Curious on how many switched back

[LSWM]

Yeah hes right. You are hitting 16oz per 600w which is mediocre mate you should be hitting 25 per 600w to get the gpw. Thats easily achieved growing horizontal. Plus I read your thread, you cant even hit 1gpw and post 48, you fucked up your plants and need help. Then trying to school us.

Show me one place in this thread where I tried to tell anyone how to grow. Pretty sure I've only provided my experience and scientific facts. If by "schooling" you mean being taught science, yes, I've been "schooling" you all.

These plants look like I fucked them up and needed help right? If you read any further you'll notice I corrected the problems myself, with some input from a veteran Mr. D.

 

[LSWM]

So you're going to make me re-read every post and through your diary, rather than answering a simple question?

Why?

I actually need to apologize because my numbers only show up in this thread via Dr. Fever. Sorry.

For future reference you can click on any members name and say "Filter Posts" and it will filter their posts in that thread.

Best I've done is about 700g from a 1k, 550 from a 600. I still haven't had a finished grow where I had plants under a 1k from start to finish.

I have been growing for almost 2 years. I have had 4 different rooms and locations, AS WELL AS having to deal with a walkthrough from a landlord and needing to tear everything down, stuff it into a uhaul, and set it back up. Said run was still my best yield yet, and honestly it was the first time I actually took it seriously. Lack of veg would be my #1 reason for lack of yield. It was as simple as overestimating final size and flipping a week too early.

I don't have a perfect environment, and no co2. I'm willing to put $$ on it that this next run currently in flower breaks 1gpw regardless.

 

[LSWM]

Yeah hes right. You are hitting 16oz per 600w which is mediocre mate you should be hitting 25 per 600w to get the gpw. Thats easily achieved growing horizontal. Plus I read your thread, you cant even hit 1gpw and post 48, you fucked up your plants and need help. Then trying to school us.

EDIT: Wait a minute. 25 per 600? That's 41 zips per 1k. Did you say you were hitting "25-35 per 1k"?

I also find it quite hilarious that you go check out my thread, and come back shit talking, but still have yet to post a picture of your own. Not that I would believe it was yours or the numbers you claim anyways. Without a thread to back it up you could be shooting shots of anyones rooms and claiming any #'s you like.

EXAMPLE: OMG HORIZONTAL GROWS SUCK GUYS! LOOK AT HOW EASY I HIT 2GPW VERT!

 

[papaduc]

Ok, but even if you do break the gpw, you've got to ask yourself about the whole inverse square rule etc etc. Because if vert lighting was so much more efficient, and if the reflected light rule etc applied as simply as you're projecting, you wouldn't be looking at 1gpw for the first time, instead you'd be pushing 1.5 no problem, even without co2 etc.

1gpw is achievable without co2 on a flat grow. No problem.

So why, if vertical lighting is so much more efficient, is that not reflected in the numbers?

 

[LSWM]

That's not what I said. 35oz on a 1k is a gpw.

Nice job going back and changing your posts to reflect what you say later. It's too bad I simply suggested reading your post rather than quoting it.

Originally posted 08-21-2014, 08:31 AM

Last edited by papaduc; 08-21-2014 at 10:14 AM..

 

[LSWM]

Ok, but even if you do break the gpw, you've got to ask yourself about the whole inverse square rule etc etc. Because if vert lighting was so much more efficient, and if the reflected light rule etc applied as simply as you're projecting, you wouldn't be looking at 1gpw for the first time, instead you'd be pushing 1.5 no problem, even without co2 etc.

1gpw is achievable without co2 on a flat grow. No problem.

So why, if vertical lighting is so much more efficient, is that not reflected in the numbers?

I have been unable to achieve 1gpw vertically or horizontally. I have grown both ways, not exclusively vert.

 

[papaduc]

Nice job going back and changing your posts to reflect what you say later. It's too bad I simply suggested reading your post rather than quoting it.

What?

Yes I edited it down, but I didn't change the facts of it.

What did you read which I changed?

What's happened is you've misread it, gone back, seen what you thought was there wasn't, and made the assumption that I've deleted it.

I have been unable to achieve 1gpw vertically or horizontally. I have grown both ways, not exclusively vert.

