-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
-
ICMag and The Vault are running a NEW contest in October! You can check it here. Prizes are seeds & forum premium access. Come join in!
Are LEDs Misunderstood?
- Thread starter PetFlora
- Start date
Awesome, thanks for the link. Looks like it's going to be a very good comparison grow.
MeanBean
Member
LED is the new standard for cabinet or closet growing. if you like 1000 watt bulb great but you can achieve the same results with led if you wanted to. Yes it would cost more initially.
However if you buy a 1000 watt HID and realize it sounds like a fan blasting all through your house all day/night, and your ac never stops you may soon realize the importance of low heat. Some can't understand the power savings either, not just the light but all the extra equipment...
I can't begin to tell you how nice it is to not have any unwanted heat. CFL's seem down right useless compared to the convenience and power of led.
HID would be out of the question at my house, I like to have guests.
However if you buy a 1000 watt HID and realize it sounds like a fan blasting all through your house all day/night, and your ac never stops you may soon realize the importance of low heat. Some can't understand the power savings either, not just the light but all the extra equipment...
I can't begin to tell you how nice it is to not have any unwanted heat. CFL's seem down right useless compared to the convenience and power of led.
HID would be out of the question at my house, I like to have guests.
nothingbut
Member
What else have you tried in the closet or cabinet?
That's a pretty poor way to make decisions. You can run a 600w in a cab, you just need the ventilation to match. That post doesn't do much for your credibility, neither does stating that it's the "new standard."
Honestly, if you haven't actually used and tested LEDs and HIDs in identical or near identical conditions, there isn't a whole lot of info that can be gathered from a grow, no matter how successful it is. There has to be something to compare it to. You could give the same cut and grow light to 10 different people, and you're going to get 10 different harvests. Direct comparison is needed. How does gpw compare in the short and long term? As for secondtry's insisting that yield isn't a good comparison.... that's just ridiculous. Obviously quality matters, but that is more subjective than yield is. Yield is a solid number, a result you can measure. Gas chromatography tests would be another good measure, but that isn't as available to most people as a scale is.
nothingbut
Member
You have a very nice cabinet set up. It obviouly is a place where LED's would work. Problem is your not pulling enough if you take 12 weeks inbetween grows to cover my med requirements. Again LED's have there place but if you were handy person there are some pretty wicked Fluro grows out there with guys building there own cabinets for half the price of that 126w light and getting well over 300grs a grow. Hey I forgot it's on IC
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=53817&highlight=growing+T5+fluros
nothingbut
Member
fluro's are under rated and way cheaper. CFL is to warm. the plants cant come to close to them.
nothingbut
Member
If this guy can grow in a pc case with a HID, I might have to change my mind what I said ....
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=3331810&posted=1#post3331810
MeanBean
Member
Dear Mr. Green Mountain, the venting that is required for a 600w lamp in a cabinet would be extremely non stealth. Thar gives up a huge red flag in the closet growing scene.
If you had your choice over led , floro, or CFL you would pick LED.
Unless:
#1. your bud jet is limited and you don't need big plants.
#2. you have cfl setup already, might as well keep digging same grave
#3. Your one of these anti LED guys...
As far as my credibility I don't see anyone in the room besides me with real data not a copy and paste formula from my college text book lol!!!
nothing but, where did you get this 12 week number? the 2 grows I documented were complete in 8 weeks????
Although it would be nice,but we can't blame plant growing speed on LED's, it's the strain. Not that I would argue LED's Could maybe take a day or 2 longer MAYBE!
Last edited by a moderator:
OrganicMonkey
Member
LED's do put out heat, Watt per Watt they put out more heat.
If I could get a 125 Watt LED bulb for the same price as a 125 watt CFL, or a 400, maybe even a 1000 Watt LED for the same price as a HID bulb, but I can't.
A 1000 Watt LED would take a lot of cooling, I have a 12 Watt and it has a radiator that isn't liquid filled but it's a steel that radiates heat.
Paid 100 dollars for a 12 Watt bulb, if it wasn't so good as a night light then it would be for only one tiny plant. It can penetrate and keep plants compact, which some strains don't need that. But it doesn't spread for a very wide plant, what your paying for LED's that spread wide are just hugely expensive.
I wouldn't compare a 400 Watt LED unit to a 400 Watt HID, why? Because the prices is hugely different, it's comparing a 400 Watt LED unit to at least a 1000 Watt HID at those prices.
Last edited by a moderator:
Chil' Please! I started this thread, and all I ask is that we keep it civil, and if at all possible, support your position/theory with results. That said, there is a lot to be learned from theory.
