60w Led Lights As Supplimenta Lighting

[DrBlaze]

Is a consensus beginning to develop that the 2700k is not as good as the 4000k/4400k? Is the 2700k a grandfathered idea originating from when most everything was HPS?

Absolutely not. Most people building flowering lights are going with 3000k. Some slightly lower, some slightly higher. If they're vegging with it as well, some choose to go 3500k.

There are a few people flowering with 4000k, but I think most would say that 4000k has more blue than is ideal for flowering. I've flowered with 4000k in cmh and I can attest that you will get some great bud, but you'll get more weight with 3000k and a lower leaf to calyx ratio.

 

[Randomblame]

Wavelength and spectrum are two different pair shoes. Best flower spectrum is 3.000°k, while 4.000-5.000°k is better for veg. But you can use 3000°k also for vegging or 5000°k for flower. C. adapts itself as it is very flexible and under almost every spectrum it can be made to bloom. You like monster sativas but don't have enough headroom, 5000°k is the solution.

 

[JSheeze]

Wavelength and spectrum are two different pair shoes. Best flower spectrum is 3.000°k, while 4.000-5.000°k is better for veg. But you can use 3000°k also for vegging or 5000°k for flower. C. adapts itself as it is very flexible and under almost every spectrum it can be made to bloom. You like monster sativas but don't have enough headroom, 5000°k is the solution.

WV(nm) = 2,897,768/{(Colortemp(°k)}



Chlorophyll a:
2897768 / 445nm = 6512°k
2897768 / 660nm = 4390°k

Chlorophyll b:
2897768 / 480nm = 6037°k
2897768 / 620nm = 4674°k

Figuring for WV:
2897768 / (2700°k) = 1073nm
2897768 / (3000°k) = 966nm
2897768 / (3900°k) = 743nm

So this is what I was trying to articulate before:

Chlorophyll a
(445nm) x [1.5] = (667nm)
Then...
(667nm) x [1.5] = (1001nm)
1001nm ~ 2895°k

Chlorophyll b:
(480nm) x [1.25] = (600nm)
Then...
(600nm) x [1.25] = (750nm)
750nm ~ 3864°k

Is there a proportional relationship between the different WV's and chlorophyll absorption?

Like are our heavy red spectrum (2700-3200) lights in terms of energy absorbed, the same to our plants as their "documented" optimal spectral ranges(445nm/665nm)? Could someone take it a factor further? For chlorophyll a, if 445nm x 1.5 equals 665nm and that in turn multiplied by the same factor, 1.5, equals 1001nm (2894°k), well then could we do it one more time? 1000*1.5 equals 1500nm or 1930°k. Could we produce the plant even better? Even heavier? Would chlorophyll a like that like it does the previous factors?

I'm wondering if there's something to this, and that's why folks are having success with 4000k/5000k flowering? Because the chlorophyll b really likes 480nm, 620nm(4674°k), (and if multiplied by another factor of 1.25, 750nm, or 3864k?

Curious if anyone else has thought about such things our if it's been researched somewhere, or if I'm totally off! Lol

So I guess has anyone grown with 1500nm, or ~ 1930°k (chlorophyll a)? And the next factor further than we typically use for chlorophyll b would be (750 * 1.25) ~ 935nm or 3100°k, which is already used. So anyone ever use <2000°k to bloom? Results?? Do they make LED's under 2000°k?

 

[It's not oregano]

Was that approx 12 lights then (6/lady)? How big was your growing surface area? Do you think having 2 plants take up your canopy area affected your yield (positively, negatively, neutral) vs the same canopy area utilized but using a different number of ladies, eg. 1, 2, 3, 4??? I liked your grow and been thinking about designing a new light for a single lady scrog 2'x2'. I've heard that > 7200lm/sq ft is ideal (not sure if they were referencing cfls though, or all lights). I was thinking 9 x Sunthin 40w (4000lm) in a [(3 light) x (3 light)] grid to cover a 2'x2' (4sq ft) canopy. 36,000lm (2700k) divided by 4sq ft is 9000lm/sq ft & 360watts. I feel like that is quite a bit of light even though it's only 9k/. I've seen journals where they are using 160lm/w COBs and people were commenting about how much light this guy had, but when you did the math it was only 7k/ but his ladies looked nice. So is 9k/ Overkill? What were you at (light saturation) when you hit your 1.35g/w? Is that typical for you (give or take for different strains)? When you had that success have you tried to continue with the same process? Grown any different strains under your households? Lol I know a shit load of questions, thanks ahead of time haha

Wow, talk about a wall of questions coming at me! No problem with questions mate, it's how we all learn on here. I'll try to answer them for you.

