Volksball's First Grow: White Widow Feminized Grow Journal 2018

Hi again, Emilya.

So I've read a bunch about topping, FIMing and Uncle Ben. Like every topic surrounding growing, there are a million different opinions. Yours is clear and seemingly one that is shared by many.

Like you've advised, I'll wait until my 5th node shoots up further before I snip off what looks to be half my plant. Yikes!

My questions is, why not have 6 colas over 4? Some say topping at 3-4 creates 6 main colas. You say 4-5. I trust your research, just asking questions to better educate myself on the 'why'. I think I may know the answer: many colas equates to less weight per, while fewer concentrates more energy to less growth sites, creating more yeild per? Maybe not, but it seems to be the only justification I can think of.

I attached a picture of someone's plant online who swears by leaving more plant and creating more colas. Is that not what I'm hoping for?

Thx again.
 

Attachments

  • harvest-day-cfl-grow.jpg
    harvest-day-cfl-grow.jpg
    589.5 KB · Views: 40
yes, more means less per... but more overall. The problem with cutting at 3-4 is that while it might have the potential to create 6 tops, it rarely does. I have one in my garden now [the continuation of my long term experiment with 3-4] that just achieved 5, but it took a good 6 days for her to wake up again after the cut... this cut acts quite a bit like a FIM... it takes forever to resolve and you are never sure what will happen. I have had cut 3-4 give me 4 and I have had it give me only 3... have never seen 2 from that cut and most typically see 5.... but again, that cut always takes extra long to resolve and I am not certain that 5 over 4 gives much appreciable increase in yield. I have found that I get better consistency and better overall control over the shape of my plants in flower, with the 2-3 Uncle Ben cut.
 
Emilya said:
yes, more means less per... but more overall. The problem with cutting at 3-4 is that while it might have the potential to create 6 tops, it rarely does. I have one in my garden now [the continuation of my long term experiment with 3-4] that just achieved 5, but it took a good 6 days for her to wake up again after the cut... this cut acts quite a bit like a FIM... it takes forever to resolve and you are never sure what will happen. I have had cut 3-4 give me 4 and I have had it give me only 3... have never seen 2 from that cut and most typically see 5.... but again, that cut always takes extra long to resolve and I am not certain that 5 over 4 gives much appreciable increase in yield. I have found that I get better consistency and better overall control over the shape of my plants in flower, with the 2-3 Uncle Ben cut.
Click to expand...

Ok. Thanks for clarifying. I may, for experimental purposes, cut two at 2-3 and one at 3-4 to see differences and growth results.

Could you tell me then, how, in the above picture, or in many floating around the net, do people achieve 10 or more colas? And again, is that desirable over the guaranteed 4 from the UB method?
 
First you go for the first 4 main kolas.. then as they start going vertical, you top each of those growth tips, creating now 8 main kolas. Then all the secondary and tertiary nodes start rising up to reach the canopy, up to 16 of them... and they can also be topped at the growth tips, doubling their number. A little bit of careful trimming with the snips can create a monster plant... the trick isn't so much in creating all of those tops, but in creating a shape that can support all those tops. Again, that is why this low profile 2-3 cut and then spreading those tips out to the 4 quadrants is so desirable... it makes for a very sturdy low slung yet very complex plant.
 
Once you start increasing the number of buds and grow this thing out in veg, they say that every extra week in veg doubles your final yield. That right there is why people do this. If you want the plant to concentrate on 1 to 4 spectacular buds and put everything it can into them, going for the best quality you can produce, you have that option... and if quantity is more of a concern, you can go for the larger more complex plant. Frankly, at most people's skill levels and in commercial soils, it is hard to tell a quality difference between the two methods anyway, so most people default to going for more quantity.
 
