Between Sun and Moon HPS/LED comparison grow.

[hazy]

Great job Hazy. Interesting thread. The environmentalist in me wants badly to go LED and lower my electric bill.

However I am missing something here so help me out. Why are we not rating LEDs the same way we rate every other light we use? That is lumens per watt. If I need 400 watts of LEDs to equal the same lumens as a 400 HPS then the value of LEDs greatly diminishes.

The side by side grows are interesting but for me starting with the basic data is required to make any valid observations.

I wouldn't know that stuff, but I'll bet you a dollar that if you look through LEDGirl's forums the info you seek has been posted by her. She really has put tons of info in assorted posts around here that give all the technical stuff of every detail of her lights.


Sir~ The led buds are denser. They have more color at the finish, and I think they are stonier, though the folks who got testers thought it was about even. I'm going to send you some tester buds from this next harvest so you can judge for yourself if you don't mind.


I took a few pics last night. They're 15 days in now.
The 400 is now back in the middle, the divider is gone and the girls can spread out a bit. Looks a little sparse in there now.



A new home for the LED girls. I'm putting a curtain between them and the big girls to the right.



This is the 345 watt LED. It has Sour Diesels under it.


205 low, 345 high.


SD buds


SD bud under the 400. Couldn't get a decent picher.



Thought I posted this, but it was just in my album.This is the actual wattage used by the 345.
So the LEDs use 455 watts. Still less than the 400 at 484 watts.

 

[nuggetshiner]

Wow! Love watching this hazy. Wanted to let you know I'm still lurking. Think I'm gonna
pick up one of those "wattage use meters". Pretty cool. If your looking for new, impartial
testers I'm available, lol. I see your playing around with some of my gear. Hope all turns
out well. Did you ever run any of the Golden Cindy? If not I'll buy that pack back, lol.
l8r, ns

 

[420atheist]

Well how about it LEDGirl? I have always compared lights by lumens per watt. I checked your web site and saw a lot of colour balance info but nothing on lumens per watt. It seems a no brainer to figure out how they stack up to HIDs since all those companies use the lumens per watt ratio.

 

[blazeoneup]

Well how about it LEDGirl? I have always compared lights by lumens per watt. I checked your web site and saw a lot of colour balance info but nothing on lumens per watt. It seems a no brainer to figure out how they stack up to HIDs since all those companies use the lumens per watt ratio.

She posted the PAR watts of her units, Which is far better then lumens, Lumens are a measurement of light output that we can visibly see, PAR is what the plants can use.

Considering that a descent % of light output by a HID is not usable to the plant. LEDS dont produce all this wasted sprectum and light, Which means they surely dont compare to HID in lumens per watt. Simply cause they put out a lot of par watts and less lumens.

To compare this do this a incandescent sucks ass for growing, But it sure puts off quite a bit of lumens. Another good example is, Take a mercury vapor light very shitty for growing plants but also puts off a shitload of lumens.

Here is one final example, Take a halogen light, It sucks ass for growing but puts off a lot of lumens, but yet you can grow better plants with a weak floresent light.

Lumens is a very shitty measurement to use for LED grow lights, PAR is what matters at the end of the day.

 

[420atheist]

She posted the PAR watts of her units, Which is far better then lumens, Lumens are a measurement of light output that we can visibly see, PAR is what the plants can use.

PAR is a description. It is the VISIBLE light between 400 and 700 nanometres that plants are able to use for photosynthesis. All lights put out light in this range just different ratios.

What she gives that may be of use is photosynthesis photon flux density per square meter (μmol) m−2. However the site seems to miss the fact that most often this is given as a ratio over time (μmol) m−2 s−1 At 6 inches a light produces 2000 micromole/squared meter is that every second? Every hour? Also this number just gives us an amount per square meter it does not tell us how efficiently the light provides that amount.

Considering that a descent % of light output by a HID is not usable to the plant. LEDS dont produce all this wasted sprectum and light, Which means they surely dont compare to HID in lumens per watt. Simply cause they put out a lot of par watts and less lumens.

Do you have a source for this? Again I have seen a spectrum chart for HID lights but I am left wanting that information for LEDs.

To compare this do this a incandescent sucks ass for growing, But it sure puts off quite a bit of lumens.

We have always used lumens per watt. Incandescent bulbs put out 18 lumens/watt at their most efficient. HPS produce 140 to 150 lumens/watt.

Another good example is, Take a mercury vapor light very shitty for growing plants but also puts off a shitload of lumens.

Mercury vapour puts out about 55 lumens per watt. No where near HPS.

Lumens is a very shitty measurement to use for LED grow lights, PAR is what matters at the end of the day

Lumens per watt is not a "shitty" measurement. Lumens per watt describes how well the source provides visible light for a given amount of energy. There are tons of references dating back for decades in indoor growing that use the lumens per watt figure to find the efficiency of bulbs.

In the end all that matters is to compare LEDs with the bulbs we are using we have to use common measurements. Without those we do not really have empirical evidence.

