LED and BUD QUALITY

[kro-magnon]

We do a lot of PAR mapping of lights and having reflective walls makes a big difference to even and intense canopy coverage. Moving from soil to coco (mineral salt, organic or blends) will provide much faster growth. You would probably be shocked by how much – especially once you get into auto-watering systems, but even hand-watering coco can provide quicker results. I don't notice any real difference in taste between soil and organic coco run-to-waste.

I should try to grow in coco but I'm not a fan of mesuring the EC and PH, I like how easy and intuitive it is to grow in soil and I use this method since such a long time I'm a bit scared to change. I'm sure I'd be shocked by the speed of growth in coco, I know it's a very effective substrate but I'm so comfortable with soil I'm a bit reluctant to change.
I have some mylar with me, I will cut some pieces to reflect the light effectively.

 

[Ca++]

To put some light on this for those less familiar

Producing pigment isn't the first solution to over active chlorophyll production. It's more the final solution. However, we are kneecapping it, with our light that targets the B peak, but doesn't do a lot for that other peak in activity.

The 'blue is bad' work done on canna, rarely talks about what blue. I hunted high and low, and when it was clear(which was rarely), they had used 440s and such. Leaving the carotinoid system under powered. Which is the regulatory system.

Other graphs show the peak between the Chl~ ones

Others straddle the Chl-b peak

I suspect the activity being mapped here, is carotene production. Not the other mechanisms which first serve to reduce oxygen related problems, from splitting the water. Which ultimately lead to bleached looking plants, if unchecked.
It's a bit sketchy still, without the big answers we would like.

I know when to put the spliff down and do some actual work, and it's about now. These colours are welcome in my grows. They add interest, and are usually seen where a plant has maxed out, and I can think of few other targets to aim for.
These are not signs I grew ruderalis. Though they could be, under different circumstances. Which is what we need to recognise.

 

[Ca++]

Not all graphs are created equally

437nm looks good here, if you wanted to hurt your plants
It was mused that this could be an absorption graph. In any case, it's a good argument for sunlight. Our peaky blue spectrum's are getting a bit out of hand.

It seems to me, that as backed up by studies of the eye, we would be well served by a mix of blue peaks, not a singular one. Until we do that, blue=bad remains true for LED users, but might be just for LED users. Because of this single peak issue.

Circling back around to the question of LED and more colour, this blue peak seems a strong candidate. I'm not sure what else is even in the running.

 

[greyfader]

It is expensive figuring it out with leds when hps does it all already at a fifth of the price

Anyway...

I am sorry @Crooked8 saying you were up Bugbees arse but people are still experiencing increased plant colouring despite all other variables being the same when growing with leds.

Don't take it so personally bro it's not like anyone is talking about your leds or your plants ( they look amazing btw )

But plants are known to show increased anthocyanins due to their environment...That could be temperature or light spectrum.

You might not be experiencing an increase in anthocyanins with a $1700 a piece led light but a lot of other people, including me, are with the cheaper $600 home units

Why is this? someone asked a few turmultous pages back..Jeez, anyone would think this is a Haze thread

There are studies showing both blue and red light are effective in promoting anthocyanin accumulation.

There is also an interesting study talking about tomatoes with increased anthocyanins and the effects increased anthocyanins have on plant growth. -

limitation to photosynthesis
strong inhibition of side branching
increased branch-to-stem diameter ratio
altered leaf shape
reduced respiration rate

The study showed anthocyanins absorb light in the blue and red bands of the spectrum and develop traits of the shade avoidance response frequently observed in plants growing in the shade, ultimately leading to lower yields.

How do we avoid this with leds? Raise the lights? Buy your lights? Calmag? What?

I personally want to avoid the low yields/low growth rate/low potency of anthocyanin rich plants

nice post, buddy! the only thing i disagree with is "hps does it all already". i grew with HPS for 19 years and my LED flowers are better quality as far as THC and terpene expression are concerned. so HPS did not "do it all" for me. i was always aware that something was missing and that it needed to be improved.

for me, the objective of this thread is to find what in the HPS spectrum caused the larger flowers i got with HPS and add that to the LED spectrum that i'm already using. and maybe get the best of both as well as the efficiency of LED.

LED lighting is here to stay, like it or not, and HPS lighting is on it's way out. sales of HPS gear is decreasing every year. the reason is electrical efficiency.

not only are LED lights more electrically efficient, but using them also radically reduces both the costs of purchasing cooling equipment and the long-term expense of the total energy needed to operate that equipment.

this in an age of ever-increasing energy costs.

i agree that it is expensive to experiment. but i'm doing it anyway because, in the long term, i will have spent less money altogether by suffering through the learning curve phase.

but, not everyone has to experiment to reap the rewards of experimenting.

i can't afford to do proper peer-reviewed research so i use the empirical method. and share my results with others who are mostly using the same method.

before peer-reviewed research became a thing the empirical method was all man had to work with.

everyone is throwing a bunch of shit against the wall to see what sticks. and then sharing their results with others who are mostly doing the same thing.

publications like ICMAG give us a forum to share and discuss our results.

we should all be working together on this and i thank you for your help!

