300W LED vs. 400W HID Demonstration

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

That is a stunningly beautiful plant.

Now, I know this can be a touchy subject, so please know that I have no agenda other than curiosity when I ask if your predilection for purple is purely aesthetic, or whether there is some general correlation between purple and potency, or purple and other psychoactive properties?

 

[molotov]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Hi SS. Just wanted to let you know I follow this thread everyday. Love the knowledge and experience that I am gaining from this. I might not input to much since I was taught that the best way to learn is to sit back watch and listen. In this case read. One of these days I hope to help others on here like you guys do. Just wanted to let you know that all this extra work you and others put into this does not go unappreciated. Unselfish people like yourself and many on this forum are what this country needs. It's sad that the ignorance of people and the negative propaganda put forth on this subject alienates so many people from enjoying one of greatest gifts we have been given on this earth. Good day to all and thanks for everything. And "We're nothing but a bunch of stoners." If they only knew.

 

[Two Tokes]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

I thought about it, but a vertical 400w bulb would light-stress the plants in a 32x32" tent, and it's not a mainstream method of growing (yet), which is important to this grow.

I think I am going to give it a shot in a 36"x42" space. Nobody has ever accused me of being mainstream.

Be interesting to see if you are right about the light stress.

 

[The Lurker]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Redundant Runt Grunt = happy action in the back room

The back room is often where I have the most fun. That's where I get to do the stuff you do in the front room

You mite want to put an apple-in-the-mouth and to shut the lid.

As an ol' buddy of mine likes to say: "Good Times Are Often Tasteless."

After we took out the apple and opened up the trunk.b

Purple with a Passion? You do good work, my friend.

Ya know folks, I've been following these post 'cause I too have been curious about LEDs, but now yall got intrested in hempy....also I went with the Lowe's 'Dynamite' because I read it here, and my plants look the best so far...

Glad to hear it! If you have time to do a journal, some folks here'd probably be interested in following, too.

I was thinking some more about this today.

It gets complicated, lol. It's difficult to compare dissimilar technologies and keep things fair...

^^^^ What They Said. This is a Battle Of The (Spectral) Bands, each camp should be maximized to both take advantage of the strengths - and minimize the weaknesses - of any particular setup or technology. Same way someone'd grow if they were doing 'em individually.

I was thinking of your phrase "fill the corners" today, and I've decided to keep the 4 plants.

It's never been my intention to "fill the corners" in my previous grows, so I asked myself why that was, and the answer is that I've been growing with lower wattage lights than these, so my practice was to crowd plants in towards the most intense light at the center of the tents as opposed to filling the corners and utilizing all the available space...

thanks for a very compelling argument...

Just a few pics I took tonight after I decided to keep all four plants and re-arranged things a little.

Good call. Might as well max out the space and let the plants brush up against the reflective walls of the tent if you've got the lighting for it. I tend to like having even plant #s in square and rectangular spaces, too.

Doesn't take much expansion of your total grow area on either side to add a good couple of square feet, either:

31.5" x 31.5" (wall-to-wall in your tent) = ~6.9 sq. ft.
26.5" x 26.5" (2 1/2 inches in from each side) = ~ 4.9 sq. ft.

Call it 5 vs. 7, in this example.

Let's say, for illustration purposes, that you can just about get a good ~2 oz/sq. ft. or so, on average (max), using 5 sq. ft. with optimal coverage (i.e. ~10 oz)

Even if your per sq. ft. production drops a bit by going to the walls (maybe - maybe not (by much)), by using all 7 sq. ft., the differences in total yield come out to:

at a 20% drop (1.6 oz), that's (7 x 1.6) = 11.2 oz;
at a 15% drop (1.7 oz), that's (7 x 1.7) = 11.9 oz;
at a 10% drop (1.8 oz), that's (7 x 1.8) = 12.6 oz;
at a 5% drop (1.9 oz), that's (7 x 1.9) = 13.3 oz; and
with a 0% drop (2.0 oz), that's (7 x 2.0) = 14.0 oz.

...etc. You'd have to yield almost ~30% less per sq. ft. before total yield drops below that of the 5 sq. ft 'optimal' area. Worth doing, IMO.

(Same reason you'd run a 1000w in 5'x 5' vs. 4'x 4' if you've got the space (and just one light); that 400w's good for around 3'x 3' or so. Biomass tends to grow into the area just fine if allowed.)

The column of air going straight up at the light also has another huge benefit.

With the fan in that position, and the lights at the same height as before, canopy temps dropped from an average of 80 to an average of 74. Love that infrared thermometer .

