Second grow (clones from the first)

Cannadab1s

Cannadab1s

Well-Known Member
Wisher2 said:
Gradation from mids to shake
looks like you grew it with T-12 fluorescent

with the price of your citi's
you should get maybe 5 more
then maybe you will be able to experience serious light
Click to expand...
Proof that cxb3590s are better? Didn't think so lol
 
Cannadab1s

Cannadab1s

Well-Known Member
Cannadab1s

Cannadab1s

Well-Known Member
From the chilled website...

"What about YPF?

Admittedly, PPFD is analogous to measurements of power/radiant flux in that it only considers the total sum of PAR and ignores the actual wavelengths that are represented. Ideally, PPFD would be weighted by the effectiveness of individual wavelengths in driving photosynthesis. In fact, this is the exact principle embodied by YPF (yield photon flux), or quantum yield. This metric takes PPFD one step further by weighting the photosynthetic response of plants to photons with different wavelengths (action spectrum) according to the effectiveness of plants in absorbing those photons. Therefore, the calculation of YPF is analogous to the calculation of luminous flux, which weights the visible spectrum according to the sensitivity of the human eye. This idea was first explored in the 1970’s by Dr. Keith McCree, who concluded that plants absorb relatively less green light than other wavelengths and that, as a result, photosynthesis is mainly driven by blue and red light.


Absorbance-weighted YPF is shown in red (Wikimedia Commons)

However, this conclusion is not exactly correct. Because McCree analyzed the absorbance of light by individual leaves, YPF fails to represent the photosynthetic response of whole plants. More recent studies have shown that the green light that passes through plants’ upper leaves is often absorbed by lower “shaded” leaves. Therefore, YPF underestimates the absorbance of green light and underestimates its importance for driving photosynthesis. Accordingly, the uncorrected action spectrum (PPFD) is probably a better indicator of the whole plant photosynthetic response.

There are some other issues too. Another major problem with YPF is that different plant species utilize light differently. Therefore, it is unlikely that the photosynthetic response of the plant species analyzed by McCree accurately represents all 352,000 other plant species. This is especially true since the plants that McCree investigated were all crop or agricultural weed species. McCree’s study also involved short-term measurements, which may have skewed his results. Again, more recent studies have painted a different picture. These long-term studies have shown that the quantity of light is more important for plant growth than quality. So, even though McCree’s study was a great contribution to our understanding of photosynthesis and plant physiology, especially when first published in 1972, both the study’s results and subsequent interpretation of those results are fairly flawed and outdated.

YPF also fails to overcome the other weaknesses of PPF and PPFD, in that the measure can be manipulated or exaggerated. Accordingly, the distance over which the metric is measured and the average PPFD or min/max ratio are needed to accurately assess and compare different systems. Therefore, even though the concept of YPF is an ideal solution for measuring light quality, our current understanding of photosynthesis and the difference of photosynthesis between species is insufficient."
 
Wisher2

Wisher2

Well-Known Member
Cannadab1s said:
Still inferior and overpriced compared to new tech
Click to expand...
if you were to build a Samsung strip light today, 3 years from now, newer technology is here, would you dump your lights for the new new
same reason why Commercial are still using HPS today
in the age of Cree COB's and Samsung Diodes
because my tech is still better than your standard HPS IMO but in a commercial setting HPS still winds every time............
another problem I have with samsung diodes pushed for efficiency
what does effeciency mean to you....because it certainly dosnt meant penetration depth
you have to saturate your entire room with those things to grow worthy plants just to try to compete with HPS
and lm/w literally means nothing if the harvest isnt there
who the hell cares if you have 200 lm/w how does that help me with yield....it dosnt
I would love to see some huge flowers grown under some LM560's
but it just isnt there
and for me
my lights have made my money back tenfold
I use them for my experiment box
testing seeds and different strains
before I do real runs
my light cost next to nothing in parts and gives me the yield of close to a 600hps
so I am good with my "inferior" tech
there might be a reason why they are still at the pricepoint they are...and havnt dropped
 
Cannadab1s

Cannadab1s

Well-Known Member
Wisher2 said:
if you were to build a Samsung strip light today, 3 years from now, newer technology is here, would you dump your lights for the new new
same reason why Commercial are still using HPS today
in the age of Cree COB's and Samsung Diodes
because my tech is still better than your standard HPS IMO but in a commercial setting HPS still winds every time............
another problem I have with samsung diodes pushed for efficiency
what does effeciency mean to you....because it certainly dosnt meant penetration depth
you have to saturate your entire room with those things to grow worthy plants just to try to compete with HPS
and lm/w literally means nothing if the harvest isnt there
who the hell cares if you have 200 lm/w how does that help me with yield....it dosnt
I would love to see some huge flowers grown under some LM560's
but it just isnt there
and for me
my lights have made my money back tenfold
I use them for my experiment box
testing seeds and different strains
before I do real runs
my light cost next to nothing in parts and gives me the yield of close to a 600hps
so I am good with my "inferior" tech
there might be a reason why they are still at the pricepoint they are...and havnt dropped
Click to expand...
Since i am a new grower and not invested in old tech, yeah, ill keep building and testing. This is a cost that will save me a lot over the years esp with how long these LED last vs HPS....

Even big growers will start. This will save a loooota moolah in the long run.

What you have seen are not independent tests conducted under strict guidelines and standards to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that these HPS lights are the best. We are still in our infancy of understanding in this area.

What you have seen is the old industry standard manage to crank out best they could with the tech that they had, and of course they aren't willing to throw it all out for new tech, they are highly invested in old tech.

New tech is about to blow them out of the water....

Gram per watt, right? How much you put in for how much you get out.

Ive been hearing about these 2 gpw LED grows...im on the train to find my own.

What's the most that an HPS can do for gram per watt? Cause if its less than LED, may as well grow under the sun cause electricity cost a pretty penny. Not to mention all the other costs that go along with HPS.

If i hit 2 or even close to 2 gpw for my shitty lil closet grow, ill shit my pants.

I dont need all the fancy cooling that goes with HPS. I dont need to replace light bulbs all the time. I dont need to worry about smashing bulbs by accident. I dont need to have to worry about a giant massive NASA looking spacestation to house my HPS in my closet. Or burning the shit outta my trichs/plant with too much heat. I needed to put my meanwell driver in the tent cause LED were too cold and realized later on that i needed the extra heat for the plant when using my LED . Lol

Theres a whole LED following online that is proving that its better right now. Even manufacturers taking the steps to test and build. This isnt even trolling me now about lights, this is trolling all LED growers and testers right now.
 
Last edited:
Wisher2

Wisher2

Well-Known Member
Cannadab1s said:
Since i am a new grower and not invested in old tech, yeah, ill keep building and testing. This is a cost that will save me a lot over the years esp with how long these LED last vs HPS....

Even big growers will start. This will save a loooota moolah in the long run.

What you have seen are not independent tests conducted under strict guidelines and standards to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that these HPS lights are the best. We are still in our infancy of understanding in this area.

What you have seen is the old industry standard manage to crank out best they could with the tech that they had, and of course they aren't willing to throw it all out for new tech, they are highly invested in old tech.

New tech is about to blow them out of the water....

Gram per watt, right? How much you put in for how much you get out.

Ive been hearing about these 2 gpw LED grows...im on the train to find my own.

What's the most that an HPS can do for gram per watt? Cause if its less than LED, may as well grow under the sun cause electricity cost a pretty penny. Not to mention all the other costs that go along with HPS.

If i hit 2 or even close to 2 gpw for my shitty lil closet grow, ill shit my pants.

I dont need all the fancy cooling that goes with HPS. I dont need to replace light bulbs all the time. I dont need to worry about smashing bulbs by accident. I dont need to have to worry about a giant massive NASA looking spacestation to house my HPS in my closet. Or burning the shit outta my trichs/plant with too much heat. I needed to put my meanwell driver in the tent cause LED were too cold and realized later on that i needed the extra heat for the plant when using my LED . Lol

Theres a whole LED following online that is proving that its better right now. Even manufacturers taking the steps to test and build. This isnt even trolling me now about lights, this is trolling all LED growers and testers right now.
Click to expand...
with this type of logic why buy anything at all
because eventually there will always be better

that would be like throwing my car already paid for in the dump because a new car gets 2 more miles per gal but it way slower with a smaller tank so it only gets 200miles out of the tank instead of 400

my light was paid off my first run with it
after that it has been basically free

you see when this shit started people were under the assumption 1.4a was the shit "efficiency" then it was 1.6a .....then 2.1
people are realizing that efficiency is trumped by penetration....higher power...although efficiency may go from 60% to 50% the yield goes up

like if you were to up your power to say 1750 from 1400 you would end up with larger more dense buds instead of the larfy popcorn from your last harvest
 
Cannadab1s

Cannadab1s

Well-Known Member
Wisher2 said:
with this type of logic why buy anything at all
because eventually there will always be better

that would be like throwing my car already paid for in the dump because a new car gets 2 more miles per gal but it way slower with a smaller tank so it only gets 200miles out of the tank instead of 400

my light was paid off my first run with it
after that it has been basically free

you see when this shit started people were under the assumption 1.4a was the shit "efficiency" then it was 1.6a .....then 2.1
people are realizing that efficiency is trumped by penetration....higher power...although efficiency may go from 60% to 50% the yield goes up

like if you were to up your power to say 1750 from 1400 you would end up with larger more dense buds instead of the larfy popcorn from your last harvest
Click to expand...
You see big companies with old work trucks running their fleet?

You see apple using apartment sized computers cause they dont want to invest in new tech when it becomes cheap enough?

Riiiight.
 
Homie Da Clown

Homie Da Clown

Well-Known Member
Speaking of Apple, my kids love Apple products, go figure!
Anyway my daughter said Apple was the first computer and was around since Adam and Eve.
Said it only had 1 byte, then everything crashed....
 
Wisher2

Wisher2

Well-Known Member
Cannadab1s said:
You see big companies with old work trucks running their fleet?

You see apple using apartment sized computers cause they dont want to invest in new tech when it becomes cheap enough?

Riiiight.
Click to expand...
hahaha yeah actually
I see a ton of 20-30 year old trucks hauling shit all day long
diesel trucks really havnt changed at all in many years

and if you are trying to compare apple (whom makes their own shit)
to someone buying a computer already made is pretty distorted
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top