600w to 1000w...Questions

[blissfest]

Can you point me to any side by side grow offs that demonstrate HPS yielding more? I haven't been able to find anything more than marleting claims and wishful thinking either way. It would go a long way toward resolving this issue if someone could link real experiments that support their position.

Even Hortilux says the following on their Web site:


For the Super HPS they say:

That's an entirely different thing. If superiority can be readily proved, you'd think they'd do it instead of relying on prose.

I'd really like to get what you say the Super HPS provides. I'd happily pay for superior technology although superior technology in this realm should really pay for itself. Strongly held positions can be presented on both sides of this question because there is nothing definitive that can be referenced. Seems like a bad sign that Hortilux hasn't provided it.

Most, as in 90+% of all the good growers in the world use HPS for flowering.

Back in the late 80's, early 90's, I grew really good bud under T12 shop lights, had this Cat Piss Pheno that was unbelievable, we called it the crippler, cause it crippled many, LOL!

You can grow weed under many different lights, but HPS rules in the flower room, and I truly believe Hortilux Super HPS cant be beat. When it does get beat out by a better bulb I will fill my hoods with them.

 

[RedDemon]

Well I received my thunder 1000w ballast today and got it all setup,after switching from 600 to 1000 the plants are responding GREAT to the switch...it's as if I didn't have any light on them at all lol.Cant wait to see what the actual yield increase will be from 4 plants going from 600 to 1000 but it's definitely going to be better

 

[blissfest]

Just pulled this out of my drying net, took over 10 zips from this plant.

She was flowered under that Nasty Orange bulb with the "wrong" PAR rating, Hortilux Super HPS

 

[RB56]

Most, as in 90+% of all the good growers in the world use HPS for flowering.

Back in the late 80's, early 90's, I grew really good bud under T12 shop lights, had this Cat Piss Pheno that was unbelievable, we called it the crippler, cause it crippled many, LOL!

You can grow weed under many different lights, but HPS rules in the flower room, and I truly believe Hortilux Super HPS cant be beat. When it does get beat out by a better bulb I will fill my hoods with them.

There doesn't seem to be any argument that "you can grow weed under many different lights." Grow logs prove that pretty conclusively. Where it gets tougher:

I truly believe Hortilux Super HPS cant be beat. When it does get beat out by a better bulb I will fill my hoods with them.

If I sold a bulb that was the best thing on the market I'd be sponsoring comparison studies to prove the marketing claims. Wouldn't even need to use weed. Find something close. grow it under multiple identical setups with different bulbs and record the results. At least that would tell us something. As it isw, all we have is pretty words from the manufacturer that contradicts your claims for the products - they pretty clearly say MH is the best option and Super HPS is the best option if you are stuck using HPS. Lots of people would be swayed by real evidence. As it is, if I follow your advice and read what the manufacture of your preferred product recommends, I'd choose a different bulb. It's confusing unless there isn't much difference.

 

[blissfest]

There doesn't seem to be any argument that "you can grow weed under many different lights." Grow logs prove that pretty conclusively. Where it gets tougher:

If I sold a bulb that was the best thing on the market I'd be sponsoring comparison studies to prove the marketing claims. Wouldn't even need to use weed. Find something close. grow it under multiple identical setups with different bulbs and record the results. At least that would tell us something. As it isw, all we have is pretty words from the manufacturer that contradicts your claims for the products - they pretty clearly say MH is the best option and Super HPS is the best option if you are stuck using HPS. Lots of people would be swayed by real evidence. As it is, if I follow your advice and read what the manufacture of your preferred product recommends, I'd choose a different bulb. It's confusing unless there isn't much difference.

Just maybe Cannabis is different from other plants? Maybe Cannabis loves a lot of Red spectrum during flowering, and doesn't need much Blue?

Years of reading multiple weed sites like this one I have yet to see someone say MH is better than HPS for flowering weed.

Maybe do a pole in the lighting forum on what everyone uses for flowering?

The Hortilux Blue looks real nice and has a very balanced spectrum chart, very expensive too. But will it beat out a Super HPS in flowering Cannabis???? I would have too see it too believe it.

I consistently grow Top Shelf weed with extreme yield like the Nug above using Hortilux Super HPS 600-1000 watt bulbs. It would be really hard for me to change.

 

[newtothiscoco]

potato potato guys. let other ppl comment on the tread to you are like spamming the thread^^" its not that we dont like to see you argue about the light's on the marked.
dont get carried away

have a good one and chill for a while, thats what its all about '

btw dont argue about some stuff that has already ben tested 1000 of times HPS is killing the MH on the yield part and ppl has argued about this for years now but there is nothing to argue about hps is the best light for flowering and mh is the best for veg's ...

 

[RB56]

Just maybe Cannabis is different from other plants? Maybe Cannabis loves a lot of Red spectrum during flowering, and doesn't need much Blue?

Years of reading multiple weed sites like this one I have yet to see someone say MH is better than HPS for flowering weed.

Maybe do a pole in the lighting forum on what everyone uses for flowering?

The Hortilux Blue looks real nice and has a very balanced spectrum chart, very expensive too. But will it beat out a Super HPS in flowering Cannabis???? I would have too see it too believe it.

I consistently grow Top Shelf weed with extreme yield like the Nug above using Hortilux Super HPS 600-1000 watt bulbs. It would be really hard for me to change.

Doing a little reading and there are MANY well done research projects on photosynthesis. The science seems settled and solid and follows newtothiscoco's list, simplified as:

Below 400 nm: nothing important happens.
400-500 nm: significant photosynthesis.
500-600: nothing significant
600-700: significant photosynthesis.

So :
400-500 (blue) useful
500-600 (green/yellow) not useful
600-700 (orange/red) useful

Basically a big worthless trough in the middle. The reason the dropout between 500-600 occurs is really elegant and relates to the colors of the pigments at play.

All we really care about is the energy that hits the plant with wavelengths between 400-500 nm and 600-700 nm. Peaks in blue and red. Even distribution not so much. I don't know if there is an advantage to even distribution between the red and blue ranges. It seems to only matter how much energy comes through in the desired bands.

Here's the manufacturer supplied spectrum for the Super HPS:

A very large percentage of the available energy falls in the 500-600 nm "dead zone".

Here's the same for the Hortilux Blue:

Looks to me like most of the energy is useless but it will take someone smarter than I to quantify the difference and whether the Super HPS or Blue is giving us more energy in the useful ranges.

Hortilux's Standard MH looks much worse:

It seems clear that all of the bulbs give us mostly wavelengths we don't need. In each case we are throwing away a lot of what we are buying, both bulb and electricity. This probably explains a lot of the potential LEDs offer - put the exact wavelengths the plant uses best close to the leaf. No wasted spectrum.

I haven't found any spectrum data for the 4000°K Sylvanias. I use the 250 Watt versions in my business's warehouse for lighting. They have a visibly green cast compared to cool white sources. This is an unmeasured visible assessment but it could be an issue since green is absolutely the last color we want to use.

Here's the other twist to this. Photosynthesis is a very simple process. Critical, brilliant, fabulous, elegant and all of that, but it is taking energy from our light source and using it to build simple sugar molecules. It has very specific requirements and functions exactly the same way, over and over. There is no vegetative photosynthesis that is different than flowering photosynthesis. CO2, H2O, energy - sugar. Throw it in the furnace to do stuff.

Different colored light does not enter the plant and do different things. It all comes into the plant and is either suited to photosynthesis or isn't. The only thing that can change the light color requirement for photosynthesis is the color of the pigment in the plant. There's definitely some difference in color between healthy marijuana plants with different genetics.

I conclude from all of this that we're using really ineffective technologies for lighting our plants. We waste lots of energy producing light between 500 and 600 nanometers. Could be half or more. All of that electricity and heat for NOTHING. Add the inverse square law and we're really fighting upstream.

The final product doesn't care how much we've wasted to get it what it needs. It only needs to care that it got what it needed. All of the HPS and MH options appear to do about the same, pretty poor job of getting us there. Probably why the argument goes on and nobody ever presents any conclusive test results. All of them can be used to grow outstanding pot if you provide enough light to compensate for the useless stuff and do everything else right Means the $20 light might be as good as the $120 light if the $20 light isn't duping huge amounts into the green.

Also suggests that most of the differences in final product attributed to bulbs are due to other things.

 

[RB56]

honestly, thinking on it a bit more....
you couldn't coordinate a 3 way blow job session with drek and RB,.... just sayin the obvious son
you kids keep measuring your dicks with each other..,,,,.

Pathetic. Imagine Drek is wondering why you're throwing him under the bus when you were all winky, winky a minute ago.

Seriously. Name calling and bullshit like this never gets anybody closer to knowledge of any kind. Grow the fuck up and enjoy yourself.

 

[blissfest]

Pathetic. Imagine Drek is wondering why you're throwing him under the bus when you were all winky, winky a minute ago.

Seriously. Name calling and bullshit like this never gets anybody closer to knowledge of any kind. Grow the fuck up and enjoy yourself.

LOL! Yeah, I seriously thought gnome and Drek had a thing going when I first read these lighting threads. They couldn't agree with each other enough and I was thinking they should get a room, LOL!

 

[blissfest]

Maybe the Super HPS works so good is because it throws out an insane amount of light. Even though much of it is useless it still has enough "good" light to get the job done.

Who knows, pretty sad they cant make a real grow light that is extremely bright and only has the spectrum plants want. Maybe someday.

The CMH's seem okay but don't have enough balls to blast deep into the canopy, imo.

 

[Drek]

Much respect guys.

I do believe that plants make use of more of the spectrum than previously thought (which doesn't at all surprise me; including imo, above and below 400-700nM). It's much the same as NASA's new X5 LED system...that includes a lot more green into the equation. Essentially making a spectrum close to plain daylight, akin to 4K MH or CMH, or Dual Arc (hortilux blue might be a little too biased into the higher-energy section at 5k for optimum single bulb use; hortilux's website suggests it's fine).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVNxNVnkBPE

HPS throws out an insane amount of light in one limited useable section of the spectrum, while doing it's best in other areas. But no competition, overall, for something like Ceramic Metal Halide HID, imo.

