8k coco grow show
- Thread starter issack
- Start date
Palindrome
King of Schwag
Looking real good in there issack!
Great looking gals!
Great looking gals!
Crazy how developed they are
WTF......No more SM-90 ?......prolly don`t mean much to a lotta folks but I think it`s bullshit for such a tried and true proven product pulled from shelves cuz of being bought out by corporate raiders like Monsanto ?......bullshit bullshit bullshit......oh well.....Them dosido`s look great bro.....
Hope the new stuff works out instead of the SM-90......good luck and...…
Peace…..DHF....
Hope the new stuff works out instead of the SM-90......good luck and...…
Peace…..DHF....
So good
looking good, very clean setup 
That’s tall for the 20 day veg. You must be treating them right. I have noticed a need to adjust light height with cmh, just to help from getting too alongated. I had good luck starting low and raising up late to right at 20” over the tops at the finish of stretch and cut off everything further than 2’ deep in the canopy except in the isle. Looking good and here’s to a happy healthy finish.
I know SM-90 is great, had an old work associate that used it and swore by it. I've never used it but it always sucks to here a good product has been taken off the shelves. TotalPond Barley Pond Clarifier Is what I use, only a single drop per gallon is what you need. I seem to always have healthy pearly white roots and never a smidge of algae in my resivoir, though I run a pretty clean DTW res of only salts and only hand water in water microbes, fulvic and other what not separately. An 8oz bottle of this stuff treats a 4000+ gallon pond and makes it crystal clear all summer, I've got a koi pond and would recommend it for ponds and for sure whatever hydro setup anyone's running.
Desire to see more: intensity increased.
after going through your side by side one. Awesome work man!! Totally jealous 
Ok bro......We`re @ day 67 +/- and enquiring minds wanna know so.....
......When`s HARVEY ?????.....LOL.....no shit.....been a hot minute since you`ve done an update , so hope all`s well with you and yours with a bumper crop of fallin down floppin colas everywhere......anyways....take care and.....
Peace…..DHF.....
This thread made me redo a side by side between the de 630 and the de 1k and it once again confirmed that the 1k dominates. The quantum 550s did better than the 630s for me. I have run acde hoods with and without the glass 20-24” over the top of the canopy. I do think that a combination of the hps and cmh is the difference maker. The 630s put out beautiful smelly flowers but the de 1k hps cover a 5x5 instead of the 630s at 4x4 and the 1k thicken flowers deeper down in the canopy. Watt for watt they probably are equal, or maybe a slight advantage to the 630, but light against light it’s not close.
I am not trying to start an argument, it’s just what I have seen with different clones in different rooms over the last couple of years. I can’t wait to see what Issack finds though, he certainly grows badass plants with great genetics.
I am not trying to start an argument, it’s just what I have seen with different clones in different rooms over the last couple of years. I can’t wait to see what Issack finds though, he certainly grows badass plants with great genetics.
Were your 630`s using "Phillips Bulbs" ?......The only reason I ask is because I belong to many small old head invite only sites and the consensus from those that do this for a living and not a hobby is that the 630`s with Philips Bulbs produce as well as the DE 1K`s if not better as Issack has encountered.....now.....
Even though there was ! K`s on 1 side and the 630`s on the other , there was overlap lighting as far as spectrum is concerned , but how much or to what effect it actually had on the room as a whole is speculative at best , so basically only time will tell from consecutive runs done with dialed conditions right ?.....regardless.....
My 2 cents from all those yrs , and...…just tryin ta help.....so.....
Peace.....DHF.....
Ibechillin
Masochist Educator
Spectrum is really important and the Philips 3100k continues to prove its the best cmh bulb, Double ended HPS only produces ~27% as much usable light in the 450nm and 750nm areas. Ive been researching Led lighting lately and learned about the relationship between light spectrum and leaf surface temperature interaction some others might appreciate. From HPS/CMH a good amount of energy is wasted to become excess heat generated from light outside the plant's usable spectrum range.
From Black Dog LED Site:
"Various artificial grow light technologies create different light spectrums. LED grow lights differ significantly from other forms of artificial plant lights in that the spectrum can be tuned, eliminating unwanted excesses of light wavelengths (colors) while providing light plants can use most efficiently. Other artificial lighting technologies produce much of their light as an unintended and unavoidable byproduct of how they operate, ultimately wasting energy in heating up plant leaves.
When a photon of light hits a plant leaf, it can either be reflected or absorbed. Reflected photons will not affect the leaf temperature at all, but physics dictates that all photons absorbed by the leaf will increase the leaf temperature; how much depends on the energy (wavelength) of the photon and whether or not some of that energy was used to trigger other chemical reactions, such as photosynthesis. Photons fully utilized by the plant in chemical reactions will heat the leaf less than photons which are absorbed but not utilized. Therefore, measuring leaf surface temperature indirectly measures the efficiency of the light spectrum for growing plants-- less-efficient spectrums will tend to heat the leaf more, while more-efficient spectrums will heat the leaf less as more of the light energy is being converted to chemical energy.
