-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
TOO MUCH LIGHT!
- Thread starter Jellyfish
- Start date
When the light reflects off the tent walls I think it also becomes polarized, losing as much as 50% on the bounce. Most LEDs have a 120* light cone, so you can see how much is going directly onto the wall.
Absolutely. miniscule/little/some is not the same as NONE or no effect at all. Understand the difference? Science and nature does
Here’s a bit from a post by OZZ talking about how, if you have the light high enough, you can have it running with more watts compared if you have it dimmed down but closer to the plants without the plants suffering
Think I read another post by someone saying the same thing..
I never owned a light meter and don’t know anything about them or what the correct term is for how photons at canopy level is measured..
Is it PPFD? You can have the higher PPFD reading on canopy level without the plants suffering when you have the light raised high enough so you can run it with more watts, compared to dimming it down and having the light closer to the canopy.
Here’s another poster in the same thread talking about the same thing ..light meter says PPFD should be ok but the plants are suffering under leds/cobs
My flowering tent is only 160 cm so I can’t raise my cobs high enough to crank the light to full 225w, so I can’t test this so well, but getting the higher PPFD(?) reading on canopy level without the plants suffering when the light is raised high enough would tell me that something is happening to the photons (eating out some of their energy) when they go thru enough air (atmospheric gasses) before hitting the leaf surface.
Hope you guys can understand what I mean ..it’s abit too technical for my level of English and like I said I have never used a light meter myself.
Think I read another post by someone saying the same thing..
I never owned a light meter and don’t know anything about them or what the correct term is for how photons at canopy level is measured..
Is it PPFD? You can have the higher PPFD reading on canopy level without the plants suffering when you have the light raised high enough so you can run it with more watts, compared to dimming it down and having the light closer to the canopy.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/showpost.php?p=8961790&postcount=217
Here’s another poster in the same thread talking about the same thing ..light meter says PPFD should be ok but the plants are suffering under leds/cobs
My flowering tent is only 160 cm so I can’t raise my cobs high enough to crank the light to full 225w, so I can’t test this so well, but getting the higher PPFD(?) reading on canopy level without the plants suffering when the light is raised high enough would tell me that something is happening to the photons (eating out some of their energy) when they go thru enough air (atmospheric gasses) before hitting the leaf surface.
Hope you guys can understand what I mean ..it’s abit too technical for my level of English and like I said I have never used a light meter myself.
PDX Dopesmoker
Active member
Someone needs to breed or find some plants that are capable of taking advantage of the high levels of photosynthetically active radiation LEDs can produce without getting too hot, thats the ultimate solution to the issue. Once a plant is found that can eat atmospheric CO2 fast enough to make efficient use of all those delicious photons then everyone can go back to discussing grams/watt and which plants smell the best instead of complaining about the too much light problem.
What landraces handle the heaviest sunlight? High elevation equatorial stuff would be my first guess.
What landraces handle the heaviest sunlight? High elevation equatorial stuff would be my first guess.
My meter reads the sun in the winter time at 1700 or so. Plants don't like it over 750ish without CO2, per the interweb charts. My little sprouts are happy at 250.
'Splain that to me.
'Splain that to me.
For the same reason you see the red object as "red". It only reflects the red light, same reflected red light goes to the white wall and back to your eye. "White" is all colors in same proportions.
Cheers
This thread fell apart seven words into it.
Try "I switched from LED to CMH lights"...
I'm guessing he just had a lower light level at canopy level after raising the lights, or he fixed his feeding so the plants can take all the light. Or perhaps cobs make hotspots? Those are my guesses.
Wow, I wish it was 1700umol in the sun here in winter
plants can take more than 750 without additional co2. With the co2 they may photosynthesise faster as they don't run out of carbon. Outside there is much larger air volume and almost always a breeze that will exchange air.
Below 600ppfd co2 is pointless, while above 800ppfd it's co2 rather than light becoming your bottleneck. Though 1000ppfd is workable without co2 with good airflow and the right plants.
A skated around it earlier. My OG crossed with an auto, who's likely from the far north, is complaining at 65,000lux which is the full 1000ppfd. While My OG crossed with Afgan heritage is reaching out in 1500ppfd and I don't use co2 as I feel it's pointless and bad for everybody's environment. It's Sats that can take the most light and Indica's that like less. Yet I see this within the mostly Indica's I have.
It's a shame more people don't spend $10 on a light meter. We could have much more meaningful discussions using illumination figures, than watts and guesstimated heights of unknown lights.
This chart is quite useless unless you can actually measure
My 65K/1000ppfd is at the top of the tops. Which may just rot if they got bigger (they would) but my canopy is lower. Maybe 40K giving a 75% growth potential. 30K doesn't make me happy, but it's in the seed vendors ballpark range of results. Most people shouldn't be pushing any harder than that.
A skated around it earlier. My OG crossed with an auto, who's likely from the far north, is complaining at 65,000lux which is the full 1000ppfd. While My OG crossed with Afgan heritage is reaching out in 1500ppfd and I don't use co2 as I feel it's pointless and bad for everybody's environment. It's Sats that can take the most light and Indica's that like less. Yet I see this within the mostly Indica's I have.