Nice work. Easy to start the plants closer in and move 'em towards the walls as required. No worries there. Nature loves symmetry, too.

Gotta love technology. Vertical makes the plants smile! Say "Cheese!"

I pushed the plants in each tent towards the corners a little, and that allowed me to run my circulation fan in the center pointed straight up. I think it stresses plants to blow them around too much, but blowing up from below, if you get the fan size/speed right, works really well.

I arrange the plants far enough apart to allow a good breeze to hit the light, but close enough so that a few fan leaves catch some of the breeze also. When the breeze hits a few of the lower fan leaves from below, it deflects and gently flutters the whole plant.

I play with circulation fan position a lot, because the devil's in the details, and blowing up through the center of the canopy towards the radiant heat source is my favorite setup.

I agree, I don't like puttin' a direct breeze on the plants all the time. Intermittent is ok, but a nice vortex that 'tickles the leaves' (coochie coochie coo!) is even better. Just enough peripheral/adjacent turbulence to help 'em breathe.

I was thinking of putting them outdoors and hoping for the best, but it's getting too cold for them to have gotten much revenge out there .

Airline Attendant: "Your five year old son is travelling on the plane alone? Is someone going to be waiting after the flight at his destination to pick him up?"

Ron: "Nope; I was gonna put him on the plane, pin a $20 bill to his lapel, and 'wish him the best of luck!'"

-Ron White, Blue Collar Comedy Tour
----

No need to put those young Eskimos out on an ice floe just yet - not while they're still useful, anyway.

Talk about a retirement plan...

 

[The Lurker]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Hi SS. Just wanted to let you know I follow this thread everyday. Love the knowledge and experience that I am gaining from this. I might not input to much since I was taught that the best way to learn is to sit back watch and listen. In this case read. One of these days I hope to help others on here like you guys do. Just wanted to let you know that all this extra work you and others put into this does not go unappreciated. Unselfish people like yourself and many on this forum are what this country needs. It's sad that the ignorance of people and the negative propaganda put forth on this subject alienates so many people from enjoying one of greatest gifts we have been given on this earth. Good day to all and thanks for everything. And "We're nothing but a bunch of stoners." If they only knew.

Well said.

I've always found the term 'stoner' to be mildly offensive myself, not simply as a descriptive. Connotations of being lazy, useless, and not contributing to society, or thereabouts. I've found a person's predilection or predisposition for or against having any particular (negative) character or behavioral trait to be largely independent of their propensity to smoke cannabis. There are some darn useful and vital folks out there (and in here) that happen to light one up from time to time. It's about time that the prosecution ends the persecution.

(For a second there, that last line makes me sound like either Al Sharpton, Dr. Cornell West...or Jesse Jackson. Rhymin' in Reason, as Gator likes to say...)

Here is a good little read...

DN you have good timing, as always...was just workin' up somethin' in my (admittedly scarce) free time (see below), and you give the perfect lead-in for it.

I know you've grown with both HID and LED in the 300-400w range, and that you're a straight-shooter, so I value your input...

good stuff dog, thank you.

Several weeks back on another forum I ran across someone trying to pump about 400w of HID (MH) into little more than a square foot of space (to see if he could break the ~1 sq ft challenge), and very kindly explained to him why his <0.1g/watt yield would improve drastically (and his root rot would disappear) if he actually used less light in his space.

Bel has talked about dose-response curves (DRCs), and photoinhibition caused by oversaturation before, too; to wit:

Ok, so there is a saturation level reached by all plants in response to light. Well, how much is that, usually? Let's take a look:

In nature, full sunlight actually provides almost 5x the amount of light at which even the most light-tolerant plants experience saturation:

I tend to think that (some strains of) mj are a bit higher than that upper range myself, but those are pretty typical (in the absence of CO² supplementation).

Ok, so around ~2000 foot-candles in natural sunlight. How much is that in PAR (PPFD - Photosynthetic Photon Flux Density), exactly? (Expressed in micromoles of photons per meter squared per second, i.e.: µmol/m²/s)

Recall that PAR varies with the type of lighting, and that a Factor (multiplier x the foot-candles value) is used to indicate how efficient any particular light source is in terms of PAR delivered. These factors for common lighting types are, generally speaking, as follows:

1) Sunlight = 0.195 micro mol/m²/s/ft.-can (or 5.13 ft.can/micromol/m²/s)
2) Incandescent Light = 0.219
3) Cool-White (CW) Fluorescent = 0.137
4) High Pressure Sodium (HPS) ~ 0.129-0.131
5) Metal Halide (MH) ~ 0.144-0.152

So in the case of light saturation above, in natural sunlight = (2000 f-c x 0.195 =) 390-400+ PAR.

