Far Red ....
- Thread starter Therrion
- Start date
Dr. Who
Well-Known Member
I find the LED supplemental units as over priced and not delivering on the promise.
I tested this shit some years back.
Skip it and focus on growing for potentials....In the long run, you don't really gain enough to justify the cost's across the board.
Simply put. - The return does not justify the costs to do it......This includes the increase in electric use for a whole grow operation....
I tested this shit some years back.
Skip it and focus on growing for potentials....In the long run, you don't really gain enough to justify the cost's across the board.
Simply put. - The return does not justify the costs to do it......This includes the increase in electric use for a whole grow operation....
Therrion
Well-Known Member
I have the deep reds covered, I use the Chilled logic V2 pucks. I already bought enough far red intiater pucks for putting them asleep , but not enough for the Emerson effect. My sealed room is dialed in. I'm just trying to nickle and dime at this point.
Last edited:
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
so i'm kinda in the same boat: i have 4K atreum 144.2 boards and i added one growmaus initiator puck (i'm in a 3x4). i'm not going for the putting them sleep faster aspect but instead Emerson.
how do you know you don't have enough for Emerson? i'm curious how to calculate how many more pucks are needed for me?
and i'm correct in saying that Emerson only requires 2 different light sources: less than 670nm and greater than 700nm?
thoughts?
ReubenIsMyDog
Well-Known Member
I don't know that my far red setup is helping anything, but was hardly cost prohibitive. The whole rig with 2 HLG far right boards and Mean Well driver only cost about $40 (including $12 shipping from HLG) and it's only on for around 20 mins a day. I mean, I guess that could be considered a lot of money for something that may or may not work, but it's not like it's a huge investment.
Axion42
Well-Known Member
I've been told to use twice as much deep red, or photo red 660nm as far red. Not sure the math on it but I use 12 deep red rapidled starboards and 6 far red leds. As long as there is more deep red 660nm than far red 730nm it wont trigger the shade avoidance syndrome and you should benefit from the emerson effect. I just started flower and after the stretch I plan to use the far reds for 5-10 minutes after lights out to put them to sleep. My first time doing this so I really dont know what to expect, only what I've been told from various members of this community...RB is the most notable.
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
yep, i've read that too.
but in my case i'm relying on the 4k qb's for my 660nm. so if i look at the chart for the spd, let's say it shows roughly 0.4 on a scale to 1.0 at 660nm. how do i figure out how many of the far red pucks would give me 0.2 on that same scale and the 2:1 ratio for deep/far? make sense?
Dr. Who
Well-Known Member
You miss the fact that you do this for extra bloom light time...correct?
Now add that electrical to the equation..... When your running 8 1k lights per room. You tend to increase the electrical cost...
Claims of adding more hrs of light time hover at what,,,2 hrs a day
That's 16 more hrs of light per day, billing wise...
Now do the math.....
For a 28 day month, that adds a total of 488 more light hrs.
This adds > $100 a month to the E bill.....or more like > $250 per run.
Now any gain I found in doing that method,,,,WAS NOT covering that > $250 cost to do it...
SO then, The use of the deep red initiator's, and running the lights for 2 more hrs a day......Did NOT increase the yield to any amount worth doing it!
The other thing is you MUST have the PROPER Nm banding to actually make the plants go to "sleep" fast.......They MUST be between 728 to 732 Nm (mostly sold in 730 Nm diodes)...
They must deliver enough power to an area to work properly also.....Like 10 watt's should be the low end diode power.....
Early, well constructed "deep red" units were at $350 + per unit.
They effectively did a 10x10 area... I needed 3, overlapping to be sure of coverage for 1 room (I only experimented with 1 room due to cost).
They sit in the pile of used grow equipment. Well, one of them was bought by the co-op farms head Hort... She's playing with one, redoing my experiments.
So far she finds the same thing I did.
Minor yield increase with the decrease in total run time being minor also..
She is now doing experiments with it in SOG type grows.....This seems to show more promise....
So, you understand now what I meant by "Not cost effective?"
ReubenIsMyDog
Well-Known Member
Most of us aren't running 8k watts. It's a matter of scale, but even then the percentages are fairly small.
I'm running a small tent for a personal grow with single qb288. Running my grow light an extra couple of hours and the far reds adds about 10KWh a month to my bill. That's like $2-3 a month.
Under a 600 watt for an extra 1.5 hours a day it would be about 30KWh or around $6 a month.
It's a matter of scale and perspective.
Therrion
Well-Known Member
growmau5 said you need 8 to 9% of your total wattage to be far red for the Emerson effect
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
cool, thanks, that gives a better idea of how much i need.
Therrion
Well-Known Member
Icemud had a post on another forum about his results. They were pretty negative . I may not even use mine until I have some room to make a control group and experiment with them myself.
Last edited:
Dr. Who
Well-Known Member
Ok, I get ya.
Still, they do not do as claimed.
The benefit is rather moot to none.....It's simply a way for some light makers to make extra money.
In some newer college studies. They find basically, no marketable reason for use in any commercial growing aspect. This was tried on several greenhouse crops including Tomato's and herbs...
The cannabis growing market is a place for those who take dubious information on anything, and profit from it. From whole nutrient lines to gadgets and lights (any LED that is not a COB is basically over priced and over hyped. Not to mention the induction lighting systems.) Now before you LED guys that bought big expensive (or even cheap blurple units) get all in a huff. How many of those claim to deliver UV lighting? They deliver UVA and, NONE I have seen actually get down to the 280-315 nm bands that are UVB and the only UV that actually effects cannabis to increase any THC levels.....While yes, thay are delivering UV radiation. They are banking on the fact that you don't know that the wavelengths they deliver,,,are useless!
Enough on LED's ..
With misleading information to outright lies. There are more then a few things that are not what they say they are.
As far as deep red use for increasing bloom lighting times..... It falls in that line of, "Nice theory on returns but, it doesn't deliver enough to become mainstream or be commercially viable.
Like I said, "If these things actually worked. Every commercial op in the world would be using the tech."
I understand you defending it, you bought it. That doesn't make it actually fill the claims of those selling them...or at least worth using.
Sorry
Last edited:
rkymtnman
Well-Known Member
the end of day far red might be a hoax but supplementing white and/or blurple leds with it is a positive.
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpls.2019.00322/full
Conclusion:
Increasing the R:FR ratio of artificial LED light above the R:FR ratio value for sun light negatively influences the growth and early fruit production of young tomato plants. The observed reductions in plant dry mass due to a lack of FR were mainly related to reductions in whole plant light absorption, which in turn were largely due to reductions in total leaf area. In contrast to the decreased leaf area, the changes in petiole angle and decreased internode length did not negatively influence whole plant light interception in these experiments. Finally, FR increased fruit yield, which correlated well with the accelerated flowering and overall increase in plant source strength under FR light. We conclude that growing tomato plants under artificial light without FR during the light period causes a range of inverse shade avoidance responses, which result in reduced plant source strength and reduced fruit production that cannot be compensated for by a simple EOD-FR treatment. Consequently, in greenhouse horticulture where often RB LEDs are used without additional FR, the addition of FR can result in increased plant growth and fruit production.
Dr. Who
Well-Known Member
Never had any issue with the use of any far red...... You knew that too.
I agree with you on FR.
The issue with blurple lights are the less then potential ability of them to produce a genuine full potential result.
The issue I have with with DR or deep red lighting that generates the "sleep" mode in a plant......The single band 730 nm diodes sets that "allow you to have up to 2 more hrs of regular bloom lighting per day." and the claims of what that does for you....
Not anything like what the makers of them claim.....Snake oil level of manipulating facts and logic...
Nice though! Many need to be aware of FR/PFR factors in growing.
BobCajun
Well-Known Member
All it does is cause severe stretching. You don't need 14 hours of light anyway, just 13 the entire flowering phase. You wouldn't use 12 because you would get lower yields and ripening would not be sped up anyway, same with fewer hours. There is no benefit from using fewer hours than the critical day length, which for most strains is somewhere between 13 and 14 hours. I've found 13 works perfectly. It takes 15 weeks, regardless of light cycle. You'll just get lower yields and potency with less hours. Show me one scientific article which shows that a short day plant will ripen faster with fewer hours than critical and I may believe it.
The fact that weed needs 15 weeks to ripen means that outdoor weed in most northern locations will never ripen, unless it's an auto of course, in which case it will be ripe but crappy, at least most auto strains. Mold may start before 15 weeks is up but you just spray the affected buds with baking soda water until it runs off into a container you hold under it, mold gone. Have to wash the buds when harvested of course to get the soda off. Bud mold needs an acidic environment, it exudes oxalic acid to acidify the area it's growing on so you have to basify it with soda.
The fact that weed needs 15 weeks to ripen means that outdoor weed in most northern locations will never ripen, unless it's an auto of course, in which case it will be ripe but crappy, at least most auto strains. Mold may start before 15 weeks is up but you just spray the affected buds with baking soda water until it runs off into a container you hold under it, mold gone. Have to wash the buds when harvested of course to get the soda off. Bud mold needs an acidic environment, it exudes oxalic acid to acidify the area it's growing on so you have to basify it with soda.
Last edited:
Sade
Well-Known Member
They are. I live and work in legal cannabis industry in Humboldt county and for light deps and adding supplemental lighting works perfectly. Especially if you are lightdepping and cutting out the sun. This way you can still accelerate the phytochrome process with some supplemental spectrums.
You have no idea about the electrical bill until you actually use them yourself. Why are you bashing everyone for finally finding a damn good LEDs light system. My whole pge bill gas and everything was 157 this month and during longest light on phase veg. Try them out man prices are dropping.