Diary PCBuds mini-grow

[PCBuds]

... But in flowering nothing can beat the sun (cri 100).
So in the future i wanna test 2000/2200k cri 60 leds (almost an enhanced hps spectrum) vs 5000k cri 98 (almost sun spectrum at noon in summer without near uv and near ir) in flowering.

I looked up the specs of my Gen2 led strips that I have...







And these are the specs for the Gen3 Thrive strips...










My strips are only 80 CRI but they are 180 lumens per watt.

The newer Thrive strips are 98 CRI but they are only 138 lumens per watt.

I guess they are not as efficient when they try to imitate sunlight.



I think that I prefer the strips that I have.
My strips are $3.87 each and the equivalent Gen3 Thrive strips are $10.06 each.

The Gen3 strips have a bit more total luminous output, but they use a lot more power to do it.

 

[Caio]

I looked up the specs of my Gen2 led strips that I have...



[URL=https://i.postimg.cc/GmP5QSYj/Screenshot-20210207-140432-Google.jpg]View Image[/url]



And these are the specs for the Gen3 Thrive strips...




[URL=https://i.postimg.cc/GpcSSJxn/Screenshot-20210207-140158-Google.jpg]View Image[/url]





My strips are only 80 CRI but they are 180 lumens per watt.

The newer Thrive strips are 98 CRI but they are only 138 lumens per watt.

I guess they are not as efficient when they try to imitate sunlight.



I think that I prefer the strips that I have.
My strips are $3.87 each and the equivalent Gen3 Thrive strips are $10.06 each.

The Gen3 strips have a bit more total luminous output, but they use a lot more power to do it.

Yours are much more efficent, don't change nothing!
I need to do a test with them before saying that a 98cri led is more efficent in flowering. Mine are only theory!

I have also an 80cri lamp and i'm really satisfied with it.

 

[PCBuds]

Yours are much more efficent, don't change nothing!
I need to do a test with them before saying that a 98cri led is more efficent in flowering. Mine are only theory!

I have also an 80cri lamp and i'm really satisfied with it.

Yes, and like you said, the CRI has more to do with human vision.

I think plants make use of all the light that they are given.

Both my 3500k and 5000k kinda suck to see under.

When I'm trying to read my PH paper and the PH drops, I need to use daylight from the window to see it accurately.

I prefer the daylight SILS over the warm white color for the lighting in my house.
The warm white seems dull and dingy to me.
I see better with the daylight color.

 

[PCBuds]

In vegetative stage plants can grow with monocromatic leds, there are many tests of plants grow with ONLY green leds.

I remember talk on the SIL thread where they were saying plants only use red and blue. (blurple lights.)

Colors like green were considered completely useless to the plant.
Leaves are green because they reflect all the green light and don't absorb it.


I never bought it.
I always felt imitating the full spectrum of sunshine is best, and plants evolved to make use of all the colors.

I proposed an experiment trying to grow a plant with just green and no blue or red, to see what would happen.
I was betting that the plant wouldn't die.

Maybe plants are green to attract green light not reflect it?
(black attracts all light, maybe green attracts green?)

 

[indagroove]

IMO 80cri is totally fine, even 70cri is great for flowering. Heck HPS is what, like 30cri and growers got great results for years from that sort of light. Lower cri usually just means more reds, and more red generally means more flowers.

 

[Caio]

Plants reflect a lot of blue and green but also some deep red; because we see much better the green-yellow part of the spectrum the leaf seems all green.

The plants can live under green led only, and in many times better than only blue.
There are university research on this topic.

The colors of light not only drive photosyntesis but also work as an "hormone" on the plant;
example: with ir light plants grow broad leafs and bigger internodes).
another example:The circadiam rhyhtm work thanks of blue light.

 

[Caio]

IMO 80cri is totally fine, even 70cri is great for flowering. Heck HPS is what, like 30cri and growers got great results for years from that sort of light. Lower cri usually just means more reds, and more red generally means more flowers.