Like I say, with time, you'll understand that the famous light chart doesn't apply as simply as you think it does, because if it did, vertical would out-yield horizontal by many times even on untrained plug and play grows.

 

[LSWM]

What?

Yes I edited it down, but I didn't change the facts of it.

What did you read which I changed?

What's happened is you've misread it, gone back, seen what you thought was there wasn't, and made the assumption that I've deleted it.

It's basically the same. Small changes to lines near the bottom. I'd say it's pretty fishy when you post something, then 2 hours later edit it, just to quote me and say "that's not what I said." Timeline: Posted @8:31 edited @ 10:14. Then @10:18 "That's not what I said!"

 

[Shcrews]

Ive always found in life that the people who get agressive and name call in debates , find it hard to string a decent response together. A reflective hood makes the light more intense like a torch or spot light or what ever.


Growing vert is a bust. Its hailed as a high yield method and I agree it can be fantastic with multiple bulbs surrounding plants. But growing one bulb doughnut style is shit. I out yield most of those grows I see on here with 4 weeks veg and horizontal scrog. Work that one out.

Btw id live to see pics of these fantastic verticle grows rather than calling me a moron etc.

well i'm not gonna post any pictures but i won't call you a moron either. Vert gardens are harder to dial in, but a dialed coloseum or stadium will yield more than a flat garden. The reason for this is the increased square footage of the canopy.

I've hit 1gpw in flood trays and it's not very hard with the right strains, definitely easier than pulling 1.5gpw in a vert garden, but vert still has a higher ceiling, no pun intended. It's just not worth the extra work to me because my gardens are not limited by wattage or square footage

 

[LSWM]

Like I say, with time, you'll understand that the famous light chart doesn't apply as simply as you think it does, because if it did, vertical would out-yield horizontal by many times even on untrained plug and play grows.

Go look at Heaths Vert SOG. Pretty sure SOG is as plug and play as you can get.

 

[papaduc]

Jesus christ... mate, seriously, you need to lighten up a bit and swerve the paranoia. I edited the post down by cutting out some things I repeated. That's all.

What I didn't say was that 25-35oz was the minimum you should be doing on a 1k light without doing something horribly wrong. Nowhere did I say that. You've misread it mate, simple as that.

What I did say about numbers is still in that post.

Go look at Heaths Vert SOG. Pretty sure SOG is as plug and play as you can get.

Heath Robinson's grow... plug and play? I actually don't know what to say to that.

 

[papaduc]

well i'm not gonna post any pictures but i won't call you a moron either. Vert gardens are harder to dial in, but a dialed coloseum or stadium will yield more than a flat garden. The reason for this is the increased square footage of the canopy.

I've hit 1gpw in flood trays and it's not very hard with the right strains, definitely easier than pulling 1.5gpw in a vert garden, but vert still has a higher ceiling, no pun intended. It's just not worth the extra work to me because my gardens are not limited by wattage or square footage

I agree with that. Dialed in, with enough space, you can hit better gpw numbers on vertical. But the tradeoff is in time and space and, for me, it's not worth it.

 

[LSWM]

Heath Robinson's grow... plug and play? I actually don't know what to say to that.

Are we suggesting that the build takes away from the ease of use?

I'm pretty sure once you have a vert SOG cab built it's as easy as dropping in cuts and coming back at harvest. Certainly not as easy as putting 100 cuts on the ground, but you did say...

Like I say, with time, you'll understand that the famous light chart doesn't apply as simply as you think it does, because if it did, vertical would out-yield horizontal by many times even on untrained plug and play grows.

I think a vert SOG grow will out yield any horizontal grow by many times, and be just as easy to maintain.

 

[Ganjaganjakush]

If one member's made their mind up or isn't interested in actually questioning it, so be it.

For me, this is all about the numbers, and it's a good debate because I'm mulling it over right now in making a decision for my next grow and it's interesting to compare.

Vertical growing is projected to out-yield horizontal. The truth is, in most cases, when you factor in space and wattage, it doesn't seem to.

What I'm seeing is that the numbers being compared to are set horribly low on the horizontal, thus making the vert look much better in comparison. For me that's the biggest issue I have with the whole vert hor debate. I think that's what's happening here to a degree, with due respect.

For example....



