HPS heat vs led heat

boilingoil said:

And serious growers learn to use the tools they are given to achieve their goals. Not bash or nit-pick anyone who doesn't grow their way or don't have the skills needed to figure out why some can grow other ways besides their way.

Click to expand...

You see why I was giving him a hard time a few days ago lol

Kingrow1 said:

Serious growers dont use leds fullstop, it is you who is ignorant to assume leds amount to anything and really its just a load of hype that has pretty much ended when cmh turned up at a fraction of the price and none of the obvious problems.

You perpetuate the opposite because the big 'I AM'S' here love to jump all over anything that might be different, simply put you all failed to answer any of the science or even out grow hps since its still being sold off the shelf.

Years waiting for some kind of proof or concensus, mainly leds are owned by dicks and then they naturally gravitate here and fuck it up for the real growers that actually know stuff and grow pure green healthy plants under 'ANY' light before spouting crap about ppfd.

Seriously you sat here and wrote ppfd crap without googling that ppfd is by far pretty meaningless, noobs like you used ppfd to even compare hps against leds when again this is a wrong comparison. All this is cited and proves you know dick all mate...!

Click to expand...

Serious growers have incorporated cmh/led. What you obviously fail to understand is that for a large scale ''serious'' op a lot more is on the line, a lot more logistics are involved and big changes have to be made. Big ''serious'' growers out for profit margins are hardly going to jump in balls deep in any industry. It is the smaller time people who proof test shit.. then the giant company's reap the rewards later. Large company's also get subsidies and tax relief's on running costs.. so if they have no issue off loading produce they may only decide to make such changes purely on ethical (aka good advertising) purposes or for marginal quality improvement to stay ahead of the curve. This shit is literally business 101 in any industry.

I didn't write about ppfd at all. Clearly you have lost grip, so this next part will send you off the rail. You know very little, you are a small time tent grower who is still ambient heat stressing his plants thinking the stress swell is ''skilled growing'' density. You read google to learn about hps and consolidate your lazy driven denial that you will never need to change and adapt, you see what you want to see. I know this because you are the guy who said wind is not natural. Wtf?.

You have never used cmh, you have never used cob/led while you only marginally grow well with hps. But clearly you know the science, so why are your plants not perfect?.. ahh right.. you're not a ''serious'' grower.

I try not to get personal but I've been very polite so far, your little childish outburst deserves to be slapped around like the little pussy you are.

Kingrow1 said:

If hps heats up the air in grow tents by much then the sun would heat the air on the surface of our planet past habitable temperatures and we wouldn't be here cause we would all be dead.

I've had this long running argument with led folk where they think hps heats your tent far too much and leds don't. I've tried to explain the science and physical principles of heat and light which be 'Conduction, Convection and Radiation' and that air is not heated by very much whatsoever from a few hundred watts of hps in a well extracted area.

Weve had to explain how to grow just so that some can realize its not leds they need but to cool their house and environment as at certain air temps everything will struggle to grow and adding light will further compound the problem whether led or not.

Click to expand...

Ok so more constructive.

It is the direction of air that hps/cmh heats. Bulbs radiate a lot of the heat onto the canopy, leds don't. You need less air circulation and venting to deal with led than you do hps because you don't have to cool canopy temp near as much, most of the hot air gets sucked directly out the top from extractor. This is also a lot to do with leds being spread out more, the air toward canopy is more evenly distributed.. evident by how easy it is to fry plant leaves directly under hps bulb.

If all techs are using the exact same W then yes all will generate the same heat. It is the direction and concentration of that heat that matters. However it isn't all + with led/cobs. Where summer temps are easier maintained, that can be countered by the need for winter supplement heating if you don't have the correct airflow thermal control. This is an example of not being bias.

You keep using the sun in a very simplistic way to back your argument. The sun is distanced enough from our planet that parts of the planet are comfortably liveable. Other parts, not so easily. Countless people die every single day from heat stroke/dehydration. Parts of the planet are so hot that your shoe soles will melt.

