LED Companies w/ LINKS

Eraserhead said:
We have a 6x6 tent we do our testing in, and tested all white in veg, both 4000k and 6000k, and white + red + deep red, and also white + red and no deep red in flowering. Plants just seem to love life under a dominant white color, and the yields we (and those that use our lights) are getting, are getting better and better the more white we add.

We're looking to do some all white seedling to harvest test grows, we'll be doing the tests once our test grower is all set up again. We'll probably have some 3rd party people do a couple runs as well, like a 2nd opinion.

We try to maintain 70-77° during lights on. Others that have used our lamps let temps get in the low 80's with no ill effects. I prefer hydro over soil, it's just easier to maintain res temps when the room temps are low 70's.

I think a lot of peoples issue with white, they think plants do not absorb green and yellow and white has a lot of that. But if the argument that plants are green therefor reflect green, then what happens to plants that change to purple, or blue? Do they stop absorbing purple when that happens? Plants love green and yellow color, they just do not need huge green and yellow spikes like you would use with the reds.
Click to expand...

Were there any ill effects when using the 4000k+625+ DR? Any reason why you decided against a second red nm peak?

Too stoked.
 
I was under the impression (given to me by past professors) that some carotenoids are responsible for the absorption of green light? Energy is then passed to photosynthesizing pigments. Please correct me if I'm wrong.
 
Yup also that ...
But question is under which conditions and "circumstances " .....
When/How exactly is it / gets worth-while to invest on increasing i.e green wls into a led light ?

:-P
That's the whole point ...

Let's not forget that making a led light is actually preparing
an almost constant and stable (in many of it's aspects ) lighting in order ,to
"distil" the best outta of a plant ...
And at our case the" best" is: as many - as juicy-as tasty- as potent-flowers ....

If I wanted carotenoid-doped carrots or lycopene-enhanced tomatoes ,
I would 've chosen a totally different spectrum layout / mix ...
I.e. ....
Blue 430-460nm and red 640-660 nm leds ...
Best choice so far , for this particular example's case ....
 
stardustsailor said:
Carotenoids .....

Mostly absorb light in blue region ...

Aid PS,m by doing so ...
"Helping main PS pigments capture rare blue photons ...." ...
And if blue photons get way much in numbers (power increase ),carotenoids then protect from photodamage of Chlorophylls ....
Acting also as strong anti-oxidants ,against free-radical oxygen roots...

-Led lighting Ingredients ..
-Controlled Environment's constant (at power/angle/spectrum/duration) lighting ...
-Aiming for great flower yields .....(And not for light stressed nutrient rich green/purple leafies ...

Do we add the light that carotenoids absorb in good quantities or not ?

That's the question (for today ,at least ... ) ....
Click to expand...


"They serve two key roles in plants and algae: they absorb light energy for use in photosynthesis, and they protect chlorophyll from photodamage"
 
So ,would you cause photodamage to get more carotenoids ?
Would then be useful for more/better " light energy for use in photosynthesis" absorption ?
Would you increase yields by increasing blue light content of white leds used by choosing CW/NW or by just using blue leds ?
 
jubiare said:
I would personally propose ganja2 for the blackdog VS area51!
Eheh
Or I dunno mmmm.....
Click to expand...
I agree ...That makes two of us ...

Dear brother Eraserhead .If your offer still stands .Better give a new panel to Ganja2..
For this testing/comparison ....
(He-he ..I will take it from him after test / comparison is done ! )

Ohhh...I wish I had the economic freedom to build & offer to you -for your personal grows , two-three ,of my new GD-SDS boxes ...

 
Eh..as for me I'm simple and choose all of the spectrum which is complicated..meaning us humans are arrogant bastards who think they know everything about what plants need.

We humans only know alot of what we know and don't know shit about what we don't know and there's alot more of what we don't know than what we do know.
 
RainerRocks said:
Eh..as for me I'm simple and choose all of the spectrum which is complicated..meaning us humans are arrogant bastards who think they know everything about what plants need.

We humans only know alot of what we know and don't know shit about what we don't know and there's alot more of what we don't know than what we do know.
Click to expand...

Not me....i know everything... :-P
 
RainerRocks said:
Eh..as for me I'm simple and choose all of the spectrum which is complicated..meaning us humans are arrogant bastards who think they know everything about what plants need.

We humans only know alot of what we know and don't know shit about what we don't know and there's alot more of what we don't know than what we do know.
Click to expand...

I'm not all that convinced we "know a lot of what we know." Rather, I think we think we know a lot about which we actually know very little. But I'll be damned if we aren't confident about what we think we know!
 
mamakush said:
I'm not all that convinced we "know a lot of what we know." Rather, I think we think we know a lot about which we actually know very little. But I'll be damned if we aren't confident about what we think we know!
Click to expand...

I'm kinda caught in the middle as an alchemist ...

Before they thought it was flat and the center of the universe...
Later said ,ok it spins around itshelf ,goes around Sun and it's sphere shaped ...