Was that approx 12 lights then (6/lady) - yes, 12 lights with globes ripped off spread in a 6x2 evenly over the cab. 2 plants under them evenly spaced so 6 lights each, but it is a small area and I have diamond Mylar on the walls, there is a lot of overlapping and reflected light so zero shadows.

How big was your growing surface area? - Converted set of drawers with internal dimensions of 28" wide by 15" deep x 32" high. That is 2.875 square ft growing surface area.

Do you think having 2 plants take up your canopy area affected your yield. - I can get 2x 10 litre pots in my cabinet with a heater, with zero floor space left. I grow autos mainly in cooler months as I can keep the lights on longer so I don't need to heat as much ( grow is in unheated concrete detached garage in UK), so put the autos in biggest pots I can get in. The pots literally can just fit in depth ways. I have tried a 5L pot auto once under these lights but only got 2 oz from it.
2 plants fill the space totally, 1 auto would leave space unused - I grow illegally for my MS suffering wife, so I need the best return I can get per grow in such a small space. 3 plants in there might get good results in smaller pots, but probably only same end weight total. I may as well save a seed and grow 2 that fill it.

I've heard that > 7200lm/sq ft is ideal - with globes off I have been told output goes up 20%, so I am getting roughly 21600 lumens over 2.85 sq ft. So about 7500 on/sq ft.

What were you at (light saturation) when you hit your 1.35g/w?- I have no idea what that light is in par etc as these bulbs don't have data sheets, but the plants liked it. Watts per sq ft is 54, which I have read is about ideal. I might get a lux meter app on my phone to see what readings are if they are reliable to use.

Is that typical for you (give or take for different strains)? When you had that success have you tried to continue with the same process? Grown any different strains under your households? - That grow was my 5th grow ever! It was also my first time ever with 2 of the same strain, always just got 1 seed before.
I did one Northern light photo under 180w CFL (6x 30w) - struggled with heat, overwatering, gnats, over feeding, you name it I did it. Got 1 oz
Swapped to 8x led and got 2 oz per plant with 2x autos.
Tried scrogging 2 x photos and got 2 oz each so decided the extra time wasn't worth it for photos under that setup.
Swapped to the current lights, upgraded to a proper extractor fan instead of pc fans and did 1 auto in a 5L pot and one in a 10L. The 5L got 2 oz but the Short stuff Sharkbite didn't auto and I had to flip it to 12/12 when the other plant was harvested. It ended up growing past the lights, even with bending the stems etc. I got 101g from it but it was a bloody nightmare grow and not what I would have planned.
Truthfully, the last grow was the first real grow I have done with my setup how i want it, with the plants growing how I intended them to. I have literally just started another comparison grow run by The Vault Seedstore, using 2x Mephisto 3 Bears OG plants, with the exact same setup, so we will see if last time was luck or no. About 3/4 way down.

https://www.rollitup.org/t/the-vaults-3-bear-og-auto-comparative-grow-in-association-with-mephisto-genetics.950971/page-7

 

[JSheeze]

Wow, talk about a wall of questions coming at me! No problem with questions mate, it's how we all learn on here. I'll try to answer them for you.

Was that approx 12 lights then (6/lady) - yes, 12 lights with globes ripped off spread in a 6x2 evenly over the cab. 2 plants under them evenly spaced so 6 lights each, but it is a small area and I have diamond Mylar on the walls, there is a lot of overlapping and reflected light so zero shadows.

How big was your growing surface area? - Converted set of drawers with internal dimensions of 28" wide by 15" deep x 32" high. That is 2.875 square ft growing surface area.

Do you think having 2 plants take up your canopy area affected your yield. - I can get 2x 10 litre pots in my cabinet with a heater, with zero floor space left. I grow autos mainly in cooler months as I can keep the lights on longer so I don't need to heat as much ( grow is in unheated concrete detached garage in UK), so put the autos in biggest pots I can get in. The pots literally can just fit in depth ways. I have tried a 5L pot auto once under these lights but only got 2 oz from it.
2 plants fill the space totally, 1 auto would leave space unused - I grow illegally for my MS suffering wife, so I need the best return I can get per grow in such a small space. 3 plants in there might get good results in smaller pots, but probably only same end weight total. I may as well save a seed and grow 2 that fill it.