That's it. If you could deliver that amount consistently and evenly to your plants (and it didn't vary throughout their lifetime), you wouldn't need much more. Ever.

(There's a way to do just that, using intra-canopy LED lighting. In fact, you can grow plants much taller than you ever could with HPS using that method - but I wouldn't, for the same reasons as bel. Short and stocky just produces better overall.)
----

What about that of (a similar intensity to) 100% Full, Natural Sunlight (at 10,000 foot-candles and 1,950 PAR (µmol/m²/s))? For a 400w, normal spectrum HPS on a (magnetic) ballast and standard reflector, in ideal conditions, that equivalent PAR is reached at a distance of roughly ~12-13" beneath the bulb.

Remember, that's still five times the saturation rate for even the hardiest of plants! (of which mj falls into that category)

Now out in nature of course, the sun isn't always at it's maximum, and plants have to adjust to different radiant intensities throughout the day, parts of the plant are shaded from above, and the like.
----

Not to re-quote myself, but the following is what we're always trying to avoid (in regards to having too much light):

...The effect is over-stimulation of the reaction centers and antenna complexes and increased flavonoid (anthocyanin) and carotenoid production, but those processes (e.g. Non-photochemical quenching (NPQ)) basically take energy away from the building of plant tissues we're interested in. I'd rather not put the plant under additional stress so it can focus on making flowers instead.

Instead of furthering the machinery of photosynthesis, too much PPFD simply enhances the creation of prolonged singlet Oxygen and triplet states for Chlorophyll (in Photosystem II, mainly) resulting in oxidation and photoinhibition, as free radical Oxygen starts running around the system creating havoc. Enough of that can cause bleaching (breakup of the Chromophores), changes in pH gradients across cell membranes, and worse.

In short, the plants are directing too much energy into creating 'sunscreen' (carotenoids and flavonoids) in an effort to keep from 'burning' (from light, not heat) - at the expense of creating a larger useful biomass (calyx to leaf ratio - i.e. buds).

The D1 protein is instrumental in the repair and 'recharging' of PhotosystemII (PSII), allowing it to 'reset' and continue with photosynthesis. Note that this repair process continually takes place at all light levels, in direct proportion to the intensity received. (Contrary to popular opinion, light saturation doesn't 'start' at a particular irradiance level, and before which the plant was absorbing all of the light without degredation - in actuality, it simply shows where the (continuing and increasing) degradation and re-synthesis of D1 cannot keep pace with the incoming light levels, and this is equivalent to where photoinhibition is said to take place.) The proteins involved in PSII repair simply can't keep pace with the 'demand' brought on by high irradiance levels:

Here's a study that might shed some more light (no pun intended) on this process:

Photoinhibition and D1 Protein Degradation in Peas Acclimated to Different Growth Irradiances

That's what you've got with your current setup.

Indoors, we have the luxury of delivering consistent (over a period of time) light levels for each hour of the 'day'; unfortunately, they're not at the same intensity, but vary by distance, as we all know.

We really tend to put our plants through the ringer indoors. Many of us either end up 1) blasting the tops of our garden with several times full outdoor sunlight, while still providing the bottoms with sufficient intensity - or, we 2) keep the tops at a reasonable (vs. full sunlight) level, and the lowest parts are starving for light.

On top of that, if a plant grows several inches in a day, close up to the light source, this becomes problematic, to say the least. Go from 6" to 3" distance in a day, and you've just quadrupled (400% increase!) your plant's exposure. Ouch!

Think your plants can produce enough extra 'sunscreen' in a day to keep photoinhibition from occurring? Not a chance. Hello, oxidation - bye bye, colas--!
----

So let's say the tops of your plant starts ~12" from the light. It gets used to that intensity, and the leaves directly underneath - which stay put - produce enough 'sunscreen' for that intensity.

Then, as the plants grow upwards, you naturally raise the light - and the lower parts need to lose that tan (get pasty again ) if they're going to absorb enough photons to fuel photosynthesis for leaves at that height. And then, they get shaded. And those auxins keep gettin' redistributed again to the younger kids, too.

And we do this over and over again (tops growing into the light, fire/frost, tan/pasty, bottoms keep losing intensity, etc.)

The plant can adjust/re-deploy some of the 'sunscreen' to a certain extent - but others (esp. in the vacuoles near the surface, and some fixed to the light-gathering antenna complexes) are stuck there upon creation. Acclimatization takes awhile, and is never fully 'over':

Is it any wonder why many folks fry the tops, and the bottoms often don't produce anything worth mentioning?