You might know that I am doing a CFL v LED + True Aeroponics Journal. And boy, do I get nasty PMS from those who say the only True Aero is when you use an accumulator, but they show no results either. That said, I do believe the science is sound. Every time I have incorporated elements they use, short of the accumulator, my plants have responded in a noticable way.
I followed Secondtrys links to the scientific studies, and feel as though I learned a thing or two. He can correct me... Leafs are light energy factories. Unless they get what they require, they will not reach their full potential. Green is a very important spectrum, maybe even more important than R/B. Red/Blue do not penetrate deeply into the leaf, making them inefficient to the overall needs. This would have a baring on quality, health and yield.
Where does that leave us? Can't we simply add a few CFLs below the canopy in order to penetrate the lower half of the leaf? I mean, why be a 'purist' when what we (or at least I am) are after, at the end, is a quality product, price maybe being a consideration?
From what I gathered, even most 600 HIDs (not enough gren) will not allow the plants to reach their full potential. This might explain why I never got good yields under 400 HID/HPS.
Solution?
Do LED light mfgs need to add green, or make green lights? Seems like a no brainer. G2led lights are white, just like HIDs, but they are LEDs. They supposedly operate even more efficiently than current LED lights. They tell me they have data from commercial greenhouses to prove their viability. If you think the LEDs available to us are expensive, wait till you see G2LED prices.
So, please, let's not denegrate this thread to where it becomes useless. Haters are haters, but sound science/theory will help us all, including LED light mfgs.
You might know that I am doing a CFL v LED + True Aeroponics Journal. And boy, do I get nasty PMS from those who say the only True Aero is when you use an accumulator, but they show no results either. That said, I do believe the science is sound. Every time I have incorporated elements they use, short of the accumulator, my plants have responded in a noticable way.
I followed Secondtrys links to the scientific studies, and feel as though I learned a thing or two. He can correct me... Leafs are light energy factories. Unless they get what they require, they will not reach their full potential. Green is a very important spectrum, maybe even more important than R/B. Red/Blue do not penetrate deeply into the leaf, making them inefficient to the overall needs. This would have a baring on quality, health and yield.
Where does that leave us? Can't we simply add a few CFLs below the canopy in order to penetrate the lower half of the leaf? I mean, why be a 'purist' when what we (or at least I am) are after, at the end, is a quality product, price maybe being a consideration?
From what I gathered, even most 600 HIDs (not enough gren) will not allow the plants to reach their full potential. This might explain why I never got good yields under 400 HID/HPS.
Solution?
Do LED light mfgs need to add green, or make green lights? Seems like a no brainer. G2led lights are white, just like HIDs, but they are LEDs. They supposedly operate even more efficiently than current LED lights. They tell me they have data from commercial greenhouses to prove their viability. If you think the LEDs available to us are expensive, wait till you see G2LED prices.
So, please, let's not denegrate this thread to where it becomes useless. Haters are haters, but sound science/theory will help us all, including LED light mfgs.
If this guy can grow in a pc case with a HID, I might have to change my mind what I said ....
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?p=3331810&posted=1#post3331810
Thanks for posting that link to the thread....it will be interesting to see how that grow turns out compared to VG's grow with the 63w panel. If he gets less than 2 oz's then i gotta say that the led's will have won between the two. I know that growing styles, medium etc. will play a part in final result but dimensions of the pc and cab are pretty similar give or take a few inches but the hps has the few extra watts...Anyone have thoughts on this?
M
MerryPrankstr
Hi PetFlora
I've been growing ever since I was a small boy, taught by my grandfather. I still live on a working farm, although I didn't do the work most of my adult life as I am a engineer by vocation. Bought my first 1KW HID back in the 80's, etc... I guess you can say I've gone through it all.
I started my LED journey about 3 years ago. Everything I read pointed to LED growing being possible. but really really hard to obtain hardware. S I did what any other red blooded American would do in a situation like this, I DIY'd my own.
A lot of misunderstanding comes from a "loose" set of definitions for LED lamps. For example what are 2nd Gen lamps? What are serious agricultural lamps and which are just plain "snake oil".
The lamps that LEDGirl sells are what I call " bottom tier serious lamps. By that I don't mean to put her product down, but rather that a product designed and constructed like hers are the lowest output lamps that actually produce. Anything less will not produce nearly enough irradiation to flower and fruit cannabis. Kudos go to LEDGirl for making these available so that others can start trying and using LED gear.
The first lamp I built was a 300 watt 5 watt emitter array. 300/5 = 60 but I used 100 of them so I could drive them at less than full bias current allowing longer life for components. Each emitter is biased at aprox 3 watts. This lamp provided much better penetration of the canopy. It also cost nearly $1500.00 in parts alone. The next generation used 15 watt emitters and really did a bang up job of getting through the canopy. Let's not talk about cost as if you have to ask, you won't want to buy one. Cost for devices will drop as manufacture ramps up, but serious LED hardware is still too costly for casual or even commercial use.