Absolutely! 80 cri leds are fine!

Standard hps is cri 21 and enhanced hps is cri 65 and hands down they are the better flowering lamp.
Better than leds!

But nothing can beat an enviroment controlled greenhouse illuminated by the Sun.

 

[indagroove]

Standard hps is cri 21 and enhanced hps is cri 65 and hands down they are the better flowering lamp.
Better than leds!

How do you figure? LEDs produce more photons per watt compared to HPS. I grew with HPS for years, and with modern LEDs I can produce more quality bud using less wattage compared to HPS. I do still use HPS for two cold months of the year, for their radiant heat.

 

[PCBuds]

IMO 80cri is totally fine, ...

Yeah, that's what I figure.

But I wouldn't want to try to read my PH paper under HPS lighting. Lol


Maybe I'll buy myself a 98 CRI bulb for my house lamp and see if I can see better indoors.

 

[PCBuds]

But nothing can beat an enviroment controlled greenhouse illuminated by the Sun.

I agree.

I think artificial lighting should imitate natural sunlight as close as possible.

 

[Sampas92]

Buds, you dont need to buy always the latest tech, that way you and all of us will always be buying shit because technology is always evolving

Btw, my 2 inexpirenced cents
I saw, dont remember wich thread, someone talking about 98 cri leds, where they say they are less efficient but they dont need to be more because of the higher cri, anyway i guess having the best colors iluminating them is better for us at least do diagnose something that may be unnoticed, for example burple leds and white leds difference.

Also, dr bugbee that i think we all know from Apogee and his youtube videos, show that for example the green spectrum of the lights will travell much deeper in the leaf than for example blue.
Shit i think if we can do it the way we have been doing it, everyone with their setup, i think we shouldnt worry too much, unless we want to spoil our girls and gift them something

Btw, indagroove your leds dont have ir diodes in them?

 

[PCBuds]

Buds, you dont need to buy always the latest tech, that way you and all of us will always be buying shit because technology is always evolving.

Yeah, I'm quite happy with my strips and they are working great for me !
They were actually old technology when I bought them, because the new Gen3 strips were already available.
I was after bang for my buck.
I expect them to last me 4-5 years, and maybe by then, the Gen4 strips will be out and I can get the Gen3 strips for $3 each ?

Btw, my 2 inexpirenced cents
I saw, dont remember wich thread, someone talking about 98 cri leds, where they say they are less efficient but they dont need to be more because of the higher cri, anyway i guess having the best colors iluminating them is better for us at least do diagnose something that may be unnoticed, for example burple leds and white leds difference.

That makes sense.
It's a bit like those graphs you posted and we both thought the 4000k bulbs were the best all round bulb with the flatest curve.

I still think that I might buy one 98 CRI led bulb for my reading lamp to see if I can see better when I put on my reading glasses to do micro surgery on my strips or do some soldering.

Also, dr bugbee that i think we all know from Apogee and his youtube videos, show that for example the green spectrum of the lights will travell much deeper in the leaf than for example blue.
Shit i think if we can do it the way we have been doing it, everyone with their setup, i think we shouldnt worry too much, unless we want to spoil our girls and gift them something

Yeah, that guy is my hero. Lol

He's the one who proved that green light does actually get used by plants, and he found out about the Far Infra-red and how it affects plants.

I like how he trashed the hell out of HID lighting. Lol

 

[indagroove]

I agree.

I think artificial lighting should imitate natural sunlight as close as possible.

Do you include light outside the visible range (UV and IR), as well? Also which version of "natural sunlight" do you try to emulate? What latitude, altitude, and season? Do we then shift the spectrum throughout the day and weeks to further emulate spectrum shifts and such over time?

 

[indagroove]

Btw, indagroove your leds dont have ir diodes in them?

