Led Growing Is The Way Of The Future My Friends

[Gary Busey]

That was their first 10 minutes in there under the LED. They were under a small 20 watt CFL prior to that.

One is dying, figured it would anyways, it was a mutant, and the roots just never took. The other is looking quite well for my first time in hydro. Nice fat leaves, super close node spacing.

That pic is like 2 1/2 weeks old. Will post a new pic soon enough.

So their new 3w diodes somehow defeat the Inverse Square Law? Care to explain?

And Gary,at 10inches from that UFO those seedlings are SERIOUSLY stretched,might wanna put it a bit closer.

 

[newworldicon]

So their new 3w diodes somehow defeat the Inverse Square Law? Care to explain?

And Gary,at 10inches from that UFO those seedlings are SERIOUSLY stretched,might wanna put it a bit closer.

The inverse square law applies to HID mainly because it is not the correct spectrum of light hence relies on the pure intensity or lumens of the HID to help it along, whereas LED light is at the very peak of absorbtion capability hence it is a far better quality light, this may explain why the results were better at 24-28 inches away, perhaps the sweet spot was found there taking into consideration, light spectrum, intensity and blending of the various spectrums. I think it is fair to say that HID relies on the inverse square law far more than LED does because of the spectrum quality. Why does every response from you seem hostile towards LED growers when the shit you seem to hate like the ridiculous claims made in the past were by manufacturers not growers, they can merely reguritate what they are told.

At least they have the courage to try and experiment with it....

 

[Harrekin]

The Inverse Square Law applies to ALL light, regardless of colour and its related to how light loses intensity at distance. It still applies to LEDs, and saying otherwise is foolish. A light will NEVER be more powerful further away than it is when its closer and if the LED companies try tell you that, they're flat lying to you.

 

[newworldicon]

The Inverse Square Law applies to ALL light, regardless of colour and its related to how light loses intensity at distance. It still applies to LEDs, and saying otherwise is foolish. A light will NEVER be more powerful further away than it is when its closer and if the LED companies try tell you that, they're flat lying to you.

I suggest you re read my post before assuming that I said LED light was not applicable to the inverse law. A LED company did not tell me or anyone else that. Is the sun slightly less intense if I had a light meter above my head compared to on the ground at my feet?? See how it does not apply to all light? See how you seem to have a very negative stance on everything LED..You are simply a troll Harrekin...
Try to address reality instead of trying to miscontrue things. Why didn't you answer your hostility? If you hate LED so much why are you constantly watching the LED threads??

 

[Harrekin]

Yes actually it is less intense,the difference is nominal tho BECAUSE of the inverse square law. I'm not trolling,I'm just telling you that a light at 26 inches will NOT do better than the same light at a closer distance. It's not possible,it doesn't work like that in physics.

EDIT: And Iv no negativity towards LED lights,but the bullshit that surrounds them is UNREAL. Seriously, no offense but real world physics is what I follow,and if you wanna think/have been told the Inverse Square Law applies "more" to HID than to LED you've been lied to or are just wrong in your assumptions.

 

[jdizzle22]

The Inverse Square Law applies to ALL light, regardless of colour and its related to how light loses intensity at distance. It still applies to LEDs, and saying otherwise is foolish. A light will NEVER be more powerful further away than it is when its closer and if the LED companies try tell you that, they're flat lying to you.

No one is saying it won't be more powerful, we're saying it might not grow as well that close because its too much light unlike with HPS. No one claims the inverse quare law doesn't apply to LED, its just LED can get away with it further away than HPS.

There is such thing as having an HPS light too close just like there is with LED. Closer is not always better, there are sweet zones and I was saying GLH found their 500w 3w diode panels seem to have a sweet spot of 24-28 in from the canopy.

An LED will grow better at 2 ft away than 1 ft if 1 ft gives you light bleaching and starts killing your plants. Wouldn't you agree in such a case its better to have the light 2 feet away than 1 ft? Again no one is saying it will be more powerful at 2ft, just it might grow plants better at that distance than closer.

 

[newworldicon]

No one is saying it won't be more powerful, we're saying it might not grow as well that close because its too much light unlike with HPS. No one claims the inverse quare law doesn't apply to LED, its just LED can get away with it further away than HPS.