And, our plants end up screaming like Naomi Campbell having to fly Coach?!?! If someone stuck me in a microwave and hit the full power button, I'd have smoke coming out of my ears like Uncle Fester, too...


That's why I much prefer horizontal canopies like ScrOG. Easy to keep light levels within the good range without having 'em at either extreme.
----

A few years back, CaliGrower put out a few lighting charts for HIDs with standard bulbs and magnetic ballasts. While they showed idealized foot-candle values (real world levels tend to be a bit lower), they were actually pretty useful overall as guidelines for a lot of folks. I believe they ended up in the Cannagrower Bible, too...

Haven't seen any updates using Enhanced Spectrum (ES) bulbs and Electronic Ballasts, so I decided to whip up a few quick charts/graphs of my own from scratch, pertinent to this grow (or anyone else using ES bulbs and E.B.'s).

The HPS bulb data I used came directly from the Ushio Website.

Lumatek claims that their electronic ballast produces 'up to 30% more light than a standard magnetic ballast'; from what I've seen, an additional 20% is not out of the question - and that's what I modified the foot-candle data by ('Solid State Ballast Factor') below.

(That doesn't take into consideration Lumatek's 'Super Lumen' switch, either, which is supposed to boost output by another ~10%. Wonder how that changes the actual, real-world levels? Hmmm...)

The chart is based on using a standard 120° horizontal (double parabola) reflector. Since we're only doing one wattage, I added the PAR (µmol/m²/s) data and also used it to calculate the multiple (or fraction thereof) of HPS PAR vs. Full (Equatorial) Sunlight, expressed as a percentage.

The PAR Factor I used for the ES bulb is 0.135; i.e. slightly more than a normal HPS bulb, but nowhere near MH and much closer to the standard HPS side.

A couple of educated estimates, but might actually be pretty close to real-world levels, after factoring in reasonable losses...
----

Anyway, here it is:

(Click to enlarge pics)

(If those plant pics look familiar, they should - they're from the 'Sunset Kush' grow. Some right pretty little girls.)

(It's pure coincidence that the smaller bud just happens to be to the right of the 'excess/too much' lighting area, and the big fat bud is adjacent to the 'good' zone - just a function of how I cropped the images and where they worked out best. Didn't mean anything subliminal by it... Really. )

I kept CG's color coding system (too close, optimal, too far) based on the old foot-candle cutoffs and translated them to the new distance from the top of the plant. He notes that, regardless of what the chart says, he wouldn't run a 400w light any closer than 7" (or a 1000w closer than 12") in any event. (His old chart goes into the 'red' zone at 5" for a 400w on a magnetic ballast - the one above starts at 6".) Translated to the new #'s, that same (go/no-go) distance is reached right around 8.5"-9" away.

There are two bold black lines also. The first (between 14" and 15") marks where the HPS produces the equivalent to Full Sunlight PAR (black text/yellow background notation on the right between the plant pics), while the second (between 31" and 32") shows the upper limit for light saturation without CO2 (2nd graph I posted with the light blue band) , right around 400+ µmol/m²/s PAR (text with green background).

Yep: in the absence of having produced all that 'sunscreen' early on and without CO2, that's about all the light you'd need, to grow your plants, if you could deliver it at constant levels to all parts of the plant. Above that level, outside of perhaps some better absorption of green-yellow light (see the Mythbusters thread) our plants simply shift focus into creating antioxidants and the like, instead of strictly fueling photosynthesis.

(With 'sunscreen', however, you need higher levels to penetrate into the leaf and properly fuel photosynthesis, as attenuation and absorption occurs from all the extra anthocyanins and xanthophylls present.)

It's worth noting that, because of the different PAR conversion factors of HPS vs. Sunlight, you need 44% more foot-candles--! to produce the equivalent PAR of natural sunlight, at any particular intensity.

So instead of 10,000 F-C, HPS delivers 100% of the Sun's PAR at 14,400 F-C!

Some of that extra light gets reflected; and, most of the rest gets absorbed as (but is not used to fuel photosynthesis) - and converted to - HEAT.

-----

Here's a nice graph I made from the chart data that puts the above into focus (HPS PAR vs. Sunlight as a Function of Distance):

(Click to enlarge pics so the text isn't all fuzzy - wide graph!)

The bold red line at 100% (y-axis) shows where Full Natural Sunlight PAR is crossed from increasing/decreasing distance.

I had to cap the y-axis at 300% so there was still sufficient delineation at lower irradiances/higher distances, so the first point of the graph shows the HPS at 9" away (263% x PAR of Natural Sunlight), and almost ~13x light saturation levels!

<Bloody Hell...>