I've heard that > 7200lm/sq ft is ideal - with globes off I have been told output goes up 20%, so I am getting roughly 21600 lumens over 2.85 sq ft. So about 7500 on/sq ft.

What were you at (light saturation) when you hit your 1.35g/w?- I have no idea what that light is in par etc as these bulbs don't have data sheets, but the plants liked it. Watts per sq ft is 54, which I have read is about ideal. I might get a lux meter app on my phone to see what readings are if they are reliable to use.

Is that typical for you (give or take for different strains)? When you had that success have you tried to continue with the same process? Grown any different strains under your households? - That grow was my 5th grow ever! It was also my first time ever with 2 of the same strain, always just got 1 seed before.
I did one Northern light photo under 180w CFL (6x 30w) - struggled with heat, overwatering, gnats, over feeding, you name it I did it. Got 1 oz
Swapped to 8x led and got 2 oz per plant with 2x autos.
Tried scrogging 2 x photos and got 2 oz each so decided the extra time wasn't worth it for photos under that setup.
Swapped to the current lights, upgraded to a proper extractor fan instead of pc fans and did 1 auto in a 5L pot and one in a 10L. The 5L got 2 oz but the Short stuff Sharkbite didn't auto and I had to flip it to 12/12 when the other plant was harvested. It ended up growing past the lights, even with bending the stems etc. I got 101g from it but it was a bloody nightmare grow and not what I would have planned.
Truthfully, the last grow was the first real grow I have done with my setup how i want it, with the plants growing how I intended them to. I have literally just started another comparison grow run by The Vault Seedstore, using 2x Mephisto 3 Bears OG plants, with the exact same setup, so we will see if last time was luck or no. About 3/4 way down.

https://www.rollitup.org/t/the-vaults-3-bear-og-auto-comparative-grow-in-association-with-mephisto-genetics.950971/page-7

Thanks! U da man!

 

[Psyphish]

For my veg and clone tents I've given up CFLs long ago, and swapped to cheap E27 cobs mixed with blurples.
I've tried about a dozen types of E27 socket leds of ebay, these are my two favs.
They advertise 15w cobs and 27w blurples, but both pull 4.8w at the wall. Yet they are pretty epic.

Best ebay cheap e27 cobs:
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/Dimmable-E27-E14-GU10-MR16-LED-Spot-Light-Bulbs-15W-COB-Natural-Cool-Warm-White/262353454681?hash=item3d157c0659:m:mQTAduML5gOqY0yHw0Kz3RQ

Best ebay cheap e27 blurples:
http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/AU-28W-E27-LED-Plant-Grow-Light-Efficient-Hydroponic-Full-Spectrum-Growing-Lamp/253052721825?epid=2085548179&hash=item3aeb1e1aa1:g:CvAAAOSwlfxXGgR9

Better e27 splitters than you are using, allowing directionality:
https://www.ebay.com.au/itm/3-4-5-in-1-E27-Adjustable-Base-Light-Lamp-Bulb-Socket-Splitter-Adapter-Holder/182401152734?hash=item2a77f4b6de:m:m18eFJnvuHcnzoMA5T3rjCg

Hard to believe those tiny E27 spots could be any good. There is no way that blurple spot is 28w without any kind of heat sink. I've bought locally made 20w 4000K spots that supposedly put out 2452 lumens, they get really hot and have a huge chunk of metal in them.

ps. loving the white spots though, I have 4x20w in my 1sqft tent and an 18w Philips flowering bulb that has far red and deep red. The Philips bulb is bigger, heavier and even hotter than the 20w white spots.

 

[JSheeze]

ps. loving the white spots though, I have 4x20w in my 1sqft tent and an 18w Philips flowering bulb that has far red and deep red. The Philips bulb is bigger, heavier and even hotter than the 20w white spots.

Hey, do you happen to know the number of LED's (individual) per wavelength band for your 18w far red & deep red? If you pop the globe off how many far red & deep red diodes do you count out of the whole array? Obviously don't do it if you don't want, just curious what the spectrum distribution for that one looks like. Do you know how far red? Or how heavy on far red? Sorry so scattered I just saw your post and a lil groggy.