 

[steadydets]

I have a new idea for google.


E-Peen filters.

Works the same way as ad-blocking software except with dialogue.

It automatically scans and edits forum pages that contain 20% useful knowledge surrounded by 80% name calling and posturing.

I'd nominate this thread as the first control.

 

[DrFever]

Herd mentality.

If you were talking the Hortilux MH blue @ 5k, then I might be inclined to take you seriously.

Even Hortilux agrees.
http://www.eyehortilux.com/products/specific/600w-Hortilux-Blue

Best overall.

Drek here is a hordi superblue in action day 4 - 5 weeks from a 3" clone how many CMH 's would you need to get a plant to look like that in 5 weeks or should i look in the CMH thread at 5 week vegged plant is there any in there hahaha owe and some plants under 48 watts sunblasters around week 8 i think ALL GROWN UNDER FLOURESCENTS when i put them in bloom stage again Hordilux 12 plants will yield me 7 3/4 pounds cause at the end of the day thats what its all about YIELD

 

[RB56]

Maybe the Super HPS works so good is because it throws out an insane amount of light. Even though much of it is useless it still has enough "good" light to get the job done.

Who knows, pretty sad they cant make a real grow light that is extremely bright and only has the spectrum plants want. Maybe someday.

The CMH's seem okay but don't have enough balls to blast deep into the canopy, imo.

I think that's it. Insane amount of light. It also looks to be very possible to to meet the plants' needs using completely unnatural looking light. It's possible that the Super HPS is getting more energy into the red range than other lights get into both useful ranges.

There's also something going on that I see in my own grows all the time. I thought you might be referring to the same thing when you talked about adding MH lights to your grow and not seeing anything worthwhile. I think we are naturally biased toward what already works. If we try something that works just as well as what we were doing (but not better), we dismiss it in favor of what we know. It makes sense but means we can evaluate two things as performing the same but mentally file the one with which we aren't familiar as inferior.

We're probably not too far from cost effective LED solutions. Never really thought much about it since MH is working for me, but it makes a lot more sense now. Everything would be easier if we didn't need to buy electricity to generate wasted wavelengths and then get rid of the heat generated by the light we can't use.I hated orange. Efficiency may eventually make me love purple!

 

[Drek]

HPS super blue is a good light, no doubt, but you don't see NASA using them on the International Space Station do you? In that application, I'm sure NASA has the most efficient and best spectrum available for their plants...which appears to be LED daylight.

HPS is a powerful and efficient lighting source, and potentially will grow the single biggest bud, at a higher cost, poorer color rendering and arguably poorer performance during vegetative growth. I can only guess to the extent plants respond to the excessive orange spectrum during the vegetative stage.

Super HPS does throw out insane amounts of orange light, while falling more or less into equivalency with other HID's in the rest of the spectrum (a different relative energy ratio...overall PPFD) imo. My plants didn't seem to respond as well to my Son Agro HPS (blue enhanced HPS) as they did to the CMH. I had them on the HPS Son for the first few weeks waiting for the CMH in the mail. They seemed to be very favorable when I added the CMH.

Here's my Agro.
http://www.usa.lighting.philips.com/pwc_li/us_en/connect/tools_literature/downloads/p-2707b.pdf

Check out page 1 and page 12 guys. There's many documented grows showing how these types of lights yield. This is about my size of grow(small), and that's enough proof for me.
http://www.rollitup.org/t/pineapple-express-g13-labs-seed-to-harvest.344359/
..and http://boards.cannabis.com/indoor-lighting/133316-ceramic-metal-halide-bulbs-hps-ballasts-3.html

Nice nugs for a 400w.

 

[Drek]

...cause at the end of the day thats what its all about YIELD

Which depends on a hundred different variables, imo, not just light. Some plants are whispy like landrace thai, other plants are shorter, etc.
I'm glad that your bushy plants are bushy! They look good.

I'm a connoisseur as far as growing is concerned. I'm interested in landraces and quality, potency, taste...experiencing the different genetic expressions. I don't grow weed to pay my mortgage, so that side of HPS doesn't appeal to me.

 

[Muttt]

I ran a 600w for years in a 3 x 4 plywood cabinet. After painting it flat white .... it was really really bright. Got exceptional results too. I think you'll be fine with 600w ..... as long as you keep it full of enough CO2

 

[RedDemon]

well im 4 weeks into my grow (3 full weeks with the 1000w hps) and i can tell the difference 10 fold.buds seems twice as big this time around and i had to stake them all to keep them upright.Keeping the light cool was NOT a problem at all being i have my 44cfm pulling the air through my cooltube.Im kicking myself for not changing sooner,ans my yield will be fabulous this time around...


Telling you guys,my Deep wreck circa 2006 from richard williams i would put up against ANY strain in potency and taste,truly a wonderful strain


Hopefully the thread will stay on topic this time around