Light Intensity; LED vs HID

puffenuff said:
Ok putting bullshit to the side, here is why I would rather have (1) 1000w hps instead of (4) 250w hps in a 4x4

250w hps * 4 = roughly 112,000 lumens
1000w hps = around 140,000 lumens

I get the benefits of overlapping coverage from multiple units. Lumens are for humans, I know, but they speak to intensity. And in general, the more intense a light, the higher PAR it puts out.

I prefer to have as much intensity out of a single source as possible. I'll take the same approach any day whether hps or led. But that's just me and I'm ok if not everyone agrees
Click to expand...

Except that's just repeating what I said. Nobody does that because 250Ws are terrible. LEDs don't have that problem. Maybe you skimmed or something.
 
JorgeGonzales said:
I think the same PPF and coverage was implied, just concentrated vs spread out.
Click to expand...

Of course it was implied, but you can't be too careful with guys like(churchhaze) this just waiting to jump down your throat.

I gotta be careful or I'm a sock account or a troll...

Diffused overlapping light imo is better.
 
Bungalow said:
I can see it not making sense with artificial lighting due to current limitation of conveying the photons over distance.... Basically - is photon density simply photon density regardless of source in terms of how far it can reach?
Click to expand...

Well, I was thinking of light loss due to diffusion. Diffuse light definitely penetrates a canopy better, that's undisputed as far as I know. But diffusion also steals light, so it's a tradeoff. In a small tent I doubt it matters, and I have no idea otherwise. Maybe running a cob per sq ft is enough, maybe it only applies to greenhouses and the sun.

And yeah, PPFD is PPFD, which is kind of the crux of this whole thread. A hung HPS uses a reflector to spread that light as evenly as possible because hotspots are not good.
 
puffenuff said:
Ok putting bullshit to the side, here is why I would rather have (1) 1000w hps instead of (4) 250w hps in a 4x4

250w hps * 4 = roughly 112,000 lumens
1000w hps = around 140,000 lumens

I get the benefits of overlapping coverage from multiple units. Lumens are for humans, I know, but they speak to intensity. And in general, the more intense a light, the higher PAR it puts out.

I prefer to have as much intensity out of a single source as possible. I'll take the same approach any day whether hps or led. But that's just me and I'm ok if not everyone agrees
Click to expand...

What you have illustrated here is that 4 250w hps does not produce the same amount of light as a 1000w light. Lower efficiency. That's an issue specific to the 250w hps technology. In this case I agree with you, but it because the 250watt hps sucks.
 
JorgeGonzales said:
What was that? I can't hear anything over the giant fart sounds eminating from the ass you have for a head. The one you are talking out of.

I'll let you correct the other great Jorge, if you dare!

View attachment 3719448
Click to expand...
This diagram is a perfect example of what I've been trying to say.
600's spread out is the least you'd go in a grow room. They have the intensity & spread to flower big, hard nugz!
400's spread out is the least you'd go in a smal tent relying on the reflection to equal you back out to 600's.
Thank you for proving my point with this pretty picture.
You are arguing the same thing but with much lower powered fixtures. In case you forgot what you were arguing about.
It's hard to argue the truth, I'm sure.
So why keep trying & putting people down in the process.

Again, an LED fixture should be a 600 watt HPS equivalent & spread out on a grow room to achieve HPS size & density nugs! It's not even something to argue about! It's a fact!!!!
 
Hybridway said:
This diagram is a perfect example of what I've been trying to say.
600's spread out is the least you'd go in a grow room. They have the intensity & spread to flower big, hard nugz!
400's spread out is the least you'd go in a smal tent relying on the reflection to equal you back out to 600's.
Thank you for proving my point with this pretty picture.
You are arguing the same thing but with much lower powered fixtures. In case you forgot what you were arguing about.
It's hard to argue the truth, I'm sure.
So why keep trying & putting people down in the process.

Again, an LED fixture should be a 600 watt HPS equivalent & spread out on a grow room to achieve HPS size & density nugs! It's not even something to argue about! It's a fact!!!!
Click to expand...

Sure. A 600W equivalent like a 250W SE-250. Keep thinking about it, maybe you'll get there.
 