 

[Psyphish]

Hey, do you happen to know the number of LED's (individual) per wavelength band for your 18w far red & deep red? If you pop the globe off how many far red & deep red diodes do you count out of the whole array? Obviously don't do it if you don't want, just curious what the spectrum distribution for that one looks like. Do you know how far red? Or how heavy on far red? Sorry so scattered I just saw your post and a lil groggy.

Honestly, I have no idea on the specific wavelengths. I doubt the bulb is any good, it's just what I had. There's 3 white LEDs, 2 far red and 7 deep reds. It's insane how hot the outer metal gets, so the 18w is most likely actual power consumption.

 

[Dave455]

Hard to believe those tiny E27 spots could be any good. There is no way that blurple spot is 28w without any kind of heat sink. I've bought locally made 20w 4000K spots that supposedly put out 2452 lumens, they get really hot and have a huge chunk of metal in them.

ps. loving the white spots though, I have 4x20w in my 1sqft tent and an 18w Philips flowering bulb that has far red and deep red. The Philips bulb is bigger, heavier and even hotter than the 20w white spots.

Still not efficient. check out quantum board 120's. !!!!

 

[Psyphish]

Still not efficient. check out quantum board 120's. !!!!

I know of them, but I don't feel like messing with DIY stuff. Besides, aren't quantum boards always sold out? I can just walk to a local market and buy bulbs without having to wait or pre-order them.

Also, I could only fit one 65w QB in my 1sqft tent, that's not enough light.

 

[Randomblame]

Honestly, I have no idea on the specific wavelengths. I doubt the bulb is any good, it's just what I had. There's 3 white LEDs, 2 far red and 7 deep reds. It's insane how hot the outer metal gets, so the 18w is most likely actual power consumption.

These looks like Philips Rebel diodes. So not a bad bulb!

 

[Randomblame]

WV(nm) = 2,987,786/{(Colortemp(°k)}

View attachment 4038123

Chlorophyll a:
2987786 / 445nm = 6715°k
2987786 / 660nm = 4526°k

Chlorophyll b:
2987786 / 480nm = 6225°k
2987786 / 620nm = 4819°k

Figuring for WV:
2987786 / (2700°k) = 1106nm
2987786 / (3000°k) = 996nm
2987786 / (3900°k) = 750nm

So this is what I was trying to articulate before:

Chlorophyll a
(445nm) x [1.5] = (667nm)
Then...
(667nm) x [1.5] = (1001nm)
1001nm ~ 3000°k

Chlorophyll b:
(480nm) x [1.25] = (600nm)
Then...
(600nm) x [1.25] = (750nm)
750nm ~ 3900°k

Is there a proportional relationship between the different WV's and chlorophyll absorption?

Like are our heavy red spectrum (2700-3200) lights in terms of energy absorbed, the same to our plants as their "documented" optimal spectral ranges(445nm/665nm)? Could someone take it a factor further? For chlorophyll a, if 445nm x 1.5 equals 665nm and that in turn multiplied by the same factor, 1.5, equals 1000nm (3000°k), well then could we do it one more time? 1000*1.5 equals 1500nm. Could we produce the plant even better? Even heavier? Would chlorophyll a like that like it does the previous factors?

I'm wondering if there's something to this, and that's why folks are having success with 3900/4000k flowering? Because the chlorophyll b really likes 480, 620, and if multiplied by another factor of 1.25, 750nm, or 3900k?

Curious if anyone else has thought about such things our if it's been researched somewhere, or if I'm totally off! Lol

So I guess has anyone grown with 1500nm, or ~ 2000k (chlorophyll a)? And the next factor further than we typically use for chlorophyll b would be (750 * 1.25) ~ 935nm or 3190k, which is already used. So anyone ever use 2000k to bloom? Results??

I don't understand your math, mate! You mix up different things.
1000nm for instance is almost pure heat radiation and is far away to the 3000°k spectrum.
Kelvin spectrum works so:
If you heat up a piece of iron to 3000°k it emits light in this spektrum. Heat it up to 5000°k and you get a cool white light, but heated up to only 1000°k it emits almost only heat.
It's also called BlackBodyLocus or B.B.L.
A spectrum is a mix of different wavelengths in the visible light area.

Our sun has a surface temperature of 6000°K, so her emmited visible light shines in this spectrum. If it were just as hot outside as in the middle (several million ° K) then there would be nothing to see on earth, neither for plants nor for humans.