 

[TrifektaSeeds]

We are all a product of genetics and environment. Environment is what causes genetics to evolve.

And fewer and fewer growers these days are saying HPS is better than LED. But each to his own.

To a degree don't forget, better spectrum in the sky won't grow you a tail all of a sudden like it won't make bad genetics good.
You are born with a set of traits that they specifically change according to environment.
Environment won't remove or add any trait that is not already there.
There are too many stupid practices going on in the weed world, flushing, this light vs the other, curing for months to "enhance", buddy if your weed isn't fire after 7-10 days of drying no cure will make it any better

I agree more say led grown weed is better, I haven't smoked elite clones under them to compare, only shit weed that was also shit under HIDs, but people also claim a lot of other things which are complete nonsense so Im still on the fence.
Because the argument is always down to light is light no matter how it is formed, and according to what I'm seeing in my and other people grows, the genetics is mostly fucked up, not the light choice.

If I would approach this subject with ration, I would have used both of them, one for winter, one for summer, this is harnessing their pros.

Ah, sticking to the subject at hand, bud quality under leds, from what I see and taste, I don't like it.
Need to smoke some more, from better growers and strains most def, but that subject is also kinda silly, its like better or worse conditions, does it matter for the effect ? I've grown shitty good plants and good shitty plants, and if the seed had the right genetics, the effect was there always..

 

[Hammerhead]

Trust me it isn't worth the time to respond to any BS. If it happens often using ignore works well. People who have never met us think they know us LOL.

I have to add no one I know paid $1700 for an LED light. My most expensive LED was 700$. My cheapest 850w LED was $260.

$260 LED used in this 5x5... I have it dimmed to 500w.. I have Haze and Kush Hybrids in here.

 

[Ca++]

What do we give to these people?

Double Pump, MoFo

Bam, Bam. And not the Flintstones style one. 440&465 from this one, maybe.

Back to the gangster channel..

 

[greyfader]

I should try to grow in coco but I'm not a fan of mesuring the EC and PH, I like how easy and intuitive it is to grow in soil and I use this method since such a long time I'm a bit scared to change. I'm sure I'd be shocked by the speed of growth in coco, I know it's a very effective substrate but I'm so comfortable with soil I'm a bit reluctant to change.
I have some mylar with me, I will cut some pieces to reflect the light effectively.

it's not the substrate type in a soilless culture method that causes high-speed growth as long as the mechanical characteristics are correct for your watering timing.

the air-filled porosity and the total water-holding capacity of any soilless substrate will determine the frequency and volume of each watering event.

keeping in mind that the greater the frequency of watering the faster the plants' metabolism will be as long as the water is not permanently present in the container.

this is because the mechanical act of watering corrects ec and ph, and causes the exchange of gases in the rootzone, refreshing them. it also disrupts the water retention curve on every pass. the water retention curve is the amount of water held at different levels in the container after a watering event, graded by gravity. disrupting the retention curve causes more of the pot's space to become fully occupied by roots.

how the grower handles this issue of matching watering frequency to the mechanical properties of the substrate greatly influences metabolic rate. then combine this set of variables to the variables presented by the plants' environment. factors like heat and humidity also affect the metabolic rate.

now combine all of these variables with the different choices of lighting and you get an idea of why some people are getting great results with LEDs and some aren't.

in a lot of cases it's not the lights, it's the grower.

That is why all of these subjective reports on the efficacy of a type of lighting don't carry much weight.

 

[Ca++]

Here are some Carotinoids we perhaps don't know

Lutein is yellow, but is found in leafy greens. I think it's off topic
Zeaxanthin is the pigment that gives paprika, corn and saffron it's colour. It's a bit different to what we see
Lycopene is a tetraterpene and a carotene. It's bright red and found in tomatoes and other red fruits and vegetables.


Lycopene is a contender, for the carotene I'm dreaming of.

I really need to do some proper growing...

 

[CocoNut 420]

I'm not a connoisseur or anything like that I just like what I like.

I've read various bits and pieces about hps/led resin and terp diffrences but tbh I don't get it, to me led grows great bud.

It's quality I'm after I wouldn't sacrifice the quality for anything its just a hobby, if there's better than led I've not tried it.

Coco dtw and 650w of led.

 

[Old Uncle Ben]

For every man that says leds are better you'll find one that says the opposite.
I remember back in the day that we used to smoke outdoor and it was cool and nice
Then, the news were flashing one day, watch out ! Hydro ! It will melt your face
Smokers beware haha, and indeed indoor was going strong and was better.
Now, led growers try to justify this tech by saying the end product is better..
But again, you see better, I for one don't see it where I live, not in my grows or others
But I also don't see it in many HIDs ops.
This knowledge of genetics first was known for a long time, lights never and will never be the cause for fire weed, it's only genetics.
Pros and cons of different light techs are strictly for grower use, a killer genetic plant will be fire smoke even under T5s

Totally agree! We tend to over think just about everything in this hobby/livelihood. I don't care if my plants are 3 shades of purple or green as I'm always satisfied with the results no matter what the light source.