Emilya said:
First you go for the first 4 main kolas.. then as they start going vertical, you top each of those growth tips, creating now 8 main kolas. Then all the secondary and tertiary nodes start rising up to reach the canopy, up to 16 of them... and they can also be topped at the growth tips, doubling their number. A little bit of careful trimming with the snips can create a monster plant... the trick isn't so much in creating all of those tops, but in creating a shape that can support all those tops. Again, that is why this low profile 2-3 cut and then spreading those tips out to the 4 quadrants is so desirable... it makes for a very sturdy low slung yet very complex plant.
Click to expand...

Ahhhhhh... I get it now. Thanks. This is why I voted you the member of the month :)

So then, as you've suggested, I may do all three with the 2-3 method, as I have the room to spread out wide (3 plants in a 5x5) and train to grow wide and flat. I like the idea of creating three 'monster' plants. They'll be in 7 gal pots so will likely have a base/space that can support outward, monstrous growth without tipping over.

Good plan?
 
volksball said:
I may, for experimental purposes, cut two at 2-3 and one at 3-4 to see differences and growth results.
Click to expand...
Experimentation, if possible, is always my best advice to a new grower of weeds.
Question everything, test what you can. - Wee'zard
 
volksball said:
Ahhhhhh... I get it now. Thanks. This is why I voted you the member of the month :)

So then, as you've suggested, I may do all three with the 2-3 method, as I have the room to spread out wide (3 plants in a 5x5) and train to grow wide and flat. I like the idea of creating three 'monster' plants. They'll be in 7 gal pots so will likely have a base/space that can support outward, monstrous growth without tipping over.

Good plan?
Click to expand...
Excellent plan... let's make it happen.
 
I
Emilya said:
Once you start increasing the number of buds and grow this thing out in veg, they say that every extra week in veg doubles your final yield. That right there is why people do this. If you want the plant to concentrate on 1 to 4 spectacular buds and put everything it can into them, going for the best quality you can produce, you have that option... and if quantity is more of a concern, you can go for the larger more complex plant. Frankly, at most people's skill levels and in commercial soils, it is hard to tell a quality difference between the two methods anyway, so most people default to going for more quantity.
Click to expand...
I suppose I'll be able to make those decisions as I go. The preliminary decisions are seemimgly the same. If quality and quantity aren't too far apart, I, like you've mentioned may go for the former, believing the quality to still be good. Cross that bridge when I get there, I suppose.
 
Good morning,

As a continuation to our conversation yesterday, I've added a few pictures of the girls' bottoms. Ha. To make sure, the small leaves or nodes above the cotyledons is the first node? Or is the pruning above two sets of large fan leaves above it? It seems like a very short plant if I trim the plant just above the first set of large fan leaves, leaving the cotyledons, the very small node and the first fan leaves. Is that correct?

Thanks.
 

Attachments

  • 20181221_065525.jpg
    20181221_065525.jpg
    700 KB · Views: 33
  • 20181221_065520.jpg
    20181221_065520.jpg
    630 KB · Views: 23
  • 20181221_065507.jpg
    20181221_065507.jpg
    721.5 KB · Views: 38
In that first picture, the internodal length between 1 and 2 is extremely short.. must have been some very bright light at that point in the grow....compared to a much longer space on the other plants. I am not sure I could bring myself to cut her at 2-3 either, and I think this one would be good to experiment with the 3-4 cut because of that. Can't see #2 very well, but #3 looks to be a good candidate for 2-3.
And yes, cotyledons don't count, the first true leaves are node 1.
 
volksball said:
Ah I see, your guide says not to use tap. Would synth nutes and city water not be better? Or are the synth nutes just reversing a correction? So many swear by the synth nutes. I suppose it's a matter of philosophy.
Click to expand...
yes, and I apologize for inconsistencies in my work as I gained more experience. I also had to write an addendum to that piece once I got a better understanding of watering requirements in flower. I, like you, learn a little more about this every day. When I first wrote that piece, I was very concerned about the chlorine in my water, thinking that I was killing all of the organics in my soil. When I finally realized that in a synthetic grow everything was temporary anyway, and nothing was really living long term in my soil, I no longer worried about the chlorine in the tap water. The hydro folks don't have that option... they need pure water. The organic living soil folks also need non chlorinated water... but admittedly, those early thoughts about chlorine in the water were incorrect.
Not sure I am understanding your question about synthetic nutes though... unless you are growing organically with no need for ready made synthetic nutes, I see nothing wrong with them. Used correctly the salt based nutrient lines are wonderful and it is no wonder that many people pick a brand and swear by it.
 