Hps is like the sun on a day with no clouds. Led is like those warm clammy days when the sun is hidden by clouds.

Flowki said:

Hps is like the sun on a day with no clouds. Led is like those warm clammy days when the sun is hidden by clouds.

Click to expand...

Are you sure you have grown under led? Every heard of Bleaching? Warm clammy days when the sun is hidden?

You do illustrate one point well - How does the sun "Out-Par" any of the light sources used for indoor growing yet it is so far away?
Your kinda making the case for a Thouie hung high

Flowki said:

It is the direction of air that hps/cmh heats. Bulbs radiate a lot of the heat onto the canopy, leds don't. You need less air circulation and venting to deal with led than you do hps because you don't have to cool canopy temp near as much, most of the hot air gets sucked directly out the top from extractor. This is also a lot to do with leds being spread out more, the air toward canopy is more evenly distributed.. evident by how easy it is to fry plant leaves directly under hps bulb.

Click to expand...

You've gone nuts trying to explain your science. All this is border line bull shit. LED's are not frying leaves? Look around. The worst leaf coloring is coming from QB and cobs. Its a lll over the forums. You know this. Stop trying to sell tech. Hopefully you can get a certified lamp going then you can pitch to government cannabis. Just like you know who did. We know you have showed awesome cannabis pics in the past. Its time you start again, we need ti see wtf you are really talking about and testing.

They're all just lights, they all work when everything's dialled-in properly. They all have their own benefits in specific environments or space configs. Only thing that irks me about these light tech threads is people spewing bullshit when they've never tried the tech.

Just pulled these, under Citi and Cree COBs, 42-48" high in 3 gal pots, solid buds all the way down.



IR shot of the batch ~3.5 x 8', running 800w in multiple LED bars spread across them or ~29 w/sq./ft. Pheno hunt from seed.

OneHitDone said:

Are you sure you have grown under led? Every heard of Bleaching? Warm clammy days when the sun is hidden?

You do illustrate one point well - How does the sun "Out-Par" any of the light sources used for indoor growing yet it is so far away?
Your kinda making the case for a Thouie hung high

Click to expand...

I never said cob/led don't light bleach or heat stress. It is easier with the correct layout of cob/led to cover the full canopy with a good intensity while avoiding light/heat stress. To achieve that with horizontal bulbs you need to shape the canopy in a loose sphere shape and although it's more than doable, it isn't easy. If you don't grow like that with hps you are wasting intensity one way or another.

I think you've completely missed the point in terms of the suns heat vs bulbs or led. I don't know how you draw the conclusion this makes a case for using a thouie hung high, respectfully, maybe you need to read the post again.

a mongo frog said:

You've gone nuts trying to explain your science. All this is border line bull shit. LED's are not frying leaves? Look around. The worst leaf coloring is coming from QB and cobs. Its a lll over the forums. You know this. Stop trying to sell tech. Hopefully you can get a certified lamp going then you can pitch to government cannabis. Just like you know who did. We know you have showed awesome cannabis pics in the past. Its time you start again, we need ti see wtf you are really talking about and testing.

Click to expand...

The qb units are like hps, too much light coming from one area. If cobs are set up the same.. they will suck too for even, light burn free intensity.

I don't know who you think I am but I have nothing to sell and never have.

GroErr said:

They're all just lights, they all work when everything's dialled-in properly. They all have their own benefits in specific environments or space configs. Only thing that irks me about these light tech threads is people spewing bullshit when they've never tried the tech.

Just pulled these, under Citi and Cree COBs, 42-48" high in 3 gal pots, solid buds all the way down.

View attachment 4168797 View attachment 4168798 View attachment 4168799 View attachment 4168801

IR shot of the batch ~3.5 x 8', running 800w in multiple LED bars spread across them or ~29 w/sq./ft. Pheno hunt from seed.

View attachment 4168808

Click to expand...

I agree, what irked me were the led claims that clearly made them far superior to all other tech.

For those that wanted to discuss ive laid the science out very basically.

Flowki said:

Ok so more constructive.

It is the direction of air that hps/cmh heats. Bulbs radiate a lot of the heat onto the canopy, leds don't. You need less air circulation and venting to deal with led than you do hps because you don't have to cool canopy temp near as much, most of the hot air gets sucked directly out the top from extractor. This is also a lot to do with leds being spread out more, the air toward canopy is more evenly distributed.. evident by how easy it is to fry plant leaves directly under hps bulb.

If all techs are using the exact same W then yes all will generate the same heat. It is the direction and concentration of that heat that matters. However it isn't all + with led/cobs. Where summer temps are easier maintained, that can be countered by the need for winter supplement heating if you don't have the correct airflow thermal control. This is an example of not being bias.

You keep using the sun in a very simplistic way to back your argument. The sun is distanced enough from our planet that parts of the planet are comfortably liveable. Other parts, not so easily. Countless people die every single day from heat stroke/dehydration. Parts of the planet are so hot that your shoe soles will melt.

Hps is like the sun on a day with no clouds. Led is like those warm clammy days when the sun is hidden by clouds.

Click to expand...

Id like to say that a hps or cmh bulb heats the air very little.

That air is also fast moving.

Ir light is fine, transpiration is highly efficient.

I feel your starting to see a bigger picture, reference to the sun was that it itself heats our air very little and an indirect form of heating heats our atmosphere. This and the sun kicks out a ton of ir, still a hot day dosent supplement the effect of ir on leaves, leds were wrong to make this assumption, fake science perpetuated to non scientific people.

The sun is actually closer than i would hang a hps if we go by lumens or micromoles, were all in a habitable zone

Kingrow1 said:

Id like to say that a hps or cmh bulb heats the air very little.

That air is also fast moving.

Ir light is fine, transpiration is highly efficient.

I feel your starting to see a bigger picture, reference to the sun was that it itself heats our air very little and an indirect form of heating heats our atmosphere. This and the sun kicks out a ton of ir, still a hot day dosent supplement the effect of ir on leaves, leds were wrong to make this assumption, fake science perpetuated to non scientific people.

The sun is actually closer than i would hang a hps if we go by lumens or micromoles, were all in a habitable zone

Click to expand...

I get what you are saying, I have from the start. The issue is that you are clinging to one fallacy to disregard an entire tech.

315cmh was advertised to replace 1k hps. Was that complete bullshit, yes, does it mean cmh is shit, no. Led has the same bs advertising x10.

a mongo frog said:

Dude at least show us all the dried bud pics. We all got week 4 pics. Dump it all out show us. Is all that top shelf bud to you? I already know you are a good gardener thats not the point. The point is this new LED tech is no where near what hps is doing in quality. Don't take it the wrong way man, I yielded a bunch of shit bud also using "new tech LED".

Click to expand...

After running four 132 3k boards 2 times and two 324 boards 2 times to harvest(so 4 harvest with quantums used only with no issues) i totally agree the hps produces higher quality then quantums can. As you said the quantums do produce great at alot lower wattage but quality was noticeable down with the qb rigs. I'm still going to use them for genetic test tents but at a lower price point since customers are use to a higher standard.

booms111 said:

quality was noticeable down

Click to expand...

In what way? Potency? Yield?

Miyagismokes said:

In what way? Potency? Yield?

Click to expand...

Potency yes yield no. The quantum grown product doesn't look as good as hps is the most noticeable difference, HPS just looks so much better and each strains personality is much more defined with hps. Potency wise hps is touch better on plants I've ran going on 10 years. Yield wise I think quantums do a fine job producing since there's more light sources. A mongo frog and I have talked before about this subject and I told him I'd report back once I had ran quantums enough to form a opinion.