Me? I've bigger fish to fry. The hell with the spectrum talk, where you get into trouble is not being able to control pests. For example, couple of years ago I had such a mite attack on my C99 2001 backcrosses that the yields and potency was shit. I had them in the greenhouse and my citrus are huge magnets for mites. I try to control with sprays of Bonide All Season Hort. oil.....whenever I get around to it.

I just like growing plants and trees.

Not to fret,
Uncle Ben

 

[TrifektaSeeds]

Spectrum is not the issue, if hps grow massive killer trees, the subject of it is irrelevant and has almost no meaning.
Light, and as much of it as possible, within the par or lm range (whatever word you like), your good to go.

 

[greyfader]

I'm not a connoisseur or anything like that I just like what I like.

I've read various bits and pieces about hps/led resin and terp diffrences but tbh I don't get it, to me led grows great bud.
View attachment 18948802
It's quality I'm after I wouldn't sacrifice the quality for anything its just a hobby, if there's better than led I've not tried it.

Coco dtw and 650w of led.

i saw yourother post

I've grown for a few years mostly with hid and in the last 2 years with led, it did take me a few crops to get the hang of them, I'm still learning
View attachment 18946872
View attachment 18946859 View attachment 18946860 View attachment 18946861 View attachment 18946862 View attachment 18946863
View attachment 18946871

But I'm getting there now, for me led is superior.

i've been meaning to ask you specifically which light produced these results. if you don't mind. and what genetics are we looking at.?

 

[Ca++]

For every man that says leds are better you'll find one that says the opposite

'Once upon a time' this was true.

Moving away from forums to pro-grows, the number are somewhat different. 3 out of 4 flower with LED, and of the ones that don't, 4 in 10 expect to try this year.

Most started using them in veg first, as is it the wise choice. Today 3 in 4 veg with LED, and 15% still use florescent. Which is killing off old kit really.

This really leaves 1 in 10 wanting to work with HID. It's not 50:50 and nothing suggests it is

 

[TrifektaSeeds]

Those that grow are not more then 10% of smokers, so I take people who buy this tech or the other opinion very carefully.
I can agree that a lot moved to leds, maybe 90%.

 

[zachrockbadenof]

Trust me it isn't worth the time to respond to any BS. If it happens often using ignore works well. People who have never met us think they know us LOL.

I have to add no one I know paid $1700 for an LED light. My most expensive LED was 700$. My cheapest 850w LED was $260.

$260 LED used in this 5x5... I have it dimmed to 500w.. I have Haze and Kush Hybrids in here.
View attachment 18948797

interesting u dimmed top 500... i toooo have a 5x5ft tent, with a mars fce8000 - i have it dimmed to 70pct, n i raised the lights another 6inches as i fear burning the top buds...

 

[CocoNut 420]

i saw yourother post

i've been meaning to ask you specifically which light produced these results. if you don't mind. and what genetics are we looking at.?

Hello @greyfader I hope all is well there.

they were grown using a mixture of breeders and lights, some bar crops and some 240w board crops, some bar lights with Samsung 301H and some with budget chips.
(iirc Sannan?)

The last picture was grown with straight 4k/660nm 720wfrom own member @dimodz

LED and BUD QUALITY

so, do i get the hot chick with it? if i had a cannabis culture museum i would want a phototron on display.

www.icmag.com

And seeds from blue star, star dream and blueberry lemon shake up.

 

[Hammerhead]

interesting u dimmed top 500... i toooo have a 5x5ft tent, with a mars fce8000 - i have it dimmed to 70pct, n i raised the lights another 6inches as i fear burning the top buds...

I'll save power whenever possible. Quality is what I'm testing for. Nothing else matters.

 

[CocoNut 420]

With dimming lights and only using what's needed I save a few quid that's the only way I can get by now with the damn electricity costs.

I'm using t5s to sex and pre flower then putting then under led to flower.

3/4 wks vegging/sexing costs me £15/20 that's heat and light.

I don't use max power until around wk5± there's no set time as such I can tell better by looking at the plants.

My thinking is if i fk them at the start of flowering I've got to limp through a whole crop on 3 cylinders ;-)
Sort of like blowing the 1st corner on a flying lap.

 

[Ca++]

In 2022 higher light intensity was the main reason people were switching to LED.
In 2023 the cost of energy became more important.

Oddly in 23, dimming became less important. 15% literally didn't care at all. With greenhouse growers amongst those questioned, it seems even more strange. People are pitching systems to them, that watch the ppf from the sun, at every moment of the day, to vary the LED system in real time. So it's surely indoor growers loosing interest in dimming, at more than 15%
It seems they are turning their back on controllers that make a fake dawn and dusk fade. Instead turning back to switching the lights in grids, like HIDs. Non of this 5% increase per day, for some of these guys.