Par is a measure of photons in the 400-700nm range. PAR is not weighted but the McCree curve shows plants will take and use whatever they can get.This is my first post in several years. Just getting back into the indoor gardening scene, and I’m already going to piss off a bunch of people on this forum. I got excited about new technologies since my last grow, but I fear it’s all just another marketing stunt. Here it is.
Can we all just agree that PAR is almost as worthless as Lumens? Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but PAR is nothing more than a measure of lumens between 400nm and 700nm. Without knowing which specific frequencies of light have what level of intensity, what does a PAR rating really tell us?
In the PAR spectrum, plants really want frequencies of light centered around (in nanometers) 430, 445, 450, 475, 640, 660, and a few others in trace amounts. If your brand new $800 LED fixture pumps out a zillion ppfd at 550nm but almost nothing at the previously mentioned frequencies, then you would be wasting your money on a plant cooker. Yet it would still look great on paper compared to all those low-PAR models.
Feel free to hate me. Just be prepared to back up what you have to say. I would love to hear from those who have been growing since the dawn of HID, and especially those who have moved on to newer technologies.
Yes par might be bullshit in the case of a growlight that has super high par but nothing in mentioned nm. However, can you give one example of such a light? Full par but no reds no blues in any shape? Until you actually find one par is going to be quite relevant.This is my first post in several years. Just getting back into the indoor gardening scene, and I’m already going to piss off a bunch of people on this forum. I got excited about new technologies since my last grow, but I fear it’s all just another marketing stunt. Here it is.
Can we all just agree that PAR is almost as worthless as Lumens? Someone please correct me if I’m wrong, but PAR is nothing more than a measure of lumens between 400nm and 700nm. Without knowing which specific frequencies of light have what level of intensity, what does a PAR rating really tell us?
In the PAR spectrum, plants really want frequencies of light centered around (in nanometers) 430, 445, 450, 475, 640, 660, and a few others in trace amounts. If your brand new $800 LED fixture pumps out a zillion ppfd at 550nm but almost nothing at the previously mentioned frequencies, then you would be wasting your money on a plant cooker. Yet it would still look great on paper compared to all those low-PAR models.
Feel free to hate me. Just be prepared to back up what you have to say. I would love to hear from those who have been growing since the dawn of HID, and especially those who have moved on to newer technologies.
These plants exhibit pretty much all of the characteristics of plants that have received very little light.here you can see my array of 24x 14w 3000k 1380lm bulbs and a few 4000/ 4200k for a total of 326 watts
i would say this is doing pretty well
View attachment 5352519
I have an Apogee and a Uni-T for lux meters. I've tested Photone twice and, based on the outcome and after having traded email with their programmer, I only recommend it in specific circumstances (I've been a software engineer for over 30 years so I have some insight into the issues that they're dealing with).Par is a measure of photons in the 400-700nm range. PAR is not weighted but the McCree curve shows plants will take and use whatever they can get.
I digitized the McCree curve years ago for 5 different spectrums at the same wattage and when the curve was applied it modified the numbers but not in a crazy way. I didn't digitize blurple but it would show some gains -vs- white with a "McCree factor" applied, given the same input. Whether that translates into more growth isn't as straight forward.
PAR isn't perfect but somewhat better than Lumens. PPFD better than LUX. That being said, a LUX meter isn't a terrible way to measure light intensity under plants. There are various ways to quantify light quantity/intensity. Even watts wasn't terrible but with the advent of LED measurement in watts becomes suspicious because the efficiency can be all over the place.
I would prefer to know PAR of a lamp, assuming the rating is honest.
i know, the photo is when i just switched to 2x8 bulbs, they got to that stage with only 112 watts (so 8 bulbs) and i added 16 more when i switched to flower, see this was like an experiment, now i know household bulbs can grow something and do pretty good, do not miss my next update on the grow diary secction, now they are sitting under 326 and getting fat, and you see when they where young and the light (8x 14w bulbs) was sitting close (12 inches) i got some of the shortest internodals ever growing and got 9 plants to show sex in a 2x3 in 4 weeks using only 120 watts, so i was aiming for what i got, i agree that yours is way better and professional but hey i wanted to grow something in the closet care free and only watering each 2 days,, this is not my first grow, i have grown using the finest leds and hps ligts, i even laid my hands on a 400v dimable hps system, but this time i wanted to do a budget grow i only spent like 150 bucks on everything, and i could not have cared less for the plants haha i would say you spent more for that pretty humidifierThese plants exhibit pretty much all of the characteristics of plants that have received very little light.
They are extremely tall, have significant internodal space, and have very little foliage.
The plant in the photo below has the opposite characteristics. A significant factor is that it was topped and LST'd. It measures 30" across, 28" front to back, and is about 24" tall. The branches are up to 36" long and the foliage is dense. The plant was grown using high light levels, at least 300µmol in seedling (24/0 photoperiod) and then moved to an average of over 850µmol across the canopy.
