alaskat999
New Member
I have just started using led lights with a switch for flowers and a switch for leaf, should I leave both switches on until harvest, or just the leaf switch and just the flower switch when it flowers?
LED lights
- Thread starter alaskat999
- Start date
Hi Alaska!
Great question! It's a common practice to provide both spectrums of light all the way through the grow process. There's a number of hi end lights out there that provide only "dual spectrum". So you'll be fine.
In my opinion, I would run the vegetative spectrum only for veg. And then switch to dual spectrum for flower.
I hope you find the answer you're looking for!
All the best my friend!
Great question! It's a common practice to provide both spectrums of light all the way through the grow process. There's a number of hi end lights out there that provide only "dual spectrum". So you'll be fine.
In my opinion, I would run the vegetative spectrum only for veg. And then switch to dual spectrum for flower.
I hope you find the answer you're looking for!
All the best my friend!
EventHorizon
Well-Known Member
What they said... but I've experimented with LED and for the price... go with a 100-200w 6500K & 2700/2100K CFL. They say "LED is experimental" aka it sucks. I had to use 8x the recommended light to get a "decent" grow. Nothing compared to my 100w CFLs.
Empire Hydro
New Member
Its quite obvious you have absolutely no clue on light usage, Par value and many other aspects of the lighting industry which is constantly improving. Anyone who is using LED's as their main lighting source will definitely lose out as LED's are not able to provide the necessary yield, potency and quality one is looking for, but anyone who is looking for a superior supplemental lighting, LED's are the way to go hands down, IMHO. Anyone who says LED lights are garbage have absolutely no clue what they are supposed to be used for. CFL's, T5's, T8's and any other supplemental lighting has no Canopy penetration to that of the LED including the new and improved Hi Output T5's from Hortilux but are definitely better than your common CFL but when it comes to inter-nodal spacing and stacking, nothing beats the penetration that comes with LED lighting.
This is not speculation as it has been proven many many times over and it depends on the LED one is using, as there are a plethora of new and improved LED units, on the market, popping up everyday from Osram chips to the Cob chips which are probably the most expensive but also the most efficient which also allows a much larger footprint of light for the plant canopy.
Do people get off on providing false info to new growers out there?
This is not speculation as it has been proven many many times over and it depends on the LED one is using, as there are a plethora of new and improved LED units, on the market, popping up everyday from Osram chips to the Cob chips which are probably the most expensive but also the most efficient which also allows a much larger footprint of light for the plant canopy.
Do people get off on providing false info to new growers out there?
VonDankenhoek
New Member
"Anyone who is using LED's as their main lighting source will definitely lose out as LED's are not able to provide the necessary yield, potency and quality one is looking for"
You are mistaken bro. Hi performance leds are top choice for yield , quality and potency in small to medium sized grows.
They are brighter, cooler and more precisely targeted to plant biology than any other light sources.
Folks burning new tech bedt quality cobs are exceeding 1 g/w easily.
You are mistaken bro. Hi performance leds are top choice for yield , quality and potency in small to medium sized grows.
They are brighter, cooler and more precisely targeted to plant biology than any other light sources.
Folks burning new tech bedt quality cobs are exceeding 1 g/w easily.
Agreed.
There's no argument the proofs in the pudding. And in many many journals on this site.
Let's not be so quick to put people down. There's a lot of contradicting information about LEDs out there so it's understandable that someone would be confused.
I don't believe anyone "gets off" providing false info. I think then, that it's your responsibility to politely correct people's misunderstandings and provide reasonable and valid counter examples and ideas. But let's not maliciously attack people for helping others. Seems a bit counter intuitive don't you think?
All the best!
EventHorizon
Well-Known Member
Yeah you're right... I don't know what LED's are for...
If you want penetration... go with plasma. I have a feeling they are trying to sell LED's themselves. Used them.... garbage. I can get 4 feet of growth off a 100w CFL.... a 90w LED UFO? All stretched out and scraggly.... hurting for light. I ended up selling my LED setup for like $50... and I feel sorry to whoever bought it.
