Ca++
Well-known member
I think you may misunderstand. It may even be entirely backwards. Though irrelevant.leds have bigger PAR, hps have higher ratio of lumens
Cannabis growers were once happy talking about floodlights in terms of watts. This was fine as efficiency differences between brands were not gaping great holes.
Then LED came along, and people had to think about efficiency, to explain how less watts made the same amount of light. Light, we quantified in lumens. For it's a common measure of light output. Soon after this, the idea of watts was forgotten, and people wanted proper explanations. It is then we started to talk about the light plants see, as being different to the light people see. Our 600 was loved. It was ~150lm/w which gave near 100,000lm when spread over a meter. Like the sun might. We then learnt our 600 was 1.7umol/w as a plant see's things. However, by this time, LED was very well established. It was really looking back that we recognised what the 600 was actually doing. Putting 1000umol over a meter. Even today, people are reading that for the first time.
They are just different measurements, that can be applied to any light source. The HPS tops out around 150lm/w while the LM301 is over 200lm/w. If we instead measure them as PAR, this favours the HPS. The PAR band is wider, and the 301b puts it's output in the narrower visual band. While the HPS has output outside the visual band. So a larger measurement band favours the HPS.
The lumen measure is really a lot worse than us measuring for PAR. The lumen measure adds extra value to green output. This is because we make better use of green ourselves. The lumen is about how well we see. The plant however, is interested in energy. It doesn't count green as being more use, and so won't be giving it a higher value than what is really there. The PAR range also measures stuff the plant see's, but we don't. PAR is much more relevant than Lumens. Both are more relevant than watts. Though we can use any of the three, for any light source