 

[JSheeze]

I don't understand your math, mate! You mix up different things.
1000nm for instance is almost pure heat radiation and is far away to the 3000°k spectrum.
Kelvin spectrum works so:
If you heat up a piece of iron to 3000°k it emits light in this spektrum. Heat it up to 5000°k and you get a cool white light, but heated up to only 1000°k it emits almost only heat.
It's also called BlackBodyLocus or B.B.L.
A spectrum is a mix of different wavelengths in the visible light area.

Our sun has a surface temperature of 6000°K, so her emmited visible light shines in this spectrum. If it were just as hot outside as in the middle (several million ° K) then there would be nothing to see on earth, neither for plants nor for humans.

Wow , I knew I was off! Lol instead of 2897768, I was using 2987786. My bad, I tried to correct it, but there maybe more mistakes haha but I think we're sorta on the same page.

I've been using this website (shown in the address bar of one of the pics) regarding my conversion. Maybe it's wrong?




My understanding is that a object, black in nature, heated up to a certain temperature, measured in Kelvin units, emits radiation in particular wavelengths, measured in nm, associated and dependent upon it's temperature. And from this thinking, a couple things, I'm not sure if LED's are black body, or work by heating them up (like a filament, or tungsten black body?), but what I'm more concerned about is what wavelength radiation are they emitting, and how heavy? I thought that colortemp was used to describe light color because before LED or CFL the way light was emitted was by heating a black body filament. So when I'm looking for possible factors of wavelengths (plus or minus) that the plant might be able to use, I'm calculating via wavelength and then converting that into colortemp because that's what the industry is comfortable with describing the color output of lights, despite the different routes now a days to create light. So idk if a black body heated to 1930°k would emit heat or light, I just know that's the way that one might describe it in terms of a black body being heated up, even though it might be another way that the radiation is emitted different than a light source that dependent on heating a black body??? How many ways could we achieve those wavelengths? Anyways that's what I thought was going on, please correct me where I'm off, I just started looking into this stuff and as you saw already Im not above making math errors lol

Also I'm pretty sure the sun is hotter than 6000°k, but like I said I'm not an expert by any means. I think absolute zero is like -276°C or 0°k and according to this the sun's around 15 million°k??

This would be radiation by means of nuclear fusion and fission(?), thus the temp isn't indicative of the same wavelength we'd appropriate a black body being heated to the same?

Like I said I don't know just trying to get right side up haha

 

[Randomblame]

That's the temperature in the center, the surface is not as hot. Try Google once again!

There is simple no need to calculate all that stuff. C. adapt to mostly every spectrum they get. Allmost every white LED in CRI80 has their peaks at ~450 and ~600nm. On CRI90 LED's shifts the "red peak" further into the reddish to ~620-635nm. The meat chips have the red peak at ~640-650nm, making them the reddest of all.

1930°k would be a mostly pinkish orange looking light while at 1000°C iron starts to glow dark and deep reddish looking.
BTW,
Philips released a 1850°k smd3010 diode for fresh meat and the light looks pinkish and Bridgelux also have a food line with COB's 1750°k for fresh meat, 2500°k for bakery products and 5600°k for fish. The 1750°k meat chips are allready used by a few growers here.
Have a look at @PSUAGRO's and @The Dawg's current posts, there you can see them in action.

 

[JSheeze]

Also I'm pretty sure the sun is hotter than 6000°k, but like I said I'm not an expert by any means. I think absolute zero is like -276°C or 0°k and according to this the sun's around 15 million°k??
View attachment 4038278
This would be radiation by means of nuclear fusion and fission(?), thus the temp isn't indicative of the same wavelength we'd appropriate a black body being heated to the same?

Like I said I don't know just trying to get right side up haha

Just found out what you were trying to tell me lol

Our sun has a surface temperature of 6000°K, so her emmited visible light shines in this spectrum. If it were just as hot outside as in the middle (several million ° K) then there would be nothing to see on earth, neither for plants nor for humans.

 

[SonsOfAvery]

I think there seems to be a lot of confusion amongst growers about Kelvin/colour temperatures/spectrums.
Relying just on the description of "cool white" or "warm white" ect is not good enough. It's more important to know the exact wave lengths (nm) used to make up the light.
Lights described as one particular colour or a certain value Kelvin, can be made up of differing ranges of nm. One could have more blue than the other for example but still be classed as the same Kelvin.