There is such thing as having an HPS light too close just like there is with LED. Closer is not always better, there are sweet zones and I was saying GLH found their 500w 3w diode panels seem to have a sweet spot of 24-28 in from the canopy.

An LED will grow better at 2 ft away than 1 ft if 1 ft gives you light bleaching and starts killing your plants. Wouldn't you agree in such a case its better to have the light 2 feet away than 1 ft?

Has Mike ever given you links to the growing testing they have done and in particular the tests with the 24-28 canopy height. That would answer so many questions..

 

[Harrekin]

Light bleaching from an LED...any links,pics,etc? Read the previous poster,he said the law doesn't apply to LEDs or sunlight,I'm not questioning LEDs,just some of the assertions made wrongly in this thread.

I'm here to keep up to date on them,but if someone posts something that's clearly wrong I'm gonna speak up.

 

[newworldicon]

Light bleaching from an LED...any links,pics,etc? Read the previous poster,he said the law doesn't apply to LEDs or sunlight,I'm not questioning LEDs,just some of the assertions made wrongly in this thread.

I'm here to keep up to date on them,but if someone posts something that's clearly wrong I'm gonna speak up.

You are making a fool of yourself, I never said it did not apply but rather that it applies POSSIBLY less because of the quality of light available. If you misunderstood that then it is up to you to fix that. I can tell that you know very little about LED because the issues you try to nitpick at are at such base levels of understanding. You don't even own one so how can you have an informed opinion on them Harrekin?

PS. If you have never seen a light bleached tip of a cola from LED then I ascertain still that you research very little on the subject.

 

[Harrekin]

Physics apply to everything in the universe,I don't need a LED grow light to know how light works

 

[newworldicon]

Physics apply to everything in the universe,I don't need a LED grow light to know how light works

Show me where I stated clearly that LED light did not apply to the inverse law and I'll conceed it, go ahead then.

 

[Harrekin]

The inverse square law applies to HID mainly because it is not the correct spectrum of light hence relies on the pure intensity or lumens of the HID to help it along, whereas LED light is at the very peak of absorbtion capability hence it is a far better quality light, this may explain why the results were better at 24-28 inches away, perhaps the sweet spot was found there taking into consideration, light spectrum, intensity and blending of the various spectrums. I think it is fair to say that HID relies on the inverse square law far more than LED does because of the spectrum quality. Why does every response from you seem hostile towards LED growers when the shit you seem to hate like the ridiculous claims made in the past were by manufacturers not growers, they can merely reguritate what they are told.

At least they have the courage to try and experiment with it....

Here...it's doesn't "mainly" apply to any type of light,it applies to all light regardless of the source.

EDIT: And jdizzle,thank you for actually answering my question,I just hate when people try explain something they dont really understand.

 

[newworldicon]

Here...it's doesn't "mainly" apply to any type of light,it applies to all light regardless of the source.

EDIT: And jdizzle,thank you for actually answering my question,I just hate when people try explain something they dont really understand.

My explanation may have not have made it crystal clear that there is the potential for the sweet spot in a larger LED panel to be higher up but that's what I was driving at, anyone who is working with LED would recognise that.
What do you achieve by nitpicking at something you are not physically encountering by not using? What's your game pal?

 

[Harrekin]

I'm not nitpicking,I asked a question,you didn't know the answer but still for some reason answered anyways and now you're all hurt cos I corrected you?

I didn't even mention anything negative about the lights,I just wanted to know what jdizzle ment because it was unclear from his previous statement.

As usual if you even ask a question about an LED you get chased off,might be why there's only 2-3 people on this thread?

 

[newworldicon]

I'm not nitpicking,I asked a question,you didn't know the answer but still for some reason answered anyways and now you're all hurt cos I corrected you?

I didn't even mention anything negative about the lights,I just wanted to know what jdizzle ment because it was unclear from his previous statement.

As usual if you even ask a question about an LED you get chased off,might be why there's only 2-3 people on this thread?

We'll agree to disagree about you correcting me, you came across as biligerant at the mention of a sweet spot higher up and then light bleached pics, most of your comments in this thread are hostile, it's all there and then you wonder why you may get resistance. The thread speaks for it's self at 46 pages or so. If you are here to learn about LED from people who are actually using it then great but try to make it clear you are interested in the claim for the sake of understanding not as an opponent.

Again I ask the question....why are you constantly on this thread if you won't have anything to do with growing with an LED panel?

 

[Harrekin]

Because as I said I want to keep up to date on them,they're not at their real breakthrough point yet,but will be eventually and I wanna be ready, I was even discussing them in PM's with other posters on this thread.

Scepticism is healthy,especially when it comes to LEDs cos there's so many crappy overpriced underperforming units out there(alongside other better performing units I might add) and so much bullshit surrounding them. You were the one who assumed I was being negative.

This thread is supposed to be a discussion thread anyways,not an LED worship "speak no wrong of them" thread,so if someone did ask a question or be negative it would be fair game too aslong as the point the person was making was valid.

 

[newworldicon]

Because as I said I want to keep up to date on them,they're not at their real breakthrough point yet,but will be eventually and I wanna be ready, I was even discussing them in PM's with other posters on this thread.

Scepticism is healthy,especially when it comes to LEDs cos there's so many crappy overpriced underperforming units out there(alongside other better performing units I might add) and so much bullshit surrounding them. You were the one who assumed I was being negative.

This thread is supposed to be a discussion thread anyways,not an LED worship "speak no wrong of them" thread,so if someone did ask a question or be negative it would be fair game too aslong as the point the person was making was valid.

Anyone who has a LED knows it's flaws believe me, So what do you think then of the idea that the sweet spot may be extended or higher up considering the light is hitting the highnotes of spectrum and is a far richer and better quality light. I was interested for 2 main reasons, my last grow under the 550 was at 14-18 and i felt they were too stacky and I just felt they were getting more light then they could possibly process or use, the rockwool did not help either, but the main reason being why would Mike at GLH make such a statement if it were in fact not true and totally obscured, by any measure it would seem completely counter productive to his cause, people would be following his advice then getting poor results and losing faith in the product. Of course this would be more aplicable to the larger panels and the fact that the area the diodes are placed in is only slighter larger than smaller panels adds to the problems I see with panels today.

 

[Harrekin]

Because it would back up their claim that their lights cover a larger area?

The ONLY way the sweet-spot theory works is if jdizzles assertion that the plants get damaged by the light at a closer range. The only thing that changes with light-distance is a drop in intensity,the kelvin temperature for example doesn't change.

Seriously,I don't doubt what jdizzle said cos it actually makes sense the way he explained it.

 

[newworldicon]

Because it would back up their claim that their lights cover a larger area?

The ONLY way the sweet-spot theory works is if jdizzles assertion that the plants get damaged by the light at a closer range. The only thing that changes with light-distance is a drop in intensity,the kelvin temperature for example doesn't change.

Seriously,I don't doubt what jdizzle said cos it actually makes sense the way he explained it.

But it shouldn't increase the footprint of the core saturation because of the limited placement of the diodes within the overall shape and design of the panel. Although there is no data that I have seen on where and at what angle the core saturation is at, no one has data mapped the spread zone. The light bleaching is as far as I'm concerned and it's seems to many others to be wholey true, there are many pics online which proves the intensity at close range is too much. But this is at 4-6-8 inches so the departure to 24-28 seems too far a gap for reality hence the sceptisism. As a person with a 420W true watt 550W panel I can tell you now the core zone is not increased at 24-28 inches, I still think it is going to be 2.5x3 to 3x3.5 (unsure) but the light may possibly be mixed better and at the right intensity for it's purpose. Who knows but we'll do the hard work for you mate, you can ride our coat tails later.

 

[Harrekin]

Ride your coattails? Lol,seriously,you're taking this very personally...sorry for not wanting to invest huge money on something that the manufacturers don't even list the true wattage of and then being skeptical of their other fairy story claims.I'm also sorry if it offends you that I'm seeking the truth about them first,there's so many lies going around "eg: 400w led outperforms 1000w HID".

I believe it's called "looking before you leap"

I'll gladly "ride your coattails" if it means I don't invest in something unworthwhile (for me)...and just outta interest,when do you want your medal for you're "pioneering" and self-sacrificing work?