Emilya said:
yes, and I apologize for inconsistencies in my work as I gained more experience. I also had to write an addendum to that piece once I got a better understanding of watering requirements in flower. I, like you, learn a little more about this every day. When I first wrote that piece, I was very concerned about the chlorine in my water, thinking that I was killing all of the organics in my soil. When I finally realized that in a synthetic grow everything was temporary anyway, and nothing was really living long term in my soil, I no longer worried about the chlorine in the tap water. The hydro folks don't have that option... they need pure water. The organic living soil folks also need non chlorinated water... but admittedly, those early thoughts about chlorine in the water were incorrect.
Not sure I am understanding your question about synthetic nutes though... unless you are growing organically with no need for ready made synthetic nutes, I see nothing wrong with them. Used correctly the salt based nutrient lines are wonderful and it is no wonder that many people pick a brand and swear by it.
Click to expand...
Oh ok. Thanks for the clarification.

If the nutes/water that I've chosen weren't any good, it'd be too late now. I do like the learning process this hobby provides; it's quick and seemingly logical, so I feel successful more often than not, and who doesn't like that?
 
Emilya said:
In that first picture, the internodal length between 1 and 2 is extremely short.. must have been some very bright light at that point in the grow....compared to a much longer space on the other plants. I am not sure I could bring myself to cut her at 2-3 either, and I think this one would be good to experiment with the 3-4 cut because of that. Can't see #2 very well, but #3 looks to be a good candidate for 2-3.
And yes, cotyledons don't count, the first true leaves are node 1.
Click to expand...
Oh, so the measure isnt the size of the leaves so much, but the distance between nodes. Interesting. Sorry for the crumby pic - I lack vision and clarity at 6am. Ha.

Would it be too much to maybe train them a bit to increase the internoadal length a bit before topping? Or might that leave it too long and cause damage?

To be clear, I've attached pictures again with marks drawn where I understand 2-3 to be. Maybe you can confirm for me. Only two unfortunately - #3 tells us nothing.

Thx.
 

Attachments

  • 20181221_083538.jpg
    20181221_083538.jpg
    691.4 KB · Views: 26
  • 20181221_083814.jpg
    20181221_083814.jpg
    718.3 KB · Views: 28
volksball said:
Oh, so the measure isnt the size of the leaves so much, but the distance between nodes. Interesting. Sorry for the crumby pic - I lack vision and clarity at 6am. Ha.

Would it be too much to maybe train them a bit to increase the internoadal length a bit before topping? Or might that leave it too long and cause damage?

To be clear, I've attached pictures again with marks drawn where I understand 2-3 to be. Maybe you can confirm for me. Only two unfortunately - #3 tells us nothing.

Thx.
Click to expand...
Yes, I believe you are counting correctly, but I am like you.. I am not sure I could do it to that short one. I would go the next node up on that one if it were mine. They will stretch a bit later on, but not much you can do about that first one right now... I would top it further up just to get it done at this point and then you get to see what 3-4 does.
 
Emilya said:
Yes, I believe you are counting correctly, but I am like you.. I am not sure I could do it to that short one. I would go the next node up on that one if it were mine. They will stretch a bit later on, but not much you can do about that first one right now... I would top it further up just to get it done at this point and then you get to see what 3-4 does.
Click to expand...
Ok, perfect. Thank you.
 
Back
Top Bottom