Or_Gro
Well-Known Member
Mind your own fucking business, trollAnd we have a winner.
Mind your own fucking business, trollAnd we have a winner.
You behaving like a child, The way you speak to people is disgusting.Mind your own fucking business, troll
Take your own advice, trollYou behaving like a child, The way you speak to people is disgusting.
Stop being so aggressive, smoke some weed it might mellow you out.
sigh.......Take your own advice, troll
NAMASTEI think I'm done with this site. Every post devolves into ignorant exchanges. Is seriously pathetic.
Peace
do you want focused intense light on your plants or just a spread of light ?In a small tent would you remove the reflectors? I use them because they came with the light.
with the reflectors on i get higher temps on my hygrometers, it might be my mind playing tricks on me though...I will think about it. I have 3 lights in the tent to spread the light better. I might leave the reflectors on the plant is loving it so far.
The trick is that with bare COBs you can move the lights much closer to the plants for the same uniformity. Something like half the height which you use for 90 degree reflectors would be fine. Doing that does give you more light on the plants.In a small tent would you remove the reflectors? I use them because they came with the light.
Makes sense. If you are spending more light on warming the walls and the reflectors then it makes sense you get more heat overall.with the reflectors on i get higher temps on my hygrometers, it might be my mind playing tricks on me though...
You might want to get some better charts or put some type of numbers on there that's difficult to make heads or tails of.Are you kidding me?
- That chart is for a COB with a 90 degree reflector!!!!!!! With a 90 degree reflector the COB would need to be at 31" to get a proper uniformity not 18" as with a bare COB, let alone 12".
- Even with a bare COB, 12" would be too close for a single COB. Or board for that matter. So that's the incorrect height anyway and of course you will get poor uniformity.
- How do you even get an elliptical spread with a single COB?
Still, here goes, a chart for a single (bare COB) at 12" over a 2'x2' (no reflection):
View attachment 4203641 View attachment 4203644
Lines are at 20% ranges. So center white is from 100% to 80% etc. I used no reflection this time for a worst case scenario.
and same for a single board:
View attachment 4203645 View attachment 4203646
It's slightly stretched, but the board is just as unusable at that height.
The only thing you wrote that makes any sense is this: "The more you spread the light the less hotspots". That's exactly why 4 COBs spread out at 12" from each other are so much better than one COB or one board in the middle of the same area:
View attachment 4203647 View attachment 4203648
Even with no reflective walls that would be a usable configuration.
Just a PSA for the new, This guy is clueless and frequently makes shit up.You might want to get some better charts or put some type of numbers on there that's difficult to make heads or tails of.
Bare COB's work great if you can keep your plants within a foot of your lights. They really have poor intensity when it comes to distance, after 18 inches with bare cob's the numbers really drop off quickly. Might work if your in a tight area with limited growth height...but that's not really the greatest way to grow...most quality grow rooms got ceilings 10-12 foot tall so they need lights that can broadcast 24 inches and further
so cobs are better for us tent growers, not warehouse growers, unless the warehouse has 9ft ceilings, but warehouse growers can use them as side lighting ?You might want to get some better charts or put some type of numbers on there that's difficult to make heads or tails of.
Bare COB's work great if you can keep your plants within a foot of your lights. They really have poor intensity when it comes to distance, after 18 inches with bare cob's the numbers really drop off quickly. Might work if your in a tight area with limited growth height...but that's not really the greatest way to grow...most quality grow rooms got ceilings 10-12 foot tall so they need lights that can broadcast 24 inches and further
All calculated numbers at Timber. He takes no PPFD readings on any of the fixtures! No PAR maps of actual coverage. FYIBack to what Dan was saying... about the cobs.. I think it’s better for SOME to use no lenses on Cobs and go bare. The reason is simple, for me, in a 5x5 i have no reason to spread the light with 6 cobs on the Vero Redwood. Lenses will reduce overall ppfd of light being absorbed by plants because they must refract it to some degree. According to dan it’s about a 12% intensity difference, and at Timber they certainly measured that statistic. You can argue semantics about percentages versus ppfd all day but lets look at the generation of the light, and how it is being relayed to the plants. A lot of diode analysis ends up being inaccurate anyway, so long as you have a decent way to measure ppfd at ACTUAL canopy level, and you are providing the correct spectrum of light, there is no need for senseless bantering about superior lighting. It’s all superior if it’s fit for your particular grow set up, don’t ridicule people based on your assumptions of their missteps. Why not make this new thing called a suggestion instead?
Wait with the reflectors bare were substantially higher you mean right? I thought bare cobs produced more intense light, only ‘misguided’. I thought the whole point of the lense is to refract light in a more evenly distributed wavelength for the plants, but that must come at a cost of intensity. There is no way the same 2 lights would produce equal intensity PPFD if one had been lensed right?The thing is when you make a suggestion, or in this case I simply gave some examples in agreement to the statement of the topic starter that COBs offer better solutions, you receive a deluge of insults from certain people who feel insecure about their board purchase.
Heck I'd rather they come up with reasoning/evidence if they don't agree with the thread topic, but posts filled with only swearing and/or an appeal to authority is what screws these threads up.
So the new thing then is to make no suggestions at all in fear of someone trying to find an insult?
In hindsight perhaps I shouldn't have been so hard on Yodaweed since he actually tried to come up with an example. Albeit that he seems to have cherry picked that example to make COBs look as worse as possible.
But yes I agree on the optics. Lenses might be less worse, but Malocan measured the difference with 90 degree reflectors in a 4'x4' tent and found 15% advantage of bare COBs over reflectors. Both fixture hung at correct heigt and therefore bare were substantially lower.
A lot of good points being made, time is a commodity you will never get back. On individual points of light vs efficiency of coverage, however, they’re not synonymous. I believe coverage would also depend on the magnitudes and wavelengths of light being produced from the individual points of light, and I think it also depends on the quality of coverage you’re after. If for example you wanted to use quantum boards, you will indeed have many many points of light. But considering just one of those points, the magnitude of those wavelengths is in no way comparable to say, a Vero or CREE individual point, especially driven at 50+W. As with all LED’s, magnitude quickly decreases as you move outward on spectrum radius. This is literally the only reason boards are being used over CREE, Citizen or Vero, LED Diodes basically straight shoot light, and unless spectrum radius of Larger COBs overlap, the board will more evenly cover every time, BUT AT WHAT INTENSITY COST? This also has to be factored into ‘coverage’ because who wants to cover if light is too weak?I love arguments about lights.
Everything pretty much comes down to time and money. More individual points of light = more even coverage. Lower driven LEDs = more efficiency. In every case, the more individual LEDs and lower you drive them, the more efficiently they will cover any given area. But do those efficiencies offset the initial cost? And over what time period? And is something even more efficient likely to come on to the market in the mean time? And honestly, if you're going to run multiple LEDs inches away from your canopy, do you have time to train that canopy evenly and raise the lights as the plants grow a couple of cm or more every day? How much is your time really worth? Would you rather be fucking around with plants and lights all the time or out enjoying yourself? Or is fucking around with plants and lights a sense of enjoyment in and of itself?
There's no straight answer for everyone. I like strips. But only when I've got enough time to fuck around with them.