Look what we did to the dog in no time. From wild man-eating wolf to Chiwawa in no time. People making rapid changes in place of the environment through human selection can have an incredible impact. Just look at the food (fruits and veg) in the grocery store. Everything has been selected for max yields and quality.
..the little chihuahua would be the 1st to disappear off the menu.
..take all of these plants and toss em out in the sun where their ancestors have evolved forever and just like that they will
thrive and excel better than any hps or Mh lamp ever made.
..seems like to get the best results from your plants under lamps is to shoot for one that mimics the suns spectrum...not some orange or very Blue colored lamp that is a small make up of the suns spectrum. imo we can only tweak certain things with these bulbs.
I'm not so sure. Maybe the really little dogs might adapt to hiding and hunting rodents, because they know they're small. Maybe more of the med-small dogs would perish, because they would be in conflict to fight or hide..and hiding would be harder!
People can show me all the light graphs they want.... I go off 20 +yrs personal growing experience
vapedg13
I think there are many different ways to get to the same spot.
In the end its all about trying new things to find the YOUR sweet spot.
Sometimes its not the size but the motion of the ocean lol.
Thanks for the pics..speaks volumes
this is my take on it,
and this is what Ive been saying since I started using MH in bloom.
if you like hps and are happy with it... fine
if you like MH and it floats your boat... good
if you see that Mh and HPS combined makes your harvest fine and good... great.
We need to focus on what the plant uses in light spectrum,,,,, and not trying to get a spectrum that the sun produces.
I've wondered about this for a while now. Are these plants are focused enuff ta know what to take from the spectrum of a 4000K MH bulb?
personally i really don't know and could care less,
but it sure looks good from here
seriously tho folks, whatever works for you does just that......
View Image
View Image
View Image
View Image
Totally disagree. This is the problem with humans, no offense. They think they know what everything on earth supposedly, needs...when what everything needs, is right in front of their f****** noses.
I never bought into that notion (thankfully for my wallet). Extreme red and blue LED's, predominantly orange HPS, etc. NASA not so long ago invented LED X5, because (surprisingly) scientists changed their minds about what a plant supposedly prefers. Guess what X5 resembles?
The fact that plants have evolved for how many hundreds of millions of years under the sun, should tell people something about what a plant supposedly prefers.
Occam's Razor.
So You disagree scientists working with plants in a Controlled environment working with various different electromagnetic spectrums appropriate for photosynthesis have not come to the conclusion which spectrum actually stimulates growth response better????? then others in different phases am sorry your Wrong thereTotally disagree. This is the problem with humans, no offense. They think they know what everything on earth supposedly, needs...when what everything needs, is right in front of their f****** noses.
I never bought into that notion (thankfully for my wallet). Extreme red and blue LED's, predominantly orange HPS, etc. NASA not so long ago invented LED X5, because (surprisingly) scientists changed their minds about what a plant supposedly prefers. Guess what X5 resembles?
The fact that plants have evolved for how many hundreds of millions of years under the sun, should tell people something about what a plant supposedly prefers.
Occam's Razor.
Very nice. Great job. If you don't mind me asking Gnome, which bulb do you use?
I use a 400 watt CMH (4k), that I'm very happy with.
Plants evolved to do their best under the light available to them. That doesn't mean the spectrum available to them is optimal for their needs.
Your assumption is without foundation. You are using it as a basis for making conclusions and giving advice. Maybe your condescension is obscuring your view?Thanks for the reply. Your reply somewhat insinuates that there was more than one light source (for the last 4 billion years) available?
There wasn't.
It DOES mean that what plants have evolved with (for 4 billion years) is the optimal source for their needs. They are the sun....the sun is them.
Anything else, is imo, silly to convince yourself of...no offense.