12/1 lighting--Any truth or banana in the tail pipe?

[little-soldier]

best way to save money would be study and gather some data on how much of direct and indirect sunlight the plant really needs in a day outdoors and apply it to indoor lighting instead of going the lazy 12/1 route. Would be cool to walk in a grow room and have the lights slowly dimming every now and then. lights would probably last longer that way too so it would be a positive double whammy!
maybe i should patent my idea

 

[Weezard]

Very cool indeed. Also toying with the fact that photon absorption. happens in microseconds, it is not continuous
There is a recovery time when supplied photons can not be used.
So dappled light works well.
And the very frugal, (read cheap), might want to save energy by supplying light in very short pulses, yah?
Have fun with that.

 

[CocoNut 420]

Has anyone seen the bbc documentary "The private life of plants"?

There's macro footage somewhere of plant cells (iirc chromatophors?) when light shines on the leaf they jostled around each trying for the prime spots.

 

[little-soldier]

Very cool indeed. Also toying with the fact that photon absorption. happens in microseconds, it is not continuous
There is a recovery time when supplied photons can not be used.
So dappled light works well.
And the very frugal, (read cheap), might want to save energy by supplying light in very short pulses, yah?
Have fun with that.

exactly what i thought. we need more studies on this.where did you learn about the recovery time?

 

[RequiredUsername]

Very cool indeed. Also toying with the fact that photon absorption. happens in microseconds, it is not continuous
There is a recovery time when supplied photons can not be used.
So dappled light works well.
And the very frugal, (read cheap), might want to save energy by supplying light in very short pulses, yah?
Have fun with that.

Some controllers offer cloud simulation. Of course you need compatible lights. I would think cloud simulation would save a little money but it's not enough to take seriously. If you take novelty out of the equation, you are left with a cloud simulation that does stimulate the cells of the plant. I would equate it with playing nice music for the plant. It will respond to the stimulation in some small way. If you can, why not? If you can't, don't mind it.

 

[Ca++]

I have developed a new view upon transition lighting.

The first few days of 12/12 we get plants that look like they are in 16/8. So why not give them that.
The second half of the week, a few hairs, but it's the kind of developmental point that 15 hours would produce. Stain dependent. So why not give them that 15/9
Middle of week 2, it's swinging into bloom proper. Which most 8 week plants will do at 14/10 so why give them less.
14h can pretty much do most 8 weekers, but by week 4, it might be better to get to 13/11 as it's fully flower time.

Essentially, I'm looking at what the plant is doing, and lighting that.

I have not heard others look at it in this way, but it's an idea that I'm having trouble shaking.

Any obvious holes in this ?

 

[RequiredUsername]

I have developed a new view upon transition lighting.

The first few days of 12/12 we get plants that look like they are in 16/8. So why not give them that.
The second half of the week, a few hairs, but it's the kind of developmental point that 15 hours would produce. Stain dependent. So why not give them that 15/9
Middle of week 2, it's swinging into bloom proper. Which most 8 week plants will do at 14/10 so why give them less.
14h can pretty much do most 8 weekers, but by week 4, it might be better to get to 13/11 as it's fully flower time.

Essentially, I'm looking at what the plant is doing, and lighting that.

I have not heard others look at it in this way, but it's an idea that I'm having trouble shaking.

Any obvious holes in this ?

I dont know. But I do go from 12 hours dark to 15 or 16 darkness in stages. Leaving 8 or so hours of light for the final weeks. It just depends on how the plants are responding. How long they flower... If you are growing a predictable IBL, or unpredictable polyhybrids it will be different. Each situation is unique. It sounds like you are working in defining your standard, which you fine tune, deviate from to fit the actual situation. To really know, you have to do side by side comparisons with clones. Can you, and are you willing to do that?

 

[Rhizoma]

Ran several times 12-1 in the past to try it out.

The only difference I saw was that vegging takes longer to get to the same size. Less light imput means less growth.

So the grow takes longer, which means in the end you probably use the same energy. So it did not have much use for me.

Never noticed any more stretch then usual. Only that some strains are more sensible as others to stay in veg. Worst case it flowers early, best case you shave of some time as it starts flowering right after shift to 12/12 (or 11/13 whatever).


@Rhizoma Same goes for autoflowers I suppose. They'll run fine, but yield less then higher ammounts of lighthours. Takes away the whole use of it being a autoflower, which you can light 18-24h a day to maximize yields. You can just aswell run it 13 hours straight then.


As said before, just take a purer sativa strain and grow it out 12/12 from the start. This maybe shaves of a week or two. With 12 weeks or more flowering time, it will still grow big enough without veg to have a descent harvest, while saving light hours/energy.

The 12-1 cycle imho doesn't work fine for everything. For sure not for flowering
Regarding auto I was questioning the same and I assume they could grow but energy is energy and they won't grow at all with the same results.