What is more important

Frank Nitty

Well-Known Member
So I've got a sterilite 30 gallon tub set up on its end, you know what I mean? If I put one 300w daylight and one 300w soft light in there, would that be better than using a bunch of bulbs?
 

Frank Nitty

Well-Known Member
300w...? CFL...?
Yeah,at the time I thought it was a good question...no n I see that it was the newb in me... that would burn down everything!!! especially in a sterilite tub!!! I know better now!!! I have a tent anyways now,so I could do that,but I won't...
 

friedguy

Well-Known Member
If you are asking if fewer, more powerful light sources are better than many less powerful light sources you will get quite a few different answers. It all depends on your preference and grow style.

Here's my take.

Many, less powerful light sources (think LED), are great for an even distribution of light.
More powerful sources (think HPS), are great for distance of light.
 

GBAUTO

Well-Known Member
What is more important, wattage, lumens or k,or are those the same thing
As all of the posts said, they are all metrics that describe specific physical characteristics of a light source. Based on what I've been able to glean in the net(which, unfortunately, may be all bs) knowing how much energy (PPF) it emits in micromoles per second(umole/s) allows you to know if it has enough 'oomph' to adequately illuminate your space. Lumens are similar but the measurement is biased towards how we see rather than what type of light that plants thrive on. Getting the most 'oomph' from each watt of power I pay for is definitely a goal. That's called photon efficacy and is measured in umole/J. That metric gives you the most info on how well an emitter converts electricity to light. The spectrum(k) seems to have more impact on quality of the flower and physical structure- on my system, I blend 3k and 4k emitters and then add some 660nm during flower-they seem to love it.
 
Last edited:
Top