High Pressure Sodium (HPS) in particular converts a significant portion of the energy consumed by the light directly to non-visible infrared light in the 810-830nm range, peaking about 819nm. This infrared light is perceptible to you (and plants) by the warmth it creates when exposed to the light. Additionally, much of the visible light HPS bulbs produce is yellow and not highly-utilized by plants. This radiation not used for photosynthesis or other chemical reactions only serves to heat up the leaves, requiring cooler ambient temperatures to keep the plants' leaves at their ideal temperature."
Optimal leaf surface temp is around 88f for cannabis, which under hps occurs around 75f ambient room temperature.
Here is a comparison of leaf surface temps between 1000w HPS and 750w led both at 24" above canopy at 75f and 84F ambient room temperatures. All images below were taken with the FLIR camera's color scale locked between 69 °F and 95 °F to allow for easier direct comparisons. In this color scale, blue and cyan correspond to temperatures in the 70-79 °F range, green, yellow and orange represent the 80-89 °F range, and red-orange, red and white indicate temperatures in the 90+ °F range.
Led doesnt emit all of the unnecessary extra light spectrum that plants cant utilize. The leaf surface temp is much lower at 75f ambient room temperature because more of the light is available for growth. Being able to run the grow room at a warmer 84f temp can also save on AC if you live in a warm area. Another nice thing about led is multiple overlapping sources of light instead of it traveling out from one main point like HID. This reduces the loss of intensity penetrating into the canopy and allows for more even coverage over an area/less of plants shading themselves/eachother.
Here are a few light spectrums/comparisons and more information:
Natural Sunlight
Plants evolved over millions of years to best convert light energy into carbohydrates and sugars. The most readily available light from the sun is in the middle part of the spectrum which we see as green, yellow and orange. These are the primary frequencies that human eyes use. However, studies show that these are the least used light frequencies in plants. Most of the photosynthetic activity is in the blue and red frequencies.
The main reason for this counter-intuitive use of light by plants seems to be related to early forms of bacteria and the evolution of photosynthesis. Photosynthesis first evolved in bacteria over millions of years in the primordial sea. This evolved in bacteria long before the appearance of more complex leafy plants. These early photosynthetic bacteria extensively used the yellow, green and orange middle spectrums for photosynthesis which tended to filter out these light spectrums for plants evolving at lower levels in the ocean. As more complex plants evolved at lower levels they were left with only the non-filtered spectrums not used by bacteria – mostly in the red and blue frequencies. The yellow, green and orange light is mostly reflected off the surface of the leaves and this is why photosynthesizing plants are green.Many manufacturers reference the absorption spectrum of chlorophyll a and b (which peaks in the blue and red regions of the electromagnetic spectrum) as the main reason for providing a purple spectrum.
The action spectrum of photosynthesis was created from research that was performed in the 1970s by Drs. McCree and Inada and this work was fundamental in defining the range of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). Prior to this research, very little work had been performed to determine how varying wavelengths of light influenced photosynthesis and plant growth. These researchers utilized filters to create monochromatic wavebands to determine the influence of light spectra on photosynthesis of single leaves using an assimilation chamber.
So why is there such a difference between the absorption spectrum and the action spectrum if chlorophyll is responsible for photosynthesis? The answer is simple: Chlorophylls are not the only photoreceptors that are responsible for photosynthesis. There are other types of antenna photoreceptors (mainly carotenoids) which also promote photosynthesis, and by utilizing narrow band red/blue LEDs in sole-source lighting conditions these pigments are not able to optimize their light harvesting capabilities. Also, it should be noted that green light does in fact promote photosynthesis in chlorophylls, quite efficiently in fact. Recent work has shown that green light is able to penetrate deeper into leaf surfaces to drive photosynthesis in chloroplast located towards the bottom surface of the leaf, in fact, more efficiently than red light at high PPFD. As PPFD increases, light energy that is absorbed in the upper chloroplasts tends to be dissipated as heat, while penetrating green light increases photosynthesis by exciting chloroplasts located deep in the mesophyll (Terashima et. al., 2009). Additionally, green light penetrates through leaf surfaces much better than red or blue light to reach the lower canopy, which is extremely important in dense canopy production techniques which are common in controlled environment agriculture.
Sources:
https://fluence.science/do-plants-use-green-light/
https://californialightworks.com/light-spectrum-and-plant-growth/
Here is The Black Dog Led Spectrum for Leaf Temperature comparison:
From Black Dog LED Site:
"Various artificial grow light technologies create different light spectrums. LED grow lights differ significantly from other forms of artificial plant lights in that the spectrum can be tuned, eliminating unwanted excesses of light wavelengths (colors) while providing light plants can use most efficiently. Other artificial lighting technologies produce much of their light as an unintended and unavoidable byproduct of how they operate, ultimately wasting energy in heating up plant leaves.