The question is, why not?

25 oz is 12.5 ounces per light.

One of those lights is a 600.

To put it into perspective, if you hit only 12.5oz on a 600w light in a horizontal grow, you've fucked up badly somewhere. That's the blunt truth of it.

But even with that low figure, you would still have hit your 25oz mark that you did with the vert.....

so how is it fair to project that you wouldn't have hit this simple target with a flat grow? It makes no sense



Again, the assertion that flat = more management and less yield, even though your situation seems perfectly set up to do much the same with a flat grow.

You're right I did fuck up along the way of my first grow. I would of been over run and had not enough room had I went horizontal I'm in a 5x5 tent.

 

[LSWM]

Let me explain the light intensity bit more clearly.

Let's for simplicity sake say that a 1k HPS bulb emits 100,000 lumens. At 2' away that is 1/4 the intensity now 25'000 lumens. Let's ASSUME that the reflector reflects 100% of light and none is lost due to reflection or distance. That means that you are getting 50,000 lumens at 2' distance over a 4x4 tray. 50,000 lumens in 16 sq ft.

A vert barebulb at 18" will be at just under 1/2 of intensity of 100,000. 44,000 lumens @ 18". A 1.5' x 4' cylinder has a lateral surface area of 37.7 sq ft. That means you are getting 44,000 lumens to 37.7 sq ft.

What this means is that Vert provides better light coverage to a greater area than a horizontal grow. Even a 5x5 tray will only be 25 sq ft. And it's only a 20% increase in lumens at that distance, and that is ASSUMING that the reflector is 100% efficient, which they are not.

 

[papaduc]

So why doesn't that pretty big increase in light efficiency across the board relate in yield numbers?

 

[LSWM]

So why doesn't that pretty big increase in light efficiency across the board relate in yield numbers?

From what I read, people in this thread preaching Horizontal, mainly you, Dr. Fever, and siftedunity, are either full of shit, or hitting the same numbers as vert growers are. By full of shit I mean Dr. Fever at 7 lbs from 2k. Maybe I'm just overly skeptical though. I'd love to be proven wrong. I think if there is a way to do 3.5lbs per 1k it's with SOG, that I think we can all agree on.

Dialed in, with enough space, you can hit better gpw numbers on vertical.

Pretty sure that means that the better light efficiency equates to better yield numbers. You just said so yourself.

 

[papaduc]

I'm not preaching horizontal. My current grow is vertical. I'm open minded about which is better and in what situation.

With regards to the light efficiency chart, the point I'm making is that you're applying figures which point to a big increase in useable light. But there are other factors involved, not least the strict training you need to make sure you have all that square area open to the light.

You're applying numbers and rather than suggesting your opinion, or theorising, you're laying down facts about how this works and why x is much better than y.

The truth is, you will find out in time why it's not as simple as that.

There is more work involved in vertical training, especially with heavy branching strains. For me, that work isn't justified by an increase in yield which makes it worthwhile.

Pretty sure that means that the better light efficiency equates to better yield numbers. You just said so yourself.

It means that to make use of the circular light efficiency, you need to be right the fuck on the ball with your training and plant selection and vegging.

To put it into perspective, that vertical grow you have going on now is nowhere near what you need for those light chart figures to be of any use to you. And for it to be at that level will require a hell of a lot more work than you're putting in now.

At that point, then you can decide if it's worth it, or if that bit of raw efficiency, when the work is factored in, is a false economy or not.

 

[HerBnGorE(illa)]

Hello everyone. I have zero experience with vert style growing and little experience anyways. That's why I'm here. To learn from experienced people who try different methods and figure out what suits my needs best. With the title of the thread I thought i may learn why a person would switch from vert to horizontal. Some pros and cons of both...some reason...what I got was a waste of time. If u don't like cucumbers don't go to a cuke forum just to say how shitty they taste....instead u go in to figure out if there's a different breed of cuke that may be good enough to put in your garden. ...only good post in 6 pages was pg 5 a guy trying to explain his take on bare bulb lumens vs reflector lumens per area. Thanks to u whoever wrote that post.

 

[HerBnGorE(illa)]

LSWM. Thanks for your post.....but you should have put it on page one so I could quit reading before the shit slinging started!