If possible its best to check the full breakdown of the spectrum...I believe this to be correct anyway. Just my thoughts.

 

[JSheeze]

I think there seems to be a lot of confusion amongst growers about Kelvin/colour temperatures/spectrums.
Relying just on the description of "cool white" or "warm white" ect is not good enough. It's more important to know the exact wave lengths (nm) used to make up the light.
Lights described as one particular colour or a certain value Kelvin, can be made up of differing ranges of nm. One could have more blue than the other for example but still be classed as the same Kelvin.

If possible its best to check the full breakdown of the spectrum...I believe this to be correct anyway. Just my thoughts.

How specific is LED's when talking about spectrum? My thinking was that LED's are pretty narrow banded when describing spectrum? Like a 6500k led will emit a tighter wavelength band around 445 than other types of lighting? Thus the lower cri? Thus why people use multiple different colortemp bulbs when growing with led vs hps or cmh or plasma??

 

[JSheeze]

I'm going to try to simplify what I was trying to say earlier even though I know it doesn't matter, I'm just OCD lol..



Peak absorption of Chlorophyll a:
- 445nm (6511°k)
- 665nm (4358°k)

Peak absorption of Chlorophyll b:
- 465nm (6232°k)
- 645nm (4493°k)

According to the math, the best lights to use considering the graph, would be (6200°k - 6500°k) for your blue spectrum lights, and (4300°k - 4500°k) for your red spectrum lights.
But...
We typically use (5000°k - 6500°k) for our blue spectrum lights (right on par, no pun intended lol), but then opt for a (2700°k - 3200°k) for our red spectrum lights.

I've been trying to understand why, and/or how this is. This is my train of thought...

Chlorophyll a:
445nm * (1.5) = 665
665nm * (1.5) = 1000
1000nm = 2898°k

Chlorophyll b:
465nm * (1.39) = 645
645nm * (1.39) = 895
895nm = 3238°k

The factor between the 2 absorption ranges of both chlorophyll's respectively, is 1.5(665÷445) and 1.39(645÷465). When we use this factor again, past what are documented ranges for the absorption of chlorophyll are, we get a wavelength indicative of the red spectrum lights we're accustomed to using (~2900°k, ~3200°k).

It could be just a coiecedence that the factors between the documented ranges of absorption is the same factors found between the lights we use now (2700°k - 3200°k) and what's documented, or there may be a correlation. My thinking of determining whether or not it is just a coincidence, is to try to use the factors one more time, and test to see how the plant responds with even farther red lights. We are already using lights that shouldn't work according to the research I've come across, so maybe there's more to the research that needs to be added?

Chlorophyll a:
1000nm * (1.5) = 1500nm
1500nm = 1932°k (test this out)

Chlorophyll b:
895nm * (1.39) = 1244
1244nm = 2329°k (test this out)

Anyone already tried this? Or maybe divide the factor and approach the farther blue end instead of red?

 

[Randomblame]

https://www.heliospectra.com/tags/led-light-strategies

 

[JSheeze]

Without holes in your pots there is no way to flush them. I recommend to flush when you start to change your nutrient regime to flower circle. This rinses out excess nutrients to better absorb the new nutrients and prevents the above described salting of the substrate.

So I attempted to flush, I ran 3.5 gallons pH'ed (with vinegar & green spike of doom) water through my soil 3 times within about 1hr-ish. My ppm meter hasn't shown up yet, but I felt it was prolly a good idea to kick out any salts that had been lingering like you were saying. Anyways, this is the color of the water running out near the end, some dirt got in the jar but it didn't really affect the color of the water after it settled. The juice seemed to get lighter in color by the 3rd application of 3.5gal vinegar/water treatment. Do I need to go further? When do I feed her again (cheese-grate high P tomato spikes and adding to molasses and aspirin water and vinegar mix)? It's been two days since I've watered her and she still has decent soil moisture (by feel if finger, and dreaded green spikes), but seems like she's lacking nutes because of the lightening of green towards the middle of the plant? Also I think I may have gotten some broad mites possibly, could this be the reason for the lightening of green in the middle? The browning of hairs on the outside row?

The last juice that ran out the end of the pot during my flush attempt...

Ok then the lightening of the green color in the middle...

And finally the possible broad mite infection (have cucumeris in mail)...


*Also what's these spots?...

**And I changed up the pattern on my fixture as well as "expanded" it. Do you think it's better? Cutting the roasting pan good/bad?