LED Grow Book. And other biologists which were involved and to some extend are still involved in Nasa's space program. And the fact that Nasa included green spectrum in their current space program. This isn't just stuff I read someplace. First hand info. But, it is correct, we don't really understand a lot of how plants truly grow and what they need. Or what spectrum does what. Unfortunately, we can't talk to plants. And I agree, most of this research is not done on Cannabis.
Klaus
Klaus
Just to clarify a little on the spectrum talk
Thanks for the input - and the images. I think I'll borrow... plant-lighting-2.jpg in order to help me explain to a (local, real-world) friend why lumen/lux cannot be used to effectively judge a grow light's prowess.
And that reminds me of the infamous study, the name of which escapes me at the moment, the one that attempted to discover the maximum amount of light-energy that a cannabis plant could effectively process. It was published, presumably peer reviewed, has been used as a reference many times over the years by growers... and the thing is so flawed that several of them jump right off of the screen and figuratively tap you on the shoulder upon first reading the thing
.
PurpleGunRack
Well-Known Member
Aye, in the world of SE HPS 600w's have the highest efficacy (lumen, at source, per watt)
If you compare a 1000w HPS to a 600w HPs in a 4x4 tent, there's no doubt the 1000w performs better, but how much more do you get for the higher bulb price extra 400w input(?) taking into account that the 1000w puts out ''too much'' light just under the lamp.
We also have to take output loss into the equation, so a cheap bulb with the same or maybe even higher lumen output than a brand bulb, could loose output much faster and you'd have to change bulb more often or suffer on quality and yield.
If I was to (cheaply) fill a big space with light, I would use 600w HID in the neighborhood of 1 light per m2.
Using the omnidirectional light source (bulb) vertically is a way to fully take advantage of the nature of the light source, just like ScroG is the best way to take advantage of weak light sources like CFL, fluorescent tubes etc.,
If you can't suit your lights to your plants, you'll have suit your plants to your lights
But when you can turn the 35/65 HID light to heat ratio upside down with proper LED, and you know your price per kwh, it's really not hard to calculate what you have to gain.
A grower could get the same quality/quantity using a lot less power, or get better/more product using the same power.
Not trying to argue with your statement or question your sources, just adding to it
I'm sure you're right even if the studies aren't cannabis specific, I don't know why/how the green lightwaves penetrate the canopy, I just know they do
When there is an abscence of other wavelenghts the plant/leaf can use more of the green light for photosynthesis.
(White light LED's have plenty green, so unlike Far Red it's not one of the colors we will gain something by adding, so don't go spending on cyan/green monos
)Yes lumen, as such, is useless for determining the effect of grow lights. However, it is useful to compare the efficacy (lumen, at source, per watt) of light sources of the same spectrum ie. one 3000K COB to another 3000K COB, or two 600w HPS bulbs to each other. It does not translate to other colors, power inputs of HID, or say anything about how much light hits various points on a given surface from a given distance.
I member...
Aye, in the world of SE HPS 600w's have the highest efficacy (lumen, at source, per watt)
If you compare a 1000w HPS to a 600w HPs in a 4x4 tent, there's no doubt the 1000w performs better, but how much more do you get for the higher bulb price extra 400w input(?) taking into account that the 1000w puts out ''too much'' light just under the lamp.
We also have to take output loss into the equation, so a cheap bulb with the same or maybe even higher lumen output than a brand bulb, could loose output much faster and you'd have to change bulb more often or suffer on quality and yield.
If I was to (cheaply) fill a big space with light, I would use 600w HID in the neighborhood of 1 light per m2.
Using the omnidirectional light source (bulb) vertically is a way to fully take advantage of the nature of the light source, just like ScroG is the best way to take advantage of weak light sources like CFL, fluorescent tubes etc.,
If you can't suit your lights to your plants, you'll have suit your plants to your lights
But when you can turn the 35/65 HID light to heat ratio upside down with proper LED, and you know your price per kwh, it's really not hard to calculate what you have to gain.
A grower could get the same quality/quantity using a lot less power, or get better/more product using the same power.
Not trying to argue with your statement or question your sources, just adding to it
I'm sure you're right even if the studies aren't cannabis specific, I don't know why/how the green lightwaves penetrate the canopy, I just know they do
I appreciate this conversation. Lots of good stuff. I believe you are very knowledgeable in this subject. The way Christopher Sloper put it makes sense. "Up to 90 % of green light gets reflected, when green hits a lower leaf green gets reflected and his another leafs underside where another 10% gets absorbed. This way, green lights bounce around inside the canopy". Other spectrums don't bounce like that.
When there is an abscence of other wavelenghts the plant/leaf can use more of the green light for photosynthesis.
Indica, mostly grows under a shade canopy (trees, etc). This is why it has developed broader leaves compared to sativa. It helps gather more light on lower light conditions, most of the red/blue has already been absorbed by the upper tree canopy, but green comes through. Did this make sense?
(White light LED's have plenty green, so unlike Far Red it's not one of the colors we will gain something by adding, so don't go spending on cyan/green monos
Yes lumen, as such, is useless for determining the effect of grow lights. However, it is useful to compare the efficacy (lumen, at source, per watt) of light sources of the same spectrum ie. one 3000K COB to another 3000K COB, or two 600w HPS bulbs to each other. It does not translate to other colors, power inputs of HID, or say anything about how much light hits various points on a given surface from a given distance.
I member...
TTKlaus: I do not seem to be able to view your reply - just the post of the member you quoted.
Indica, mostly grows under a shade canopy (trees, etc). This is why it has developed broader leaves compared to sativa. It helps gather more light on lower light conditions, most of the red/blue has already been absorbed by the upper tree canopy, but green comes through. Did this make sense?
I tried to reply inline. But it didn't work. So I posted my reply by itself. Check out my last post before this one. Still learning the format of the site.
Tt klaus
I tried to reply inline. But it didn't work. So I posted my reply by itself. Check out my last post before this one. Still learning the format of the site.
Tt klaus
Grassmaster
Well-Known Member
Hydrofarm manual says:
Measures photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) from 400 to 700nm.
My Hydrofarm works great and I use it more than my LUX - Foot Candle meter. I did haver to open mine up today because one of the 4 wires from the cord broken on the sensor side (I have to rework the solder connection). Luckly I'm a proffessional technician and micro solder ever day. Opened up the other side and their is a very modern super miniature circuit board that the sensor cord plugs into. (sort of like a phone jack). They should add another plug on the sensor side to stop wire breakage.
The Hydrofarm also charges like a cell phone so you won't have to use batteries.
I wouldn't spend much money on a meter. All you need is a baseline intensity number to adjust your light levels for the appropriate levels. Depending on the growing stage of the plant.