Naw, they have 4k white plus 630nm and 660nm diodes. I have a separate far red fixture (730nm, if you consider that "IR", which I don't), which I run for end of day treatment, but I don't run the far red all day long. When I run UV I run that separate too, mid day. Actually right now I'm running both LED and HPS together, because it's cold and I need the radiant heat from the hps for a few more weeks at least.

 

[PCBuds]

Yeah, I would include all the light outside the visible range.
As far as version goes, I personally would just aim for some sort of average.

I know that things like if the plant was originally from the equator, it would probably be best to emulate that kind of lighting.

And in my case, growing Autoflowers, I would probably want to emulate a northern climate because of the ruderalis in them.

But in practical terms, it starts getting difficult and complicated having say the IR slowly turn on first in the morning then turn off slowly, last at night and slowly increasing lights on time for spring then decreasing it to simulate fall hours.

The other thing is cost.
I remember finding a 5 watt far infrared LED cob of the frequency Dr Bugbee mentioned at digikey for $70.
F-that.

And you don't even know if they are working because you can't see it. Lol


The Bridgelux strips are aimed at the "human vision" market so they don't have IR and UV but the newer Gen3 Thrive are 98 CRI and would have a much flatter curve which I like but I'm not willing to spend the money right now.

I'm sure the cost will be coming down because they are better for people and plants, and as greenhouses convert to LED lighting, the cost of IR and UV led chips will hopefully come down in price too.

And as Caio mentioned plant strains will start evolving too, to accommodate everyone that is switching to LED.

I'm just going to wait for the technology to evolve and for the prices to come down.



You made your last post while I was typing this.
Looks like you're doing the far red lights and timing thing.

How many Watts and $ was your 730 nm fixture?
Is it on a separate power supply and timer?

 

[PCBuds]

Do you include light outside the visible range (UV and IR), as well? Also which version of "natural sunlight" do you try to emulate? What latitude, altitude, and season? Do we then shift the spectrum throughout the day and weeks to further emulate spectrum shifts and such over time?

What's your opinion on UV lighting?
From what I remember it's generally bad for plants but can be used to control them?

And they will burn out your retinas too.
I'd end up doing more drunken gardening and wake up blind in the morning. Lol

 

[indagroove]

What's your opinion on UV lighting?
From what I remember it's generally bad for plants but can be used to control them?

And they will burn out your retinas too.
I'd end up doing more drunken gardening and wake up blind in the morning. Lol

The research says that UV lighting can increase cannabinoids and terps, but too much is going to cause issues. I use UV sometimes (when I have the headroom), but only do short blasts or around 15-minutes each on hour intervals during midday. I've grown amazingly frosty weed without UV too though.

 

[PCBuds]

The research says that UV lighting can increase cannabinoids and terps, but too much is going to cause issues. I use UV sometimes (when I have the headroom), but only do short blasts or around 15-minutes each on hour intervals during midday. I've grown amazingly frosty weed without UV too though.

Hmm...

I remember reading that all light is brightest at high noon including IR, but at dusk and dawn, the IR is the most prominent because of refraction.


You really jumped on the LED bandwagon.
I remember you were a really hard sell at first. Lol

 

[indagroove]

Hmm...

I remember reading that all light is brightest at high noon including IR, but at dusk and dawn, the IR is the most prominent because of refraction.


You really jumped on the LED bandwagon.
I remember you were a really hard sell at first. Lol

I was burned years ago by shitty blurples and mediocre cobs, which soured me to LED for a while. I been running my QB's for about a year now, and verry happy with them. As far as UV, I use Agromax floro tubes for that, when I do add it.

 

[Caio]

How do you figure? LEDs produce more photons per watt compared to HPS. I grew with HPS for years, and with modern LEDs I can produce more quality bud using less wattage compared to HPS. I do still use HPS for two cold months of the year, for their radiant heat.

LPS produce more photons than an HPS......but under LPS plants don't flower.

Under a 600w hps you can grow top colas bigger than a 2 litres cola bottle.
No way you can do this with leds.

Leds can substitute cfls in small grow box but not hps in bigger grow rooms.

My 2 cents