Cfls all over pays off

lol well ive always heard the more cfls the better off u where and im in the middle of 3 grows all useing a slightly diff setup and this one by far by placing as many lights all over at as many spots asi could, payed off...this is nirvana papaya

i useds 4 t8 48 inch floros 2 6500 and 2 3500 and then i used 6 100 watt 2700 and 2 300 watt 2700k and well i think it payed off heres the pics

looks very nice miko how long until this plant is done, id love to see how big it gets/yeild

well done. when you say 100w and 200w cfls are you talking about the incandesent equivelent wattage? the ones that would have to be the "100w's" that you have look much smaller than a actual watt cfl of that size range so im pretty sure you are. when discussing cfls the number to go by is the actual watts. the incandesent equivelent wattage is just the amount of energy that it would take for a incandesent to put out the same amount of light.

im useing = for every 100 i mean 23 wat and i forget the = for the 300 watt 1s

Yeah, he's got 6 23w's and 2 65w(or 42w?). Either way, yeah it definitely paid of bro lol. What week of flowering are we looking at?

yea i know all that i was just listing the the = , so its more like 6 23 watt 4 32 watt floros and 2 60 something watts

this is around week 4 , i failed to keep track lol i know its around week 4 because my other plant (bubbalicous) is in week 6

You know what really pays off? HPS.

With a 250w HPS kit, you will pull less power and grow more bud of better quality = win/win/win.

I disagree with hps bud being better except maybe denser. It is a yellowish spectrum and is just more efficient in creating lumens. Better spectrum with cfl.

If you can get beer can reflectors or aluminum baking pans over the lights it will help a lot. Large clamp reflectors work best. I have been thinking of running Papaya, will look forward to a smoke report.

Cool man she looks healthy. Only thing I don't like about CFL is the lack of density. Also, it seems nugs take longer to mature. To each their own though.

Density thing with cfls is about proximity bros. HPS only typically has denser buds because it "penetrates" foliage to a greater extent. If you can get those CFLs close enough.... Also, this guy would be running HPS if he could I'm sure, space looks hot to me already with just those cfls.

yesum said:

I disagree with hps bud being better except maybe denser. It is a yellowish spectrum and is just more efficient in creating lumens. Better spectrum with cfl.

Click to expand...

Are you sure about the better spectrums with cfl, or are you just saying that? Because I'm looking at the graph, and they don't look to be all that great to me:

^Compared to hps they look good. Yea, another thing is get those lights within 1 or 2 inches of the buds or you are wasting the energy.

cfls are great but the pros use hps for a reason.

in the 6500k CFL in tht graph..thts alotta uneeded green! the 2700k is alright but the 6500k is not strong enough in the blue needed




good lookin grow tho bro..i dont think these guys understood u were showing off a CFL grow not saying it was better than HPS!

im thinkig a couple cfl's with my hps cant hurt

hell no for flower im gunna put one in each corner i was thinking LEDs but for the price i cant get a decent 14-18 watter

Green light is useful in growing, it was a myth that it was useless and has been debunked.

yesum said:

Green light is useful in growing, it was a myth that it was useless and has been debunked.

Click to expand...

If im not mistaken wasnt it a specific wavelength of green light or something like that? It wasnt just normal green light, i remember that much. looking for that article ive found another interesting article http://jxb.oxfordjournals.org/content/58/12/3099.full
[h=2]Abstract[/h]Light has a profound effect on plant growth and development. Red and blue light best drive photosynthetic metabolism, so it is no surprise that these light qualities are particularly efficient in advancing the developmental characteristics associated with autotrophic growth habits. Photosynthetically inefficient light qualities also impart important environmental information to a developing plant. For example, far-red light reverses the effect of phytochromes, leading to changes in gene expression, plant architecture, and reproductive responses. Recent evidence shows that green light also has discrete effects on plant biology, and the mechanisms that sense this light quality are now being elucidated. Green light has been shown to affect plant processes via cryptochrome-dependent and cryptochrome-independent means. Generally, the effects of green light oppose those directed by red and blue wavebands. This review examines the literature where green light has been implicated in physiological or developmental outcomes, many not easily attributable to known sensory systems. Here roles of green light in the regulation of vegetative development, photoperiodic flowering, stomatal opening, stem growth modulation, chloroplast gene expression and plant stature are discussed, drawing from data gathered over the last 50 years of plant photobiological research. Together these reports support a conclusion that green light sensory systems adjust development and growth in orchestration with red and blue sensors."



I still cant find that other one, wasnt it by harvard or some other big name university? i know ive seen it a few times before.

^^ You know more than me on the specifics of the green light. I just know a trusted researcher in cannabis was sure that green light was good stuff and I have forgotten the scientific specifics on it.

I was looking at the hps spectrum and it is pretty crappy but the cfl is not great either, spikes of color. If you mix a 6500k and 2700k cfl you have a good spectrum. The enhanced hps with extra blue looks good depending on the chart I view.