There's NO WAY a 90w LED can compete with a 100w (500w equiv) CFL. Go to any hydro shop and they will tell you the same. Watt per Watt Gram per Gram? Sorry, but it's CFL.
And anyone who tells you that LED isn't still experimental is a liar. Just because it's marketed doesn't mean it works 100%.... I mean hell, you can buy Time Travel Machines on eBay...
Yes, I'm comparing LED to time travel... because in theory, it works.
If you want penetration... go with plasma. I have a feeling they are trying to sell LED's themselves. Used them.... garbage. I can get 4 feet of growth off a 100w CFL.... a 90w LED UFO? All stretched out and scraggly.... hurting for light. I ended up selling my LED setup for like $50... and I feel sorry to whoever bought it.
There's NO WAY a 90w LED can compete with a 100w (500w equiv) CFL. Go to any hydro shop and they will tell you the same. Watt per Watt Gram per Gram? Sorry, but it's CFL.
And anyone who tells you that LED isn't still experimental is a liar. Just because it's marketed doesn't mean it works 100%.... I mean hell, you can buy Time Travel Machines on eBay...
Yes, I'm comparing LED to time travel... because in theory, it works.
I'll try and give my opinion on the question asked. If you start under LED, I suggest just your leaf setting (at least for the first week or so). Depending on the total wattage of your light, I'd keep them 20-40" above seedlings. Try and get them to "full spectrum" in week 2. You may need to raise the lights a few inches when flipping both. If you listen, they'll talk to you. Good luck!
VonDankenhoek
New Member
Bud get a clue. Do yo have enough bandwidth to open a pic? This forum is filled with successful led grows. the nug and plant contedts on 420 are loaded with wins from led growers.
Your opinion in theory could have merit but in fact it's ignorant blabbering. YOU ARE WITHOUT A CLUE.
Rockskipper
New Member
DukeO
Well-Known Member
To the OP
Your first answer from Pigeons420 was dead on and Welcome to the world of LED...
I do have to say that the rest of this is the funniest thread I have read in a while.
It is like a time warp to 2005.
Well it is 2015 now and LED's rock.
Sure if you buy the very cheapest without a good spectrum or not enough wattage or your one of those who is just stuck in the mud and not capable of relearning somethings.
Then you may have issues with LED.
But if someone now who is a half way capable grower and buys a pretty good or better LED light.
You should be able to pay that light off on your first grow with it.
There is a reason that LED's are going in more new tents then any kind of light right now.
I could grow with any light I want and have grown with many kinds.
At this space in time I chose LED and someday maybe it might be something else.
But I will not be going backward to CFL or HID. It is not that you can't grow good weed with them.
It is because there is no need from them anymore. I also do not want to drive an old car anymore. They are both outdated now.
I have found it best in life to listen to people that are successful at things and not to listen to much to those that have failed.
There are just to many reasons why someone could fail and most of the time you will not get the whole story out of them.
But the ones who have made it work will tell you in great detail just how they did it.
Once you get dialed in with a good LED.
I think you will love it. I know I do...
Your first answer from Pigeons420 was dead on and Welcome to the world of LED...
I do have to say that the rest of this is the funniest thread I have read in a while.
It is like a time warp to 2005.
Well it is 2015 now and LED's rock.
Sure if you buy the very cheapest without a good spectrum or not enough wattage or your one of those who is just stuck in the mud and not capable of relearning somethings.
Then you may have issues with LED.
But if someone now who is a half way capable grower and buys a pretty good or better LED light.
You should be able to pay that light off on your first grow with it.
There is a reason that LED's are going in more new tents then any kind of light right now.
I could grow with any light I want and have grown with many kinds.
At this space in time I chose LED and someday maybe it might be something else.
But I will not be going backward to CFL or HID. It is not that you can't grow good weed with them.
It is because there is no need from them anymore. I also do not want to drive an old car anymore. They are both outdated now.
I have found it best in life to listen to people that are successful at things and not to listen to much to those that have failed.