This is a typical autoflower grow. Feed it lots of light and they grow…through the roof. Cannabis thrives in ambient CO2 at up to about 1000µmol. More photons = more food = more flower.
Great info. Thanks for posting it and explaining "the method being the madness".i know, the photo is when i just switched to 2x8 bulbs, they got to that stage with only 112 watts (so 8 bulbs) and i added 16 more when i switched to flower, see this was like an experiment, now i know household bulbs can grow something and do pretty good, do not miss my next update on the grow diary secction, now they are sitting under 326 and getting fat, and you see when they where young and the light (8x 14w bulbs) was sitting close (12 inches) i got some of the shortest internodals ever growing and got 9 plants to show sex in a 2x3 in 4 weeks using only 120 watts, so i was aiming for what i got, i agree that yours is way better and professional but hey i wanted to grow something in the closet care free and only watering each 2 days,, this is not my first grow, i have grown using the finest leds and hps ligts, i even laid my hands on a 400v dimable hps system, but this time i wanted to do a budget grow i only spent like 150 bucks on everything, and i could not have cared less for the plants haha i would say you spent more for that pretty humidifier
The Mars was my first light in 2021. I did a grow in 2017 using a Kind blurple and then archived everything. When I started growing again, I picked the Mars because it was a single bar light, so it was easy to work with, and it's got a really good PPFD map. It's not a "sexy" light like the bar lights and the other two SP's just don't have a lot going for them but the 3k is nice. After using it for a couple of grows, I decided to go with separate veg and flower Growcrafts and it's worked out well. I'm getting better quality plants with the two lights but that's not a knock on the Mars. I think it's a very cost effective light.and... is that a sp3000 used for side lighting? lol i used to have one, pretty good light, it does not get hot and the plants love it, i loved that light
i used it with a 600 hps and got some fire flower
Good. I hope they fill in. They didn't get much food as kids but make up for them now that they're teenagers.oh and my plants where topped and lst ed too even a litle hst there on the top with the supercropping of the mains
i think the intermodals are aok you will see now with more light it will fill that space with bud
You nailed it. That was an auto and you know they have a mind of their own. I could have trimmed it back, sure, but it made more to just leave the tent open, try to keep things upright, and use the lights that I already had.btw hey i love your hydroponic system you got some nice trees there , one question, are you forced to leave the door open on that 2x4? (now that i think about it its pretty obvius with side lighting you leave it open, then whats the need of the grow tent? could just line the walls with mylar xd)
bless
i'd be curious to compare the pulse pro spectrum reading to some high price spectrum meter out there.not much to tell you hold it under your light near the canopy and it gives a measurement of the light intensity ive been using that to dial in the height of light so i can get maximum light at the canopy without burning the plants in a co2 enriched room. better than guessing with the back of my hand and hps light
Quantum Sensors - PAR Meters | Apogee Instruments
Apogee Instruments’ quantum sensors are the tool of choice for researchers and agricultural professionals measuring photosynthetically active radiation (PAR) and daily light integral all over the world.www.apogeeinstruments.com
i also got a pulse pro that measures spectrum but i cant speak for how accurate that is.
Pulse Pro
The Pulse Pro offers enhanced grow room monitoring with CO2, PPFD/PAR, light spectrum, vapor pressure deficit, temperature, and humidity tracking. This advanced monitor boasts real-time and historical data, customizable alerts, and support for multiple sensors and WiFi networks. Crafted in the...pulsegrow.com
Tbh i wouldn't expect too much from it at that price. A hygrometer costs around 10 $, a co2 meter starts at 60 $ (but those are really bad), a quantum meter is in the range of 300 $ and a simple spectrometer is atleast 4 digits but the sky is the limit.i'd be curious to compare the pulse pro spectrum reading to some high price spectrum meter out there.
Anyone can chime in on this? it would be really interesting !
That's also my though but still curious!Tbh i wouldn't expect too much from it at that price. A hygrometer costs around 10 $, a co2 meter starts at 60 $ (but those are really bad), a quantum meter is in the range of 300 $ and a simple spectrometer is atleast 4 digits but the sky is the limit.
Proper calibration easily doubles the cost of each sensor.
Also they don't give any performance characteristics of the spectrometer compoment. The other sensors atleast has a measurement uncertainty attached (but no information how that was derived).
Send them an email about what sensors they use. I have a PulseOne and they publish the manufacturer and model number for some of the components. Perhaps they'll do the same for the Pro.Tbh i wouldn't expect too much from it at that price. A hygrometer costs around 10 $, a co2 meter starts at 60 $ (but those are really bad), a quantum meter is in the range of 300 $ and a simple spectrometer is atleast 4 digits but the sky is the limit.
Proper calibration easily doubles the cost of each sensor.
Also they don't give any performance characteristics of the spectrometer compoment. The other sensors atleast has a measurement uncertainty attached (but no information how that was derived).