ttystikk
Well-Known Member
And the best part is that it isn't even hard or terribly time consuming to do.
Have any of you DIY COB Growers finished a crop under 1000W DE HPS? - POLL
- Thread starter OneHitDone
- Start date
testiclees
Well-Known Member
This is a post by @Queece from over in the HPS killer thread. In my view it addresses "penetration" in a persuasive way:
benbud89 said: ↑
in all honesty, how do you feel the lower buds are coming along? just as developed as those in the canopy? Im asking about penetration to learn, becuase things look a little packed. I do not try to be a bother. Thanks for sharing.
Queece:
Hey man, penetration isn't really a thing. Cannabis leaves absorb 90% of visible light that contact them, the way you get penetration with cobs is diffusion. Run your chips bare, have a lot of them, and use light baffles like reflective walls to keep photons in. What you're going for in cob builds is a lot of overlap with the beam-angles in an enclosed space. Lowers receive plenty of light if you have lots of light to give. I love tents for this reason, you can basically think about your light like filling the space up with a liquid with higher pressure on top and lower on the bottom.
What really matters is how much energy (in the form of photons) is being encapsulated. I was just up at my buddy's new facility in Michigan and he's got cooltubes running along the perimeter walls of a 13x20 and some shitty 300W spiderman leds in the middle of the room. I've used the exact same lights without having 10,000 watts in the same room and got shitty larf everywhere. These looked like they were under 1000W lights, but they weren't even close to the hoods. The massive amount of energy being ambivalently pumped from all sides of the room, even with low energy diffraction, is enough to excite huge growth.
What you have to realize, with cobs or anything else, is that you can't cheat thermodynamics. What is most important isn't optics, spectrum, or chip, it's wattage. There is a ceiling though for what a plant can use, if you stay right at that ceiling, regardless of what you're using, you will get a very similar result: hps, cob, plasma, induction, doesn't really matter. It's all energy, cobs are just the most efficacious way of delivering it without heat complications.
cdgmoney250
Well-Known Member
Yes.
And you are incorrect in your assumption that resin production can only be increased adding UV light.
Different light sources affect plants differently.
Nope, no UV. Most of us are aware of what the SPD of our COBs looks like, as well as traditional HID.
Cree 3500K (courtesy of GreeneGene707)
Traditional lighting
This massive difference in spectrum makes a difference to the plants too.
I have personally seen the same strain get frostier under the same light intensity, but different quality of light.
I'm not talking schwag to dank, I just said more resin production.
Like I said... LEDs are NOT a secret weapon for growing dank plants. But, the plants seem to perform better when given a fuller spectrum to utilize. If you match light intensity, plants react better to a spectrum that is closer to nature.
Just an observation of personal experience.
Yodaweed
Well-Known Member
You are simply wrong, LED's don't make more resin. I have done side by side comparisons using clones from the same plant, weed is the same. If that was the case blurple LEDs would be the best kind, you are simply speaking non-sense.
Last edited:
Yodaweed
Well-Known Member
UV is the only type of light that is proven to increase resin production, because it harms the plant and in response to the damaging rays the plant produces more trics to protect itself. That's a proven fact...this magical spectrum with unicorns and magic gpw numbers just doesn't exist...get real guys.
cdgmoney250
Well-Known Member
That's cool. So did I.
Different results in my case.
LED was better. Difference wasn't huge, but it was noticeable.
Thanks for telling me how MY results went from MY grow.
You should study up on light physics and plant biology/physiology. And stop reading Jorge Cervantes Grow Bible.
Yodaweed
Well-Known Member
If the spectrum was all that mattered than blurple lights would be best, they had the most complete spectrum, its obvious LED's trying to go towards HID lighting, more intensity at the expensive of lesser a spectrum.
Mr. Candiano
Active Member
Strain temp Co2 nutes humidity ect....... It's all in the environment. You have your environment dialed in you'll have quality medicine, if you have good genetics.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
Wellllllll... not exactly. If you're pushing enough that it hurts your plants then it's too much. Stories abound of people blasting their poor ladies into complete shock and no growth at all!
I read a fascinating paper about the trichomes themselves, wherein the author believed that the spherical shape of it made it a lens for focusing light onto the pad at the base of the ball on the stalk. It seems that several wavelengths are active including but not limited to UVB.
His conclusions were that UV supplementation is helpful, B is better than A, and many other wavelengths appear to help.
So the trick is low levels of UV throughout the cycle for best effect. This works no matter what the light source being supplemented.
If I decide my buds are weak from lack of UV, it's trivial for me to add some. We'll run without and see how we like it.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
As the price of COB LED comes down, this debate will cease. The excess HVAC requirements will demand it.
Mr. Candiano
Active Member
I hear that anything to become more efficient keeping quality and yeild.
Abiqua
Well-Known Member
resin aka terpinoids, haven't all been identified completely, let alone have a standard to test at different parameters...so how can you know for surety's sake that a terp profile is only influenced by UV, if they haven't all been found? that's a little perplexing....possibly is more like it..........
Fact and opinion get confused regularly around these parts.
Fact and opinion get confused regularly around these parts.
cdgmoney250
Well-Known Member
You clearly don't know shit about plants.
And you clearly don't know how read a Spectral Distribution Graph either.
If you took the time to learn more about light "in general" and how plants use it, this would not even be a discussion.
You sir, are CLUELESS.
Pick up a book with real plant science to get your fundamentals down. Stop believing in stoner science marketing.
And you clearly don't know how read a Spectral Distribution Graph either.
If you took the time to learn more about light "in general" and how plants use it, this would not even be a discussion.
You sir, are CLUELESS.
Pick up a book with real plant science to get your fundamentals down. Stop believing in stoner science marketing.
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
This. Because it will always be easier to manage environmental conditions around more efficient lighting.
cdgmoney250
Well-Known Member
Sunlight is the only magical spectrum I know of.
Which grow lights have a closer resemblance to the sun?
ttystikk
Well-Known Member
I AM SOOOOOOOO STEALING THIS!
LIGHTS
NUTES
SOILS
AC
ALL OF IT!
Learn some science and you'll be shaking your head every time you walk into a 'hydro' store.
Mr. Candiano
Active Member
Yes Sr. and that = money saved money earned
Blurple lights are missing important parts of the spectrum. Even NASA knows this now. Plants respond better to white light. It is also proven that uvb does increase trichome production but I have never seen it proven that is the only way to increase them (two seperate things).
My thoughts on the overall debate are that we could look to combine the two different sources as long as they are mutually beneficial to the grow environment. Use hps for blasting the centers and make cob bars for the corners and perimeters. Saving money on initial expense (possibly reusing existing equipment) while capturing the benefits of each hps and led.
nevergoodenuf
Well-Known Member
In less than 5 months there will be COBs with UV. So this argument will be obsolete soon.