Later said : "well ,not exactly a perfect sphere ,but rather squeezed at the poles ...
Kinda more like "slightly flattened sphere " ... "


or ..'Relativity' theory ...
later to come the 'Quanta' theory ..
later the 'Strings' theory
Bra theory ...Maybe next ? ....

Confident ...

Εν οίδα ,ότι ουδέν οίδα ...

( All I know is that I know nothing.
Socrates. )

Edit : Did he just explained "everything " and "why " all these are takin' place ,or what ?
"Knowledge " => "evolution" =>more knowledge => more evolution ...ect = "LIFE" (?..)

or else to explain another fairytale ..:

Can you imagine how the story would've had unfold ,if
-say- "Adam & Eve " never have bitten the "fruit of forbidden ..knowledge " ?
If had stayed forever in the Garden ( more like a growroom ,actually..I was there ! ) of Eden ,living to eternity ....
Just the two of them..



......

How nice ...
What a great "creation " ....
A cage with two birdies inside ...
Yeah,right ....
And they lived happily ever after .....
I might add ...
....


" I think I jutht thaw a thnake ...."
...
Making things ,better ...
Ferruccio Lamborghini vs Enzo Ferrari ....
More or less ...
;-P
:fire:
 
^^^ this guy...

Could anyone else speculate as to why some would choose to run strictly 625nm chips, I know they give out wavelengths past the peak; but I thought far red was a big deal for flowering?

Either way I am excited for the upgrade for several reasons, just curious about the science behind the thought.
 
Eraserhead said:
We have 1 new model coming out for 2013 (so far), it would have been out 2 months earlier, but I got really sick with the flu and could not meet the deadline I set for myself.

The light is a couple watts short of 170w, and covers 5-6 sq ft, if a bigger footprint is needed, just use more lamps, simple as that.

Honestly, I have no interest in putting up large amounts of lights just to prove what most everyone already knows. You are just not worthy of it to me.

I'll put up a 170w against double wattage of your lights, 340w you have? Take it or leave it.
Click to expand...

Sorry to hear you were sick, that can push major projects back for sure, plus you are moving to a new location which is even more work.

We have both agreed in previous posts that footprint claims in this industry are usually utter BS. I don't like the idea of us using a double the size light against yours when we have a whole line of lights. You claim a 5-6 sq ft footprint. We claim 2.5' x 2.5' which would be 6.25 sq ft. If we had to give a flower range like you it would be 2.25' x 2.25' to 2.5' x 2.5' which would be 5.1 to 6.25 sq ft. Seems pretty damn close to your claim.

So you got your light and we have ours, of course everyone will deal with the wattage difference as they see fit but our claimed flower footprints match up with only a .25 sq ft difference. When exactly is your new light ready to go?

And to set the record straight, growers do not want smaller lights. We sell more Platinum XL-U than any other light and this has been true for almost 5 years now. Don't get me wrong the new Micro-U has started to give it some competition but the Platinum XL-U is still the king in terms of volume. This is not a guess or an estimate, but years of data. Not to mention every professional grower we have worked with does not want to have more than one plug per 4' x 4' in their setup.

Also, for anyone who buys into the posts that suggest we are selling a light that does not perform I can guarantee almost a full 50% of our sales are returning customers. We often tell people who are making a large investment to buy one light and make sure it meets their expectation then buy the rest and they all come back. That is how you build a sustainable business, offer a good product that simply does what you say it does. This is why we are asking for a head to head after Eraserhead made comments aimed directly at us. Let the lights do the talking.
 
LOL You basically said what I said...just worded differently. We're also wrong about alot of things we just don't know it yet.

Sorry for going off topic...OK back on topic.
 
Perro Negro said:
Sorry to hear you were sick, that can push major projects back for sure, plus you are moving to a new location which is even more work.

We have both agreed in previous posts that footprint claims in this industry are usually utter BS. I don't like the idea of us using a double the size light against yours when we have a whole line of lights. You claim a 5-6 sq ft footprint. We claim 2.5' x 2.5' which would be 6.25 sq ft. If we had to give a flower range like you it would be 2.25' x 2.25' to 2.5' x 2.5' which would be 5.1 to 6.25 sq ft. Seems pretty damn close to your claim.

So you got your light and we have ours, of course everyone will deal with the wattage difference as they see fit but our claimed flower footprints match up with only a .25 sq ft difference. When exactly is your new light ready to go?

And to set the record straight, growers do not want smaller lights. We sell more Platinum XL-U than any other light and this has been true for almost 5 years now. Don't get me wrong the new Micro-U has started to give it some competition but the Platinum XL-U is still the king in terms of volume. This is not a guess or an estimate, but years of data. Not to mention every professional grower we have worked with does not want to have more than one plug per 4' x 4' in their setup.

Also, for anyone who buys into the posts that suggest we are selling a light that does not perform I can guarantee almost a full 50% of our sales are returning customers. We often tell people who are making a large investment to buy one light and make sure it meets their expectation then buy the rest and they all come back. That is how you build a sustainable business, offer a good product that simply does what you say it does. This is why we are asking for a head to head after Eraserhead made comments aimed directly at us. Let the lights do the talking.
Click to expand...