 

[blazeoneup]

PAR is a description. It is the VISIBLE light between 400 and 700 nanometres that plants are able to use for photosynthesis. All lights put out light in this range just different ratios.

What she gives that may be of use is photosynthesis photon flux density per square meter (μmol) m−2. However the site seems to miss the fact that most often this is given as a ratio over time (μmol) m−2 s−1 At 6 inches a light produces 2000 micromole/squared meter is that every second? Every hour? Also this number just gives us an amount per square meter it does not tell us how efficiently the light provides that amount.


Do you have a source for this? Again I have seen a spectrum chart for HID lights but I am left wanting that information for LEDs.

We have always used lumens per watt. Incandescent bulbs put out 18 lumens/watt at their most efficient. HPS produce 140 to 150 lumens/watt.

Mercury vapour puts out about 55 lumens per watt. No where near HPS.

Lumens per watt is not a "shitty" measurement. Lumens per watt describes how well the source provides visible light for a given amount of energy. There are tons of references dating back for decades in indoor growing that use the lumens per watt figure to find the efficiency of bulbs.

In the end all that matters is to compare LEDs with the bulbs we are using we have to use common measurements. Without those we do not really have empirical evidence.

Well we can safely say LEDS put off almost 100% usable light for the plants, No wasted light aside from the few infrared LEDs used in the units. So you can see where I am going, I believe a hps has much higher lumen per watt then a LED does.

This is just an example dont quote the numbers below. Just an example of my point.

Whats better in your opinion, A led that has lets say 50 lumens per watt, But that 50 lumens is at the peak absorbtion point for photosenthesis, and you have a hps putting off 100 lumens per watt but its in a wider wavelength and some of its light is peak absorbtion some of it isnt.

yeah 400-700 nanameters is the absorbtion point for photosenthesis to accur, But at certain wavelengths you get higher effeciency when looking at photosenthetic energy absorbtion. Plants will get more energy from a light with 20,000 lumens at peak absorbtion point then a light with 50,000 lumens over a wider range of wavelengths.

Lot's of variables to look at, Lumens just not accurate for this type of light IMHO.

LEDS break the barrier with effeciency, You can design led lights to putt off 100% of its light in the peak absorbtion points for photosenthesis, Which in turn equals higher effeciency even though it may put off less lumens per watt it puts off 100% effecient lighting with no wasted wavelengths, For this reason alone lumens is a shitty measurement for LEDS.

HPS MH and all that, Put off a very wide sprectrum and wide variety of wavelengths some in the peak absorbtion category and plenty of less effecient wavelengths.

Hope this is starting to make sense to you now, most lights like mh, hps, etc, Lumens works great for a measurement... why, because they all put off a wide band of light in a 400-700 nanameter area, But how much of that light is at the peak absorbtion point? So for those lights yeah lumens works simply because they all put off light in a wide area of wavelengths, a properly designed led will not. It will only put out light in the peak wavelengths for maximum absorbtion.

This is why I feel lumens are a shitty measurement for LEDS....

 

[hazy]

Take your crap out of my thread 420atheist. This thread is not for you led haters to go neener neener neener, and 'oh yeah, prove it' * SAID WITH A PUNK ASS WHINER VOICE.

If you want to talk to ledgirl, then PM her, I don't want to read your questions or her responses. I'm sure you can find dozens of posts where she answers this probably from you with another troll name, or buy your own light and test it yourself.

Besides. all you need to know is in the pics.

 

[420atheist]

Take your crap out of my thread 420atheist. This thread is not for you led haters to go neener neener neener, and 'oh yeah, prove it' * SAID WITH A PUNK ASS WHINER VOICE.

If you want to talk to ledgirl, then PM her, I don't want to read your questions or her responses. I'm sure you can find dozens of posts where she answers this probably from you with another troll name, or buy your own light and test it yourself.

Besides. all you need to know is in the pics.

Hazy please accept my apology. I assure you I am not a "hater" of LEDs. I can also assure you this is my only account and I have not posted about LEDs before. I will attempt to find those threads though I thought my post were on topic here concerning how LEDs compare with HIDs.

My background is in engineering and I spend a lot of time with science (thank you Carl Sagan.) I believe if you reread my post you will see I am only attempting to understand the capabilities of these lamps compared to what we are used to using.

Anecdotal evidence is nice but you have to admit that plants have different yields under the exact same conditions. And the number of data points so far is statistically insignificant. Grows like yours show us what is possible in your environment under your conditions.

All I requested was a common set of criteria to compare with. The simplest most accurate way to compare lights is by lumens per watt and then look at the spectrum they emit . This is in every hydroponic 101 book and video out there. I am totally open minded to more scientific methods of measuring grow lights but we need to have those numbers for all lights and the measuring technique has to be relevant.

 

[VerdantGreen]

420 athiest - HydroGrow / LEDGirl have their own forum on the front page of IC - you would be better to go there and ask your questions or have your debate.
it's kind of rude showing up in a thread that deals with testers growing plants under LED's and trying to start a debate with the vendor. kind of like asking someone from a shop to come to someones house that you have never met just so you can start an argument with them...

hey hazy how big of a footprint are you giving the 345 watter??