So my question to you is what you call 2nd generation G2LED's. Just to get some common ground for conversation's sake so wee can talk apples to apples.
As far as your question of different spectrum lighting goes, I went with the practical approach and combined sources of differing technologies to tune spectrum ratios when LED's could not provide them at a reasonable cost. I found quartz halogen lamps and incandescent lamps each added to a total spectrum.
For example the first few harvests were way over ripe because I waited for the trichs to turn amber (LOL). I learned that some varieties just don't when starved for UV. There is a large body of experimentation going on right now to determine which spectrum determine plant behavior ( a discussion for another thread ).
It is my firm belief that the new emerging light sources will allow understanding of plant growth and behavior and allow us to grow in a manner we have just begun to discover. Did you ever hear of Martian Night grows? (Google it !) Lots of really exciting new ways to grow more smartly and productively.
Hope your thread gets lots of intelligent responses here and a bit less rhetoric.
There's a lot for everyone to learn and discuss on this subject as old ways get modernized and re-thought! No need to throw away the baby with the water !
I've been growing ever since I was a small boy, taught by my grandfather. I still live on a working farm, although I didn't do the work most of my adult life as I am a engineer by vocation. Bought my first 1KW HID back in the 80's, etc... I guess you can say I've gone through it all.
I started my LED journey about 3 years ago. Everything I read pointed to LED growing being possible. but really really hard to obtain hardware. S I did what any other red blooded American would do in a situation like this, I DIY'd my own.
A lot of misunderstanding comes from a "loose" set of definitions for LED lamps. For example what are 2nd Gen lamps? What are serious agricultural lamps and which are just plain "snake oil".
The lamps that LEDGirl sells are what I call " bottom tier serious lamps. By that I don't mean to put her product down, but rather that a product designed and constructed like hers are the lowest output lamps that actually produce. Anything less will not produce nearly enough irradiation to flower and fruit cannabis. Kudos go to LEDGirl for making these available so that others can start trying and using LED gear.
The first lamp I built was a 300 watt 5 watt emitter array. 300/5 = 60 but I used 100 of them so I could drive them at less than full bias current allowing longer life for components. Each emitter is biased at aprox 3 watts. This lamp provided much better penetration of the canopy. It also cost nearly $1500.00 in parts alone. The next generation used 15 watt emitters and really did a bang up job of getting through the canopy. Let's not talk about cost as if you have to ask, you won't want to buy one. Cost for devices will drop as manufacture ramps up, but serious LED hardware is still too costly for casual or even commercial use.
So my question to you is what you call 2nd generation G2LED's. Just to get some common ground for conversation's sake so wee can talk apples to apples.
As far as your question of different spectrum lighting goes, I went with the practical approach and combined sources of differing technologies to tune spectrum ratios when LED's could not provide them at a reasonable cost. I found quartz halogen lamps and incandescent lamps each added to a total spectrum.
For example the first few harvests were way over ripe because I waited for the trichs to turn amber (LOL). I learned that some varieties just don't when starved for UV. There is a large body of experimentation going on right now to determine which spectrum determine plant behavior ( a discussion for another thread ).
It is my firm belief that the new emerging light sources will allow understanding of plant growth and behavior and allow us to grow in a manner we have just begun to discover. Did you ever hear of Martian Night grows? (Google it !) Lots of really exciting new ways to grow more smartly and productively.
Hope your thread gets lots of intelligent responses here and a bit less rhetoric.
There's a lot for everyone to learn and discuss on this subject as old ways get modernized and re-thought! No need to throw away the baby with the water !
S
secondtry
I for one would suggest you try a 400w CMH with a digital ballast (it's quite) and a good reflector like a PL or a SunSystem II with an air cooled hood using an inline centrifugal fan (which is also quite). That way you can get the much touted "hands on experience". I for one find it very odd you would yell at me for explaining the science behind LEDs while claiming I don't need to test them to understand them while you don't even understand HID and won't test them either...
HTH
I for one would never recommend anyone put a 400 HID in a small cabinet. I know people do it, but I think it's an accident waiting to happen.
I would also love to see pics of a 3 by 3 area producing 2 pounds of dried bud. That's a pretty bold claim. But if you say it's true I'd love to see it. You've made comments calling other peoples claims as "bullshit" yet make a claim like that, which I will add is more than any other claim I've ever read. If you're going to make extroidinary claims such as that it would be good to see it. Do you have any pics? I'm not calling you a liar, but I'd love to see proof of it.
I would also love to see pics of a 3 by 3 area producing 2 pounds of dried bud. That's a pretty bold claim. But if you say it's true I'd love to see it. You've made comments calling other peoples claims as "bullshit" yet make a claim like that, which I will add is more than any other claim I've ever read. If you're going to make extroidinary claims such as that it would be good to see it. Do you have any pics? I'm not calling you a liar, but I'd love to see proof of it.
S
secondtry
No it's not. There is no way for grower B to assume he can use yield data from grower A to make a judgment on a lamp; it's that simple. And what about the "yield is a solid number"? No one records the % of moisture content in the weighed bud (well, I do) and so people reporting they get 1 gpw with a LED can't be used to judge the quality of the lamp with accuracy because one is weighing the water and claiming that as yield! Thus two growers will generally have two different moisture contents to their buds, thus there is NOT an accurate comparison made. Do you see the problem here? Why is it that only cannabis growers want to use subjective yield data for a means of comparison?
And why isn't anyone least using lumens when comparing lamps? Just claiming LED array X yielded Y says nothing about the irradiance of the LED array so there is NO WAY another grower can use that yield data, they would also need to know the irradiance of the lamp used when growing, and knowing the exact distance from LED to canopy and the cubic size of the "whole canopy" is needed too...otherwise grower B can not copy grower A, nor use grower A subjective yield data to judge a lamp.
I have written time and time again that we should judge a lamp by PPFD, which is a proven datum for Pn. The higher the PPFD up to about 1,500 the better the lamp, period. It has to do with distance to canopy and reflector too, and ballast for HID and the temp the of array for LEDs (the cooler the more irradiance); but, using PPFD as a qualifier is the best option right now and if one records all those other variables one can account for them. For me, I will test LEDGirls new high power LED array at various distances to find what the PPFD output is, and if it's low (like I assume it will be) one can then say it's not worth it if a HID can offer higher PPFD at distances which do not overly heat the canopy (i.e., a 400w could be 6-10", etc). That is REAL science and it is objective proven data, while yield is SO very subjective it isn't even funny.
I will repeat again: if yield is so great of a qualifier why is it that zero studies use yield? (They all use PPFD, Pn, etc)
Also, like I have written many times, the quality of cannabis is easily to find analytically, I have developed a TLC (Thin Layer Chromatography) method to find analytical semi-quantitative (i.e., comparative) levels of total THC, CBD, CBC, etc, etc, and certain terpenoids, etc, etc. I modeled my method after those used by the UN, NATO and the DEA. My method is perfectly sound and I had my buddy who is an organic chemist review it. To "read" the TLC spots I will use JustTLC (link), but one could use the free version called JustQuantify (link).
All the material I use currently with TLC (I bought a retail test kit to compare) is easy to buy with no licenses required. My method uses similar "mobile phase" and "stationary phase", with the "visualizing regent" as Fast Blue BB salt and I also use a "perseveration phase" so I can keep the plats for a long time with out spot degradation. Using comparative TLC assay I can test two different buds and find which one holds more total THC (for example). And once I make (and purchase) my own "standards" I can use FULLY quantitative TLC and state how much total THC is present by the mg or gram, etc!
My TLC method is just as accurate as a Gas Chromatography (that is proven through a few studies) and my method only costs about $100-300 all told, where a GC costs over $5k and requires one to have a standard which if purchased is over $1k a gram!
I made my TLC method so anyone, like you, can copy it and test their cannabis at home for very cheap. I will do a big writ up on it with pics and vids once I have my own website up.
Using TLC one can then test LED vs. HID to see which offers more quality. And using PPFD one can test lamps to see which offers greater photosynthesis!
HTH
S
secondtry
I agree, that is why the setup would need to be done right.
Sure, but I report by the "whole canopy", i.e., cubic area, mine is generally 3x3x3. I only took a few pics of some LUI nugs last time, but they are bigger than orange juice boxes
I will be sure to post pics of my up coming Double Dutch grow which I assume I will yield 1.5-2 pounds like I normally do, that is if DD is the big yielder people say it is. I have been using a heavy LUI strain I picked out of about 30 different LUI strains.
The main reason I called that BS is he hasn't even harvested yet, he's making a projection of yield...and not only that, but 250w is not going to make a pound unless it a freak strain like I've never seen nor heard of before.
I can post pics of some LUI on plant and harvest, but I don't have whole canopy pic anymore. Give me a day or so and I'll upload it. However, I wouldn't call it "proof" because one can't judge yield from a photograph, but I do get you point, thanks.
Also, how about making the LED vs. HID thread a sticky?
S
secondtry
I agree, and I'm sorry for my part, I just get so heated when people refuse to accept proven analytical data and proven scientific theory. I will play nice from now on...