I would much rather run several small units, as opposed to one large unit as the ability to customize my footprint is of far greater value to me than having high wattage in a single unit. Especially when units can daisy chain together, eliminating the need for multiple plugs.

EDIT: I have a large panel right now, and I love it; but for anyone doing a perpetual grow, or multiple strains at once, it's just not ideal. Maybe for commercial grows, but I don't think the majority of LED panels being purchased are for commercial grows.
 
Beefbisquit said:
I would much rather run several small units, as opposed to one large unit as the ability to customize my footprint is of far greater value to me than having high wattage in a single unit. Especially when units can daisy chain together, eliminating the need for multiple plugs.

EDIT: I have a large panel right now, and I love it; but for anyone doing a perpetual grow, or multiple strains at once, it's just not ideal. Maybe for commercial grows, but I don't think the majority of LED panels being purchased are for commercial grows.
Click to expand...

We have to fill out some pretty strange shaped spaces when consulting and setting up grows, having our six models to select from allows us to select the right light for the right space and budget. That being said, numbers don't lie and we sell more Platinum XL-U than any other light by a long shot. I have personally ventured a guess that the early adopters of LED tend to want the biggest light available based on their nature, but that is not a fact, just a guess.
 
Perro Negro said:
We have to fill out some pretty strange shaped spaces when consulting and setting up grows, having our six models to select from allows us to select the right light for the right space and budget. That being said, numbers don't lie and we sell more Platinum XL-U than any other light by a long shot. I have personally ventured a guess that the early adopters of LED tend to want the biggest light available based on their nature, but that is not a fact, just a guess.
Click to expand...

Quite possible. People going from 1000W HID to LED, would probably feel more comfortable going to 700-800W than 400-500W.

Not sure how your clientele mashes up with other companies from a market standpoint, so I really have nothing to base an opinion on in that sense. But as a grower, I can certainly say that I prefer using panels that smaller/easier to maneuver/position for better coverage.

I grew some White Widow in with some Blueberry and Neville's Haze, and it was a bitch to keep the canopy somewhat level with my large light.
 
I don't blame anyone for selling what people want, even though it is often NOT what they need. Again overcompensating for lack of knowledge, or small penis theory

The argument that 50%+ of your biz is big panels, OK for commercial growers....

That you are not seeing a greater percentage to small buyers suggests me that your products are not meeting their needs.
 
That flu messed me up pretty bad, and my back was acting up at the same time, I spent a lot of time in bed waiting for it to be over. I'd never wish that upon anyone.

We designed and sold a larger lamp last year. The panel was 26"x26" and drew just short of 600w. It took us almost an entire year to move 46 of 50 units. We have 4 left and no intentions of producing more.
af-600.jpg

Our A51-90 170w model, I lost track on how many of those I have sold, but the numbers were well over 300 units. The 135 model did pretty good too, @ 250w.

The new model is in transit right now, we're just waiting on customs.

Perro Negro said:
Sorry to hear you were sick, that can push major projects back for sure, plus you are moving to a new location which is even more work.

We have both agreed in previous posts that footprint claims in this industry are usually utter BS. I don't like the idea of us using a double the size light against yours when we have a whole line of lights. You claim a 5-6 sq ft footprint. We claim 2.5' x 2.5' which would be 6.25 sq ft. If we had to give a flower range like you it would be 2.25' x 2.25' to 2.5' x 2.5' which would be 5.1 to 6.25 sq ft. Seems pretty damn close to your claim.

So you got your light and we have ours, of course everyone will deal with the wattage difference as they see fit but our claimed flower footprints match up with only a .25 sq ft difference. When exactly is your new light ready to go?

And to set the record straight, growers do not want smaller lights. We sell more Platinum XL-U than any other light and this has been true for almost 5 years now. Don't get me wrong the new Micro-U has started to give it some competition but the Platinum XL-U is still the king in terms of volume. This is not a guess or an estimate, but years of data. Not to mention every professional grower we have worked with does not want to have more than one plug per 4' x 4' in their setup.

Also, for anyone who buys into the posts that suggest we are selling a light that does not perform I can guarantee almost a full 50% of our sales are returning customers. We often tell people who are making a large investment to buy one light and make sure it meets their expectation then buy the rest and they all come back. That is how you build a sustainable business, offer a good product that simply does what you say it does. This is why we are asking for a head to head after Eraserhead made comments aimed directly at us. Let the lights do the talking.
Click to expand...

I can see how a 600w+ draw would be okay for flowering, as long as the Umole values are up to par (pun intended), but for veg or even seedlings? I would never waste 600w on a seedling.

If someone wanted to run a 5x5 tent with our new rig, you'd need 4 units to cover it good. But would you use all 4 lamps on a few seedlings? No, you'd use 1 lamp until more footprint was needed, then keep adding them as needed.

At least with my 600w unit, there were 4 switches so it wouldn't use so much power when it's not needed.

Beefbisquit said:
I would much rather run several small units, as opposed to one large unit as the ability to customize my footprint is of far greater value to me than having high wattage in a single unit. Especially when units can daisy chain together, eliminating the need for multiple plugs.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top