When a photon of light hits a plant leaf, it can either be reflected or absorbed. Reflected photons will not affect the leaf temperature at all, but physics dictates that all photons absorbed by the leaf will increase the leaf temperature; how much depends on the energy (wavelength) of the photon and whether or not some of that energy was used to trigger other chemical reactions, such as photosynthesis. Photons fully utilized by the plant in chemical reactions will heat the leaf less than photons which are absorbed but not utilized. Therefore, measuring leaf surface temperature indirectly measures the efficiency of the light spectrum for growing plants-- less-efficient spectrums will tend to heat the leaf more, while more-efficient spectrums will heat the leaf less as more of the light energy is being converted to chemical energy.
High Pressure Sodium (HPS) in particular converts a significant portion of the energy consumed by the light directly to non-visible infrared light in the 810-830nm range, peaking about 819nm. This infrared light is perceptible to you (and plants) by the warmth it creates when exposed to the light. Additionally, much of the visible light HPS bulbs produce is yellow and not highly-utilized by plants. This radiation not used for photosynthesis or other chemical reactions only serves to heat up the leaves, requiring cooler ambient temperatures to keep the plants' leaves at their ideal temperature."
Optimal leaf surface temp is around 88f for cannabis, which under hps occurs around 75f ambient room temperature.
Here is a comparison of leaf surface temps between 1000w HPS and 750w led both at 24" above canopy at 75f and 84F ambient room temperatures. All images below were taken with the FLIR camera's color scale locked between 69 °F and 95 °F to allow for easier direct comparisons. In this color scale, blue and cyan correspond to temperatures in the 70-79 °F range, green, yellow and orange represent the 80-89 °F range, and red-orange, red and white indicate temperatures in the 90+ °F range.
Led doesnt emit all of the unnecessary extra light spectrum that plants cant utilize. The leaf surface temp is much lower at 75f ambient room temperature because more of the light is available for growth. Being able to run the grow room at a warmer 84f temp can also save on AC if you live in a warm area. Another nice thing about led is multiple overlapping sources of light instead of it traveling out from one main point like HID. This reduces the loss of intensity penetrating into the canopy and allows for more even coverage over an area/less of plants shading themselves/eachother.
Here are a few light spectrums/comparisons and more information:
Natural Sunlight
Plants evolved over millions of years to best convert light energy into carbohydrates and sugars. The most readily available light from the sun is in the middle part of the spectrum which we see as green, yellow and orange. These are the primary frequencies that human eyes use. However, studies show that these are the least used light frequencies in plants. Most of the photosynthetic activity is in the blue and red frequencies.
The main reason for this counter-intuitive use of light by plants seems to be related to early forms of bacteria and the evolution of photosynthesis. Photosynthesis first evolved in bacteria over millions of years in the primordial sea. This evolved in bacteria long before the appearance of more complex leafy plants. These early photosynthetic bacteria extensively used the yellow, green and orange middle spectrums for photosynthesis which tended to filter out these light spectrums for plants evolving at lower levels in the ocean. As more complex plants evolved at lower levels they were left with only the non-filtered spectrums not used by bacteria – mostly in the red and blue frequencies. The yellow, green and orange light is mostly reflected off the surface of the leaves and this is why photosynthesizing plants are green.Many manufacturers reference the absorption spectrum of chlorophyll a and b (which peaks in the blue and red regions of the electromagnetic spectrum) as the main reason for providing a purple spectrum.
The action spectrum of photosynthesis was created from research that was performed in the 1970s by Drs. McCree and Inada and this work was fundamental in defining the range of photosynthetically active radiation (PAR). Prior to this research, very little work had been performed to determine how varying wavelengths of light influenced photosynthesis and plant growth. These researchers utilized filters to create monochromatic wavebands to determine the influence of light spectra on photosynthesis of single leaves using an assimilation chamber.
So why is there such a difference between the absorption spectrum and the action spectrum if chlorophyll is responsible for photosynthesis? The answer is simple: Chlorophylls are not the only photoreceptors that are responsible for photosynthesis. There are other types of antenna photoreceptors (mainly carotenoids) which also promote photosynthesis, and by utilizing narrow band red/blue LEDs in sole-source lighting conditions these pigments are not able to optimize their light harvesting capabilities. Also, it should be noted that green light does in fact promote photosynthesis in chlorophylls, quite efficiently in fact. Recent work has shown that green light is able to penetrate deeper into leaf surfaces to drive photosynthesis in chloroplast located towards the bottom surface of the leaf, in fact, more efficiently than red light at high PPFD. As PPFD increases, light energy that is absorbed in the upper chloroplasts tends to be dissipated as heat, while penetrating green light increases photosynthesis by exciting chloroplasts located deep in the mesophyll (Terashima et. al., 2009). Additionally, green light penetrates through leaf surfaces much better than red or blue light to reach the lower canopy, which is extremely important in dense canopy production techniques which are common in controlled environment agriculture.
Sources:
https://fluence.science/do-plants-use-green-light/
https://californialightworks.com/light-spectrum-and-plant-growth/
Here is The Black Dog Led Spectrum for Leaf Temperature comparison:
Last edited:
