The Candlelight Club: Support Group For Those Running 400W & Less

[Jackalope]

I guess knowing your Gm per watt ration is good. I have no idea what mine is. Personally I weigh each plant for reference only. I don't ever add it all together to see what the room did. That's why I use the 1000 watt HPS. Just add tons of light and let the plant do what it does. This only works when you have excess room.

 

[Weavel]

I think it helps me to improve, numbers don't lie (unlike me when im all stoned telling you how big my bud was, almost as big as the bud that got away or was that fish damn i get confused)

also as my numbers improve it becomes plentiful more of the low grade buds go into the scrap pile, and never even make it into the final weight unlike when first starting and getting .2 gram per watt counting everything that even closely resembled a bud!

 

[TheFertilizer]

I think it helps me to improve, numbers don't lie (unlike me when im all stoned telling you how big my bud was, almost as big as the bud that got away or was that fish damn i get confused)

also as my numbers improve it becomes plentiful more of the low grade buds go into the scrap pile, and never even make it into the final weight unlike when first starting and getting .2 gram per watt counting everything that even closely resembled a bud!

I've always wondered about that metric because there doesn't seem to be any real standard way of measuring it.

I'm kind of in the same boat, if a bud is way too small I'll just toss it in with my trim, but I also trim extremely heavy. I will have tons of calyx in my trim because I just go over the whole bud like a hedge trimmer to get all that sugar leaf off.

So for example on my most previous harvest, it was pretty low, about 112 grams. However, that's not including the 100 grams of trim.

Personally I've found that people who use the g/watt metric are typically large scale producers or cash croppers, and basically the sort that wouldn't worry about how much mass gets lost in trim, but on the other hand, I've also noticed that people producing this much tend to get less thorough with the trimming and so it makes me wonder how much the level of trim effects that final g/watt ratio.


For the merits of discussing light output, would it make more sense to include the trim in the amount produced? I mean, it is part of what the light produced, and strains have such vastly different calyx-to-leaf ratios, one light or setup might seem to produce far less grams per watt of finished product when in reality it's actually the strain producing so much more leaves that you lost in trim.

I've always just measured my actually smokeable yield, but I suppose if I started adding the amount of trim on to that, then it would put me into more of the .5-.75 g/watt range. I'd have to actually go look through my journals and tally that up to be sure.

 

[Weavel]

to me it doesn't matter what standard you use as long as you improve it, (has to be dry weight though) I just use the numbers to compete with myself, Doubt I will ever hit the 1-2 gram per watt some of the folks get.

Also strain has a lot to do with it, this one strain (some kinda og kush) produces half as much as the other strains under my other light, mars pro 2 160 (350 watts) 2 indica dominant (kelly hill strain) produced 4.5 oz, and 3 kush plants only produced 3.5 oz plants were equal in size buds on kush just weighed way less.

 

[TheFertilizer]

Hey didn't mean to forget about this thread for so long.

I ended up getting about 45 grams off all of the plants under that T5. That might not sound like a lot, but it depends on how one puts it into perspective. Think about how much it might cost someone to buy that amount from a store or the black market, and then they would be totally out of the loop on what was used. This is basically 300 dollars of tent, light, ventilation and maybe 50-100 more on soil and irrigation setup, and really I didn't even spend that since I already had all the materials. Let's just say someone is just putting together their first setup though, a $80 200 watt light produced a little over 1 and 1/2 ounce. Plus, it was very good end result as well. To buy an ounce of weed at this quality at a store here would cost 200+ but to throw up a panda film space with some PC fans and CFLs of equivalent wattage might cost as low as 50 bucks.

Anyway I am not saying it's a huge success, especially to get what isn't even a whole month's supply, but it still kinda demonstrates that growing with low light isn't worthless. Even a very modest setup can turn into an investment that pays itself off within the first harvest or two. It padded the rest of my harvest pretty nicely, and I actually ended up with my usual 6 month supply of medicine because I rejected the notion that flowering plants with such low light would be worthless.