VG

 

[hazy]

Hazy please accept my apology.

accepted

I assure you I am not a "hater" of LEDs. I can also assure you this is my only account and I have not posted about LEDs before.

Accept my apology for assuming you were one of the anti-led minions. The forums are full of long gigantic posts in long gigantic threads of these questions and answers and genuine flaming. These questions are almost always presented with ill intent and trollish flaming. I really don't know or care about lumens or any other stuff that is probably important, I have too much to think about already. I'm not trying to stifle debate and discussion about the effectiveness of LED lights compared to HIDs, just trying to keep it out of this thread. LED growers tend to get attacked around here. I mean we got guys with massive experience and are looked up to like Blazeoneup, who have guys with 22 posts coming on here and talking crap to him. Unbelievable rudeness. I'm just trying to keep this thread about my 'anecdotal ' evidence.

Anecdotal evidence is nice but you have to admit that plants have different yields under the exact same conditions.

exactly. Most growers here will have better results than me, as I am on the low end of growers yield wise.

As VG suggested, you can find the hydrogrow led forums on the main forum page down at the bottom above the seed vendors.

The 345 is only covering about 30 x 30, it could cover a little more. I keep it a foot above so it has a bigger footprint than the 205.

 

[unclefishstick]

hey hazy,how are you finding the heat produced by the 345 compared to the 205?

 

[420atheist]

Accept my apology for assuming you were one of the anti-led minions. The forums are full of long gigantic posts in long gigantic threads of these questions and answers and genuine flaming.

Accepted. I was unaware of previous post and will check them out. I have no dog in the fight one way or the other. I'm just looking for the facts. I try to live a green lifestyle that lowers my carbon footprint so lower watt lights that do the same thing appeal to me.

 

[GreatLakes THC]

Nice thread...

Nice thread...

Looking forward to see the results from this more even wattage comparison.

GreatLakes THC

 

[420ish]

.

The 345 is only covering about 30 x 30, it could cover a little more. I keep it a foot above so it has a bigger footprint than the 205.[/COLOR][/FONT][/QUOTE]

what is the biggest foot print you think it would handle while maintaining results similar to yours?does it put out alot more heat?i have had problems in my veg when running 220 watts of pll and 2 90 ufos with 80 cfm fan.i am thinking of upgrading to led girls lights due to yours and most other testers great veg cycles.my hid hut and the generic one do good but dont have the right footprint and hers look even better.

 

[hazy]

I've been kinda busy lately, and just haven't had enough time to take and process pics for an update. I took some pics a couple days ago and have them ready now finally.

hey 420ish, the 345 could do 36x36, maybe a little more.
In fact that footprint thing is the main problem with LED lights. As has been pointed out by many people, a 400 lights up a bigger area and can produce over a 5x5 area, while the LED can only cover 3x3. Regardless of whether or not the LED makes good buds, and it does, the 400 can make more because of the footprint being bigger.


A couple cacti growing on my porch in containers.



These pics are 31 days into 12/12.


Now that I've chopped these,


I've turned the big light off and took out the divider.





OK, the wife just came in and told me I've got to go outside and get to work, so I'll post up the rest of the pics later tonight.

 

[SirSmokalot]

Looking awesome hazy

 

[freedom4ever]

Hell yeah! Real nice grow you got going.

 

[hazy]

Hey unc, the 345 puts out noticeably more heat than the 205. Still not hot, though I have to keep it 12" above the tops to keep from burning them though.
Thanks freedom.

Hey Sir, good to see ya.

Ok, some more pics,

Here's momma dove with two baby dove tail feathers sticking out from under her. She lives above my porch in an Acacia tree. She's so close I could almost touch her, but I would never try,The babies are gone now, but she's back to do it again.


led grown Sour Diesel

Purple kush





Sour Diesel led



LED UP^^^
=============
HPS DOWN\/\/
Burmese haze growing under the 400


GAK hps

 

[SirSmokalot]

nice update once again
so i read u think led are more potent... always open to a sample when the time comes. will match samples to keep from denting ur stash hehe.
talking bout ur cloning luck again huh, hope it gets better. my diy aero is working great. all they need is a cycle timer to keep temps down. they are like magic though. roots just blow up...

 

[LilHoldem-NB]

Well keeping your power consumption under the radar for your commercial grows I presume the intial setup for led is obviously more but if you match watts and have the capital to invest in the led setup with say 5000w equal to a 5000W hid show then your doubling your profits every grow. First grow profits go to recoop your intial investment in the led setup. After the 3rd grow your getting double the weight with led for the equal amount of watts used and also doubling profits. Thats bizness 101 my friend. lmao!!!

You'll still need fans & a scrubber w/ LED grow.



Wrong! If growing is your business, the ONLY comparison is net revenue. That's Business 101 my friend.