There are just to many reasons why someone could fail and most of the time you will not get the whole story out of them.
But the ones who have made it work will tell you in great detail just how they did it.
Once you get dialed in with a good LED.
I think you will love it. I know I do...
How would Plasma give the best penetration? The light first off in a 300w LEP by gavita only puts out around 400 umol/m2/s-1 at 18", has a very wide angle reflector spreading out the light from a single point source the size of a corn kernal...? how would that give best penetration? I also confirmed these readings not only from Gavita's data sheets but also took readings with my Apogee MQ200 at the local hydro store.... let me just say... very unimpressed.
Matter of fact, Penetration-one of the commonly used words in LED and plant lighting with virtually no solid definition or quantifiable measurement.... in all honesty, anytime I see someone claim "better penetration" I slightly pee on myself with laughter.
To me, penetration means proper illumination of the lower leaves under the canopy... so lets investigate how one can achieve this...
A handful of things can affect penetration when speaking in terms of a zone of optimal light into the canopy.. light intensity, multiple point sources vs single overhead lighting, distance between light point sources, beam angles, lenses, reflective surfaces, defoliation, grow style...
Penetration when speaking in terms of a distance or range of optimal intensity would refer to the "beam throw" or how deep far the light will carry, maintaining a PPFD of over 510umol/m2/s-1. This would be measured from the top of the canopy to the point where the light would drop below 510 umol/m2/s-1. This would be the range of Optimal penetration.
How could this be influenced??? What would penetrate more??
If you were comparing apples to apples like HPS to HPS, obviously in the same reflector and grow area, a 1000w would have better penetration than a 400w in terms of a single point source of light. In this situation the only change would be the actual intensity of the light source, therefore having a larger "zone" that would be optimal to produce good buds. Now does this mean that everyone should only use 1000w HPS...not exactly.... in this situation if you are growing 4' plants then yes a 1000w would be a better choice because you would get less larf on the lower sites, however, if you were growing a scrog or sea of green where penetration would only need to be 12" or so, then using multiple lower wattage bulbs would actually provide better penetration for the same wattage due to angled light entering and minimizing shading and since the lower wattage HPS would have less of a "zone" for optimal lighting, in a scrog or Sog or for short plants this would be ideal and provide better coverage, less hotspots and better penetration.
When talking LED then you also have beam angles which will affect "penetration" or distance into the canopy. For better penetration Higher wattage chips and narrow beam angles would offer great penetration when speaking in terms of "zone of optimal light" Similar to if you take a flashlight or beam of light with a zoom reflector, what causes more throw, a floodlight wide beam or a tight narrow beam? The tight narrow beam would have better penetration because the throw of the light is much longer as light is not dispersed as quickly as the flood setting. (focusing light using reflectors, and collimating lenses do not adhear directly to the inverse square law)
For example LED panel with 60 degree beam angles and lensing vs a non lens diode at 120 degrees, which would have better penetration? The one with the 60 degree beam angles because by directing the light in a tight angle, it extends the range the light carries which gives a larger "zone" of +510umol/m2/s-1 light vs the 120 degree one which the "zone" would be very very small. (when comparing equal panels with equal components, layout..etc)
Does this mean though that you should only look at LEDs with 60 degree beam angles..nope..Again, your lighting choice should be chosen by your grow style... if your growing tall 4' plants then yes, you would want a higher wattage, narrow beam angle light above each of the plants. If you are growing a scrog, sea of green or small plants then you would want a larger beam angle because you would get more smaller wattage lights with wider beam angles and hang the lights much closer to the canopy... then you would benefit not only from less shading due to multiple point sources, but also since a large "zone of optimal light" isnt needed, you would also benefit from better coverage area from same wattage using more smaller wattage lights...
Another way to achieve penetration is to provide multiple point sources of light. So in this method to achieve better penetration is to have multiple light sources spaced out from each other to provide "side lighting" and reduce shadowing. This also is accomplished by adding reflective material around the grow area which most of us already know and do. The more directions or diffused light that is entering the canopy from different angles, the greater the penetration because it would lessen shading from overhead direct lighting only from a single point source.
There also is another way to talk about penetration, and that would be in regards certain wavelengths of light and how far that light penetrates into the leaf tissue. This would involve light spectrum, and photon absorption. Out of all wavelengths of light in the PAR region, Green light Penetrates into the leaf further than red or blue light in high intensity full spectrum lighting because blue and red light are absorbed more easily at nearly 100%, where green absorbs around 70% therefore, because the reflected light is able to reflect within the leaf mesophyll, it can penetrate deeper into leaf tissue enhancing absorption of photons and increasing rates of photosynthesis. Commonly under the forest canopy, most of the light to find more Green and IR light than other colors because other colors like red and blue are absorbed much easier. The combination of green and IR is responsible for what is known as shade avoidance syndrome where plants will stretch in the abundance of this light to get out of the shade into more intense and full spectrum light.
So now, I think you can see why I giggle a little when I see people saying things like "better penetration" because it can be influenced by so many different variables, and could mean a couple different things. Like a high intensity 1000w light may have great penetration in terms of "light throw or zone of optimal light" where as multiple low wattage panels can also offer amazing penetration by providing multiple point sources of light.
And of course the hydro store wants to sell you CFL over LED, because there is a larger profit margin
I've asked handfuls of Hydro stores here in socal why they don't carry LED, and its because there is no margin for them to make money, as they are already expensive and jacked up 5x the price of mfg or more. Also, you sell a grower a LED, you don't see him needing another light for 50,000-100,000 hours, but with CFL and HPS... you will be in the shop at least 1x per year buying more bulbs, which equates to more profit One thing I have picked up in life is never trust someones opinion or information that can make a profit off you...
Anyways, Sorry to post such a long post, but I figured I would add to the conversation and provide some thoughts to ponder. Sorry you had bad luck with your 90w UFO light, but don't base your decision on just that alone as there are literally hundreds and probably thousands of very successful LED (primary light) users here with amazing results.. Most lights can be used successfully if you know how to use them properly, but they are all not the same, so must be chosen correctly and used correctly. I've seen some amazing CFL grows too and I say do whatever you are happy with.... LED do work amazingly well and I now have about 2 years of dust on my HID ballasts and love LED grow lights
I'm not sure what LED you are using, but you should always have the veg switch on, in veg and in flower.
The flowering switch you can use for both, or just veg, I would suggest trying the veg only first, and if the plants are stretching a lot, then add the flowering switch.
Make sure to never run just the flowering only... some LED's fans only come on with the veg setting like the mars 3wx144 lights (the bloom switch does not power the fans, and if used without veg will cause issues).
Hope this helps, typically the more light the better, unless you are exceeding the plants daily light needs which I don't think you will have to worry about.
Rockskipper
New Member
Well I guess my little light does'nt even come close to cutting it, lol, so I guess I'll back out of this thread.
That light did cost me 150.00 to get it to Alaska with shipping and all , and it is a full spectrum light.
I'm a first time grower so I'm learning as I go.
Thanks for the info. Cheers.
That light did cost me 150.00 to get it to Alaska with shipping and all , and it is a full spectrum light.
I'm a first time grower so I'm learning as I go.
Thanks for the info. Cheers.
VonDankenhoek
New Member
my first light was a mars i grew very nice flowers with it. good luck with your light keep learning if you expect to improve your garden.
We're all learning! That's the beautiful thing about his hobby. It never ends. And the therapy that comes with it is something beautiful. Don't be intimidated by the knowledge you don't know. Rather, celebrate the information you do know! Because you're still ahead of many.
I wish you luck on your travels and if you need anything just drop a line!
DukeO
Well-Known Member
You should be able to grow a nice little top grade plant with that light.
Good Luck to you!
Good Luck to you!
BuddroGreen
New Member
Not saying you need a BML Spydr 1200, I just helped a newbie friend that got an Illumitex Neosol NS @ 300 watts, it is a 600w HPS killer for sure!! Here is a good comparison. 