IMG_20180501_223556.jpg

• TheFertilizer
• May 6, 2018

IMG_20180501_223828.jpg

• TheFertilizer
• May 6, 2018

IMG_20180501_221910.jpg

• TheFertilizer
• May 6, 2018

IMG_20180425_010317.jpg

• TheFertilizer
• Apr 25, 2018

In the meantime, I have been thinking about trying some LEDs

 

[Jackalope]

I lied when I said I was going to try a low light grow. I wanted to, really, I did LOL. Still to wrapped up in these high power lights. One thing to consider about light intensity is the when and the where.
This summer I had a totally different grow the I have had previously. Temperature has been a major concern. I did really good early on keeping temps down through veg and the first 5 weeks of flower. Now with nighttime temps being so high I am not getting any cool down time. That and the fact that there is so much plant mass in the tent now doesn't help either. Thing is the high wattage has did most of its work already. Growth has slowed down and buds are just working on maturing. To fight the heat I dropped my lights back to 750 Watts. 750 watts is enough to penetrate through the canopy I have. From bulb to bottom of growth is only 4 to 5 feet. Plenty of light is getting where it needs to be. If I had had to do that 2 or 3 weeks ago I might have lost weight. Doing it now shouldn't matter that much. Natural light intensity lessens as the season changes. Indoors is different for sure but a plant is a plant. In the end they don't "Need" intensity to finish up. The fact of what could go wrong with temps reaching 88 to 90 degrees. Far out weighs any bud mass I may loose with lower wattage.

 

[TorturedSoul]

There's always Fresca Sol water-cooled light fixture stuff. Get a large enough reservoir for it and you'd probably be able to keep ahead of the eight-ball. Some people probably just use a too-small one and dump/refill nightly, but that's a tremendous waste of water.

 

[Kip22]

My last go I ran 332 real watts under LED and yielded 7 oz so 1 gram per 1.69 watts which is okay I guess.

I had 1 sativa dom strain, "JT" I bred myself that produced about half and the rest came from 3 crop kings purple kush that were never happy from about week 2 on. If I planted all JT strain I've probably have been close to a gram per watt but I like to have variety and I know the 1 plant will give back enough.

 

[nobodyhere]

I run a max of 250w when possible via cobs in a 2x2.5 gorilla grow. Next one will be a 3x3.

Is 1gr a watt wet or dry?

I just added an outside of the tent veg light, single vero 100w dimmable 4000K. I run it at about 40w with three small plants under it.

 

[Old Fart]

I guess I would fall in with this group. I run a small 2x2x4 high tent with a mars reflector 48. It pulls about 100 Watts. Whether I grow 3 or 4 plants the yield is the same about 2 to 2 1/2 oz. ( seems to improve a bit each grow ). Costs very little to run, although money is really not a concern. I just like to grow and this supplies me with a small amount of a variety of strains

 

[TheFertilizer]

Speaking of very low lighting, I've got this little experiment running...

Experimental Journal: Extreme Low-Power Feminized Pollen Production

I run a max of 250w when possible via cobs in a 2x2.5 gorilla grow. Next one will be a 3x3.

Is 1gr a watt wet or dry?

I just added an outside of the tent veg light, single vero 100w dimmable 4000K. I run it at about 40w with three small plants under it.

I always count the dry weight. I'd be getting much better figures if counting wet haha

I guess I would fall in with this group. I run a small 2x2x4 high tent with a mars reflector 48. It pulls about 100 Watts. Whether I grow 3 or 4 plants the yield is the same about 2 to 2 1/2 oz. ( seems to improve a bit each grow ). Costs very little to run, although money is really not a concern. I just like to grow and this supplies me with a small amount of a variety of strains

That's pretty good though I have yet to top over 1.5 ounce per plant yet.

My last go I ran 332 real watts under LED and yielded 7 oz so 1 gram per 1.69 watts which is okay I guess.

I had 1 sativa dom strain, "JT" I bred myself that produced about half and the rest came from 3 crop kings purple kush that were never happy from about week 2 on. If I planted all JT strain I've probably have been close to a gram per watt but I like to have variety and I know the 1 plant will give back enough.

Seems like strain matters a lot, I've been trying to find a really high vigor strain to help out in the struggling yield department.