It's a shame more people don't spend $10 on a light meter. We could have much more meaningful discussions using illumination figures, than watts and guesstimated heights of unknown lights.
This chart is quite useless unless you can actually measure
My 65K/1000ppfd is at the top of the tops. Which may just rot if they got bigger (they would) but my canopy is lower. Maybe 40K giving a 75% growth potential. 30K doesn't make me happy, but it's in the seed vendors ballpark range of results. Most people shouldn't be pushing any harder than that.
This thread fell apart seven words into it.
Try "I switched from LED to CMH lights"...
Heathen. Heating up metal till it glows and denying LED is better. I have included your Mercury containing lamps on my chart, but feel you would be better breaking them open to treat syphilis
Look what I replied to Fatsy a page before.
When you light a candle in the dark, it is emitting photons. What light it is supposedly reflecting then. Red hot iron is also emitting photons, not reflecting anything, you can even tell the temperature of hot iron by the color of the photons it is emitting. Atomic matter emits photons.
High energy photons from the sun slam into atmospheric gasses, which in turn emit photons and the atmosphere becomes opaque and we can’t see the stars in space anymore. So, Sun light we see is a secondary effect and the light we see comes from the photons emited by the molecules of the gasses. The sky during the day appears blue because of the color of Oxygen. Oxygen also gives water is bluesish color.
But enough of this cause it’s sort of off topic. If you still don’t wanna believe atomic matter is emitting photons when it’s agitated by higher energy levels of different forms of electromagnetic radiation (light is one of it’s forms, heat is another one), then it’s fine by me.
Peace
I would like a good comparison test of meters. A light meter measuring lumens is not measuring the entire spectrum a plant needs.
You need a sensor that will measure the entire spectrum we want.
Light meter:
PAR meter:
Specs on my little meter:
https://shop.pahydroponics.com/hort...lg-30-uva-supplement-light-shipping-included/
I like the USB 520 version, and may get one (Edit, or may not. They cost $438):
https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/sq-520-full-spectrum-smart-quantum-sensor-usb/
The same company has a temperature sensor that mimics a leaf. I think one of those optical forehead thermometers would work OK, and they are a lot cheaper.
This is what I am using now:
You need a sensor that will measure the entire spectrum we want.
Light meter:
PAR meter:
Specs on my little meter:
https://shop.pahydroponics.com/hort...lg-30-uva-supplement-light-shipping-included/
I like the USB 520 version, and may get one (Edit, or may not. They cost $438):
https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/sq-520-full-spectrum-smart-quantum-sensor-usb/
The same company has a temperature sensor that mimics a leaf. I think one of those optical forehead thermometers would work OK, and they are a lot cheaper.
This is what I am using now:
Last edited:
Goatcheese,
it's offtopic and it's wrong, many of the things you explain are incorrect.
There are many ways to emit photons, the main is called black body radiation, plasma is not a black body for example.
Skyes are blue because of nitrogen, not oxigen... and the water is colourless, not blue. Oxygen has nothing to do with it.
Sorry for the tone but i work in a physics lab, sometimes teach physics and feel the need to correct such mistakes.
It's all about qed. And love
Cheers
it's offtopic and it's wrong, many of the things you explain are incorrect.
There are many ways to emit photons, the main is called black body radiation, plasma is not a black body for example.
Skyes are blue because of nitrogen, not oxigen... and the water is colourless, not blue. Oxygen has nothing to do with it.
Sorry for the tone but i work in a physics lab, sometimes teach physics and feel the need to correct such mistakes.
It's all about qed. And love
Cheers
PDX Dopesmoker
Active member
Goatcheese,
it's offtopic and it's wrong, many of the things you explain are incorrect.
There are many ways to emit photons, the main is called black body radiation, plasma is not a black body for example.
Skyes are blue because of nitrogen, not oxigen... and the water is colourless, not blue. Oxygen has nothing to do with it.
Sorry for the tone but i work in a physics lab, sometimes teach physics and feel the need to correct such mistakes.
It's all about qed. And love
Cheers
All of those "I know how everything works because of muh academic qualifications" rumors that people who've purchased academic qualifications circulate are plainly false. Being trained to rigidly regurgitate textbook dogma often turns people into useless, narrow-minded idiots who lose the ability to observe reality when reality and textbook dogma disagree. If academic qualifications in physics correlated with ability then why are uneducated people like James Watt, Michael Faraday, Thomas Edison, Benjamin Franklin, The Wright Brothers, Lewis Latimer, Clyde Tombaugh, Guglielmo Marcon, Alexander Graham Bell all bigger names than their more highly qualified contemporaries?
Pythagoras was so uneducated that he never even learned the pythagorean theorem in school.
Goaty is obviously trolling though so don't get sucked into it. There is no way anyone could come up with that many "facts" that are all wrong unless they are trolling.