Bungalow said:
I can see it not making sense with artificial lighting due to current limitation of conveying the photons over distance. Low current cob fixtures themselves remind me of a cloudy day with the way they spread light (assuming spacing is well measured.) It's highly uniform and fairly diffuse (depending on how low the current and how many cobs.) I'm thinking more about this intensity-penetration concept and how photons work - which I don't really understand. I apologize if I missed a response to this, but I'll ask it for summary here: How does increasing levels of low driven cobs achieve "deeper penetration" (lol.) The comparison being a single focal point of intensity sending down harsh rays that can't be fully absorbed by the canopy - is it the same concept with increasing levels of intensity from multiple sources (angular lighting and bypassing the first level of canopy aside here) Basically - is photon density simply photon density regardless of source in terms of how far it can reach?
Click to expand...

"How does increasing levels of low-driven COBs increase penetration or density?"
Good question.
 
Only
puffenuff said:
Ok putting bullshit to the side, here is why I would rather have (1) 1000w hps instead of (4) 250w hps in a 4x4

250w hps * 4 = roughly 112,000 lumens
1000w hps = around 140,000 lumens

I get the benefits of overlapping coverage from multiple units. Lumens are for humans, I know, but they speak to intensity. And in general, the more intense a light, the higher PAR it puts out.

I prefer to have as much intensity out of a single source as possible. I'll take the same approach any day whether hps or led. But that's just me and I'm ok if not everyone agrees
Click to expand...

Only thing I disagree with here is that 4, 250's will not achieve 112,000 lumens @ any given point of measurement.
Adding all 4 together will not actually give you that # in density @ any one point.
More like an even 20-30,000 lumens across the board. Or a little more then whatever a 250 bulb puts out alone!
Meaning there's never enough intensity or density to flower marijuana plant to have big , hard nugs. Just Flarf!!!
 
B
JorgeGonzales said:
It increases total light. I mean, are you honestly struggling with this?
Click to expand...
But does not increase density enough.
I can't believe you're struggling with this.
I actually grow pot in a room depending on the lights not the walls to flower my pot & I want to flower my plants @ least 2-3' down past the top of the canopy not just the top 6".
I thought you'd want it big, long, n hard.
But maybe you prefer it 4-6" n soft.
 
Hybridway said:
250's will not achieve 112,000 lumens @ any given point of measurement.
Click to expand...

This statement doesn't make any sense. Lumens isn't a measure of intensity that can be measured at a given point. Lumens is a total that can only be found from looking at ALL points.

I know you really do think you're the only one here who gets it, but you keep showing that you don't even understand the terms you're using.
 
churchhaze said:
This statement doesn't make any sense. Lumens isn't a measure of intensity that can be measured at a given point. Lumens is a total that can only be found from looking at ALL points.

I know you really do think you're the only one here who gets it, but you keep showing that you don't even understand the terms you're using.
Click to expand...
N you seek any technicality possible to avoid sounding as wrong as you are.
 
Pretty sure I've read a side by side grow where the 1k beat out 2 600s

Could be in-line with that persons agenda tho.
 
churchhaze said:
I'm afraid it's a bit more than a technicality. 4x28055.5lm = 112222lm



You have stupid thoughts in your head.
Click to expand...
It will not achieve 112,000 lumens from any one point.
Only disperse x4 low output sources of let's say 25,000 lumens each as a guesstimate.
W/ the overlap you may achieve 35,000 if your lucky. But I'm using these #'s as an example rather then looking up the Lumenous value of a 250 bulb & doing the math equations. Someone else can do all that.
But that doesn't mean my point is not valid.
Dig for technicalities all you want.
I grow 1 pound per 600 watt HPS bulb consistently x12 plants every harvest.
 
Last edited:
Hybridway said:
Only
Only thing I disagree with here is that 4, 250's will not achieve 112,000 lumens @ any given point of measurement.
Click to expand...

nobody said that.
112,000 lumens is the approximate total amount of light produced by 4 of those lights, where as 140,000 lumens is an approximate total amount of light produced by 1K. in this case because of the technology it will take about 5 250hps to produce the same amount of light as a 1000hps.

The total amount of light produced by any lamp is NOT the same as the instantaneous reading at any point on the canopy.
This is like the difference between "PPF" of a lamp versus the "PPFD" at any point on the canopy.

Learn to understand what people have been trying to say, ignorance and refusal to learn makes you the one trolling this thread.
:wall:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top