There's always Fresca Sol water-cooled light fixture stuff. Get a large enough reservoir for it and you'd probably be able to keep ahead of the eight-ball. Some people probably just use a too-small one and dump/refill nightly, but that's a tremendous waste of water.

Whoa, that seems pretty interesting. I don't know if I'd really trust water around my lights though. I once read about water-cooled lights in Jorge's book but never actually seen them available.

 

[GrizzWald]

Read first paragraph... I'm in, great idea for thread.... Now back to reading

 

[Vegan4life]

I guess I am in this category of lighting, although I haven't seen quantum boards mentioned here.

I am new to growing and just completed my first grow. After much reading I decided what my first grow would be, what light, what grow medium, nutrients, strain.

3 x 3 tent
4 plant scrog
coco 70%, perlite 30%, drain to waste, 10% to 20% run off every feed (fed twice per day)
5 gallon cloth pots
Advance nutrients sensi grow and bloom and supplements
Light, 260 watt XW Quantum board QB304,
I tried to keep light 14" above canopy for flower, around 18" during veg
Strain, 3 plants - Critical Kush, 1 plant - CBD Critical Mass
5 weeks veg (from seed to 12/12), Flower (approximately 70 days from 12/12 to harvest)

Yield:

262 grams of dry tops/ bud
180 grams dry lighter under the canopy buds. ( resinous & potent)
40 grams of sugar leaves

So 442 grams of dry bud total. 442 grams divided by 260 watts = 1.7 grams per watt

I will never grow in the summer again... I had to keep dehumidifier going and the AC on 24/7, electric bill off the charts...
Good thing is I have enough bud to last me a year and plenty to give away!

I will be starting my next grow in February 2019 and completing before summer heat and humidity. I am going to go organic with Clackamas Coot's method.

 

[TheFertilizer]

I guess I am in this category of lighting, although I haven't seen quantum boards mentioned here.

I am new to growing and just completed my first grow. After much reading I decided what my first grow would be, what light, what grow medium, nutrients, strain.

3 x 3 tent
4 plant scrog
coco 70%, perlite 30%, drain to waste, 10% to 20% run off every feed (fed twice per day)
5 gallon cloth pots
Advance nutrients sensi grow and bloom and supplements
Light, 260 watt XW Quantum board QB304,
I tried to keep light 14" above canopy for flower, around 18" during veg
Strain, 3 plants - Critical Kush, 1 plant - CBD Critical Mass
5 weeks veg (from seed to 12/12), Flower (approximately 70 days from 12/12 to harvest)

Yield:

262 grams of dry tops/ bud
180 grams dry lighter under the canopy buds. ( resinous & potent)
40 grams of sugar leaves

So 442 grams of dry bud total. 442 grams divided by 260 watts = 1.7 grams per watt

I will never grow in the summer again... I had to keep dehumidifier going and the AC on 24/7, electric bill off the charts...
Good thing is I have enough bud to last me a year and plenty to give away!

I will be starting my next grow in February 2019 and completing before summer heat and humidity. I am going to go organic with Clackamas Coot's method.

Wow that's a great yield just shy of a pound off one light? Very well done.

Just for keeping track of the score, 260/9 = 28 watts per square foot.

I have heard a lot of great things about the quantum boards. How much did that one run you?

 

[Vegan4life]

Thank you,

It was $357.99 US. Assembled and delivered. I was a bit leery during the grow, I can't argue with the final result...

I'll post some pics in a bit.

 

[TheFertilizer]

Thank you,

It was $357.99 US. Assembled and delivered. I was a bit leery during the grow, I can't argue with the final result...

I'll post some pics in a bit.

Do you happen to remember what your temps and RH were like throughout the grow?

 

[Vegan4life]

Temps were 72 -78, humidity 40% -60 %. I have 4 - 11" fans blowing down on plants 24/7 and one tower fan blowing below canopy 24/7, one 6" exhaust on top of tent runs 24/7 and one 8" exhaust with carbon filter for the room which is on a timer and exchanges air several times a day. I have a filter over a open window for air exchange.

I was checking and adjusting PH levels couple times a day. So much for PH perfect nutrients.

One night I turned off the AC, and left dehumidifier on, when I checked in on grow in the morning Temp was 105 in grow room! Never did that again...

I am using a insulated shed that I built (Man cave) for my grow room.

 

[Slowpuffer]

That one is pretty interesting! Honestly with a space that size and with that light, you have some pretty high light intensity. And that's a pretty big pot for the roots too. I think your biggest challenge will be keeping it from growing out of the space. Are you going with an autoflower or a photoperiod? I think that might be the perfect size to do a 12/12 from seed on a feminized seed.

Oh and as far as your setup goes, so it sounds like you're working with 45 watts/sq-ft. People who suggest to use the watts/sq-ft rule seem to suggest that actual watts matters more so I'm considering the 135 watts in that measure.

Personally I still really doubt that the watts/sq-ft guideline can really scale that well over different light types. Not all watts are output equally. I mean, people will readily admit that watt-for-watt CFL will not produce the same as HPS, and recognize that it's all about the par and spectrum difference, but then they will sit and insist that we only count LEDs for their actual draw wattage as if their hither PAR:watt ratio doesn't matter. I think it's because not all LEDs are really high quality, but in any case it draws into question how do you consider something like a 315 W CMH which tend to have much better PAR:watt ratio and spectrum than top of the line 400 W HPS lamps.

But in any case I hope maybe having more growers with low power lights chime in will help "show us the light"... Pun totally intended.

This looks like you've started an educational thread here, at least I'm hoping so. And as I was reading, It struck me, that i have one of each of the lights we're discussing. I have a 315w cmh on two plants (inzane in the membrane) & a 430w eye Hortilux on two plants, and yes, they're intermingling, in my 4x4x5.5 tent. Before I added the 315w. I lost my last crop, because the heat & humidity just overwhelmed me, even with a small room ac. So my current grow is basically 1st. time I'll be able to see how much more yield we get. Yield depends a lot on strain, and inzane in the membrane strain is new to me, so yield remains to be seen.
I have two more identical size tents, one with a 630w cmh Nanilux , which I only run during cold weather, as it creates lots of heat. The other I have an 4 ft., 8 bulb t5 and a 2 foot 4 bulb t5.
The wife & I live on SS, and some family help. I'm 76 & shes 69. We want to down size on lights, and are currently investigating quantum boards & cobb lighting. Before legalization It was not an issue to have a high electric bill, because the price for a Z was like $390, now, fast forward 2 yrs., people selling for $150, so these days, I just want to grow what we use. And I'm thinking that them QBs are for real. I'm seeing amazing results from the journals I've followed. LEDs, finally are for real, and the price is going down, down, down. But now I'm thinking how i will heat that tent, that my trusty 430w has been heating ?
Naturally, everyone likes a big harvest, but i don't concentrate on yield anymore, rather on keeping plants healthy, and just except what it gives me.
I will share one thing that I've learned using lec cmh light, they will burn your plants at a greater distance, compared to hps and tricomes will turn amber sooner under cmh.
Anyone on here ever grow this inzane in the membrane ?

Nah I figure discussing new lighting technologies would be part of this thread.

I'm trying out CMH personally. It has a very good color spectrum and higher PAR:watt ratio than even some LEDs of the same power factor. Some of the systems are a little spendy, like $300-$500, but I got a retrofit kit that uses a converter to adapt to my old hood, and then I Just plugged into the new CMH ballast. It came as a kit with a Phillips ColorMaster ( the bees knees of CMH ) for $200.

I bought the Sun system 315w cmh from Growers house for $250 .

 

[TorturedSoul]

LEDs, finally are for real, and the price is going down, down, down. But now I'm thinking how i will heat that tent, that my trusty 430w has been heating ?

There's no law that says you cannot mix your lighting to match your circumstances. If running "A" means you have to add supplemental heat (or more of it), but running "A" plus "B" or just B means you can do without extra heating... then it begins to make sense economically to go with the latter strategy.

I will share one thing that I've learned using lec cmh light, they will burn your plants at a greater distance, compared to hps and tricomes will turn amber sooner under cmh.

This is not going to hold true with every ceramic metal halide bulb, because a lot of them are, like many "regular" metal halide bulbs, intended for "people spaces" - such as retail stores - and in such cases, it becomes a good idea to block the bulb's UV output. But with CMH bulbs like the Eye Hortilux 315-watt CMH, the manufacturer intends the bulb to be used exclusively for growing plants and, therefore, the bulb is unjacketed... in other words, it is made in such a way that the bulb's UV output isn't blocked. And MH bulbs in general produce a fair bit more UV than HPS bulbs do. That might have something to do with what you have observed.

By the way, what ballast are you using to run your 430-watt HPS bulb? I used to use those (wattage) bulbs back in the '90s with core & coil (aka "magnetic") ballasts, but have not done so since. I loved them; the bulbs I used were the type with the extra blue element(?) that fired first, then the traditional HPS glow came on shortly afterwards as the ballasts... did whatever they do, lol. Best bulb in the 400-watt class I ever used in terms of short internodal distance and yield. Those ballasts have long since gone on to other people, sadly, but I do have one 400-watt Lumatek electronic ballast that I've thought about trying to get a 430-watt HPS bulb for. It has a "super lumen" switch which causes the ballast to use 430 watts, 450 watts, something like that. I assume it'd be all right with such bulbs, but that is just a guess. On the other hand, if I remember correctly, the parts list for my old ballast model had different part numbers than the same brand's 400-watt ones. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean anything; General Motors has been known to sell the exact same (type of) part at Chevrolet and Cadillac dealerships - under two different part numbers - with the Cadillac dealership charging 50% to 300% more than the Chevrolet dealership charged . So who knows? Not I, certainly.

Rambling (as per usual). . . .

 

[Slowpuffer]

There's no law that says you cannot mix your lighting to match your circumstances. If running "A" means you have to add supplemental heat (or more of it), but running "A" plus "B" or just B means you can do without extra heating... then it begins to make sense economically to go with the latter strategy.



This is not going to hold true with every ceramic metal halide bulb, because a lot of them are, like many "regular" metal halide bulbs, intended for "people spaces" - such as retail stores - and in such cases, it becomes a good idea to block the bulb's UV output. But with CMH bulbs like the Eye Hortilux 315-watt CMH, the manufacturer intends the bulb to be used exclusively for growing plants and, therefore, the bulb is unjacketed... in other words, it is made in such a way that the bulb's UV output isn't blocked. And MH bulbs in general produce a fair bit more UV than HPS bulbs do. That might have something to do with what you have observed.

By the way, what ballast are you using to run your 430-watt HPS bulb? I used to use those (wattage) bulbs back in the '90s with core & coil (aka "magnetic") ballasts, but have not done so since. I loved them; the bulbs I used were the type with the extra blue element(?) that fired first, then the traditional HPS glow came on shortly afterwards as the ballasts... did whatever they do, lol. Best bulb in the 400-watt class I ever used in terms of short internodal distance and yield. Those ballasts have long since gone on to other people, sadly, but I do have one 400-watt Lumatek electronic ballast that I've thought about trying to get a 430-watt HPS bulb for. It has a "super lumen" switch which causes the ballast to use 430 watts, 450 watts, something like that. I assume it'd be all right with such bulbs, but that is just a guess. On the other hand, if I remember correctly, the parts list for my old ballast model had different part numbers than the same brand's 400-watt ones. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean anything; General Motors has been known to sell the exact same (type of) part at Chevrolet and Cadillac dealerships - under two different part numbers - with the Cadillac dealership charging 50% to 300% more than the Chevrolet dealership charged . So who knows? Not I, certainly.

Rambling (as per usual). . . .

That 430 lumatek is the same ballast I have, I'm assuming. I've used It for over 5 years now with not one problem. but I do believe one 315 cmh will replace it.
While i certainly respect your knowledge, I must disagree about the cmh not changing trichcome colors sooner. Especially the 630w cmh, with one 3100 & one 4200. And will finish about one week sooner than a regular hps. I will now just buy single 315w, as It's much easier cover a space, if lights can be moved around. And the 630 produces to much heat to be run without overheating a 4x4 tent. Ha !! Right after I bought this light, they went to air cooled hoods !! Story of my life !!