The far red thread

testiclees

testiclees

Well-Known Member
PhotonFUD said:
Did not. It was the vendor's cult following that got it closed down. I just asked some simple questions regarding safety and product certification. After that I was labelled one of the four horsemen of the apocalypse.

My apologies for participating in that thread. I really don't understand the problem as the vendor didn't really produce anything, in either his purported 'grows' or lighting products, that couldn't be had far better and less costly elsewhere.
Click to expand...
This shrill, cowardly plea for attention is pitiable. Creepy half wit who has established zero credibility go back to your 12 step assholism program.
 
Hybridway

Hybridway

Well-Known Member
Does anyone here agree that 730's should be incorporated into our LEDs during lights on for the full daytime schedule?
My lights have them but not many. I feel that what our LEDs lack the most is The IR in HPS & the UV in MH.
My HPS bud is huge & my MH bud is purple. Combined they are huge & purple. Now combine that w/ the great full spectrum of cobs, further enhancing them Even more so then we are now. Efficiency aside.
The HPS (IR) allows me for quite a bit of second growth spurt.
Excuse me if this had been discussed previously in this thread. I was following along & participating awhile ago n haven't checked in since.
 
Last edited:
MrTwist1

MrTwist1

Well-Known Member
GreenSanta said:
As anyone done several side by side experiments with or without far red? I would be willing to try if I saw concrete evidence but I feel the 3590s perform so well I can simply focus on the growing, try to improve my soil...
Click to expand...
I haven't done a side by side, but I have run the same cut with and without far reds at lights out, and it finishes faster with the far reds. I am confident enough in it's effectiveness that I personally wouldn't even bother to run a side by side to test for faster flowering.

How much it can affect stretch and yield etc remains to be seen, but the possibilities seem interesting.
 
I

ichabod crane

Well-Known Member
I have found that I dont come on here as much as I did before some butt hole troll implied a bunch of BS on GGs thread and got it locked. Crap that he/she/it was asked over and over to back up with proof which it refused to do.

Coming on here I see it is still posting. If this site had half a brain it would boot it before all of the followers left. Guess I wont be on here anytime soon.

GGs thread was really the biggest draw for me on here.
 
Icemud420

Icemud420

Well-Known Member
Hey Everyone... so after running the 14/10 with 2 hrs of Far Red after lights out, and still no flowers I think its safe to say this method doesn't work. I moved my timers to 12/12, have the Far red running for 15 minutes after lights out, 15 minutes before lights on, and for 1 hour a peak daylight (emerson effect to help with mid day depression). Currently after the change I am on day 3 of flowering from when I went 12/12. Lots of stretch on the indica dom's but the sativa dom's don't seem to be effected much.
 
Abiqua

Abiqua

Well-Known Member
The problem with side by side is huge variability in control. Studies are designed to isolate a control by eliminating variables. Side by sides are not this. Too many variables, that essentially don't allow a control to isolated, therefore skewing results in a number of directions.....

One example, two cuttings from same mom, same "controls", different results. Epigenetic effects should be considered as well, what role does the evironment play on the genome development...., the list goes on and on, why a side by side, proves hardly nothing, not from trying but because the Methodology is flawed to begin with.

They probably offer some anecdotal evidence, but what?
 
Evil-Mobo

Evil-Mobo

Well-Known Member
Abiqua said:
The problem with side by side is huge variability in control. Studies are designed to isolate a control by eliminating variables. Side by sides are not this. Too many variables, that essentially don't allow a control to isolated, therefore skewing results in a number of directions.....

One example, two cuttings from same mom, same "controls", different results. Epigenetic effects should be considered as well, what role does the evironment play on the genome development...., the list goes on and on, why a side by side, proves hardly nothing, not from trying but because the Methodology is flawed to begin with.

They probably offer some anecdotal evidence, but what?
Click to expand...
This is why I said screw it and have tested everything that interest me in my own garden so I can see what "works for me" not because "someone said so" :blsmoke:
 
wietefras

wietefras

Well-Known Member
Side-by-side is at least better than consecutive grows. Or having no control at all. Especially the latter seems to be very popular. "Oh look the plants look nice. See it works great" - is what you can read in just about every Mars Hydro grow report.

Of course not growing two plants next to each other, but two grows (in separate) spaces where you try to control all the other variables to be as similar as possible.

If the difference is big it will show. If not then who cares, or do the test more than once to average out other influences..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top