Those look just great under the high cri. That's what the high CRI is all about, produce natural realistic looking (for us) colors. That is a result from the spectrum though, and is this case a MUCH better one if you use 3000.
2700-3000k at 90CRI is what people should be using instead of being blinded by luminous efficiency and picking 80cri 3500K. Those are the ones for fat colas. Especially buying 3500k and 4000k cri 80 and adding photo red show nicely how the lum/per watt at the light source epeen race leads to idiocracy. Buy lower color temp with cri 90 and you don't have to.
Buys led roughly 17% more efficient in producing light (top bin 3500k 80 cr vs , especially blue yellow orange, and ignores the cobs with the excellent spectrum for photosynthesis with a 640-660 peak
40% higher than the 80cri. Can buy grow light, buys bay lighting instead... All some Unlucky Brians material.
More stem elongation compared to more blue light is to be expected. It's not that big of a problem as people make it out to be though. And easy to fix by adding some cooler temp, or adding xpe for more blue. If you care about the effectiveness of efficient led you barely veg in a flower space anyway. When you have to choose only one, you obviously pick the best one for the two months flowering. And add steer lighting when necesary. That's one of the major advantages of led horticulturist and professional grow light designers are a lot more interested in.
Supra wrote a good post once with some key info:
The 80cri (and higher K) are better for warming up plants though lol
Rough, but should be obvious enough for those with more than half-a-brain:
View attachment 3694615
The 3500k and up users are mainly focussing on chlorophyll b. You're all running, as many others knew already, an efficient veg light. Which yes, can grow bud too, just like mh can. And yes, plenty of margin in efficiency to beat hps with it it gpw-wise but when you design a led grow light that is not the goal... The energy saving is inherent to led, you don't have to use a sub optimal spectrum.
The whole blue for veg and red for flower didn't fall out the sky... More blue is more compact plants, depending on R:FR ratio. In combination with daylight/fullspectrum, more FR is larger and thin leaf surface, more blue is smaller but thicker leaf surface.
This is still confirmed and researched daily by photobiologists for different plant species. As I said long ago, grow led is all about steer lighting. And the high cri version offer a very solid basis instead of the higher color and lower cri versions. Besides, as you all know, red light is way more efficient for the plant....
@Rahz: remember what I said about that the quest for lum efficiency should not lead to wasting space or light... Well here you go. That max ppfd depends on the quality of light as well. High ppfd with suboptimal spectrum leads to photoinhibition much faster. As is evident in the grows from people who claim cobs bring out the colors better... and follow that up with pics of plants showing the clear signs of photoinhibition. The unusual anthocyanin production to protect the plant against all that excess far less useful green and some blue (absorping those and removing those from the reflected spetrum, hence the red/purple appearance). At the same time it causes a decrease in quantum efficiency and reduction in net photosynthesis.
Malvidin is a common anthocyanin:
Moral of the story, most here are doing led all wrong and it's time you start talking plants instead of light source efficiency. Buy 3000k 90cri instead. Or the 2700k even, no spectrum data in the specs and may be overdoing it in terms of lowering blue,
Proper color, under hps of course:
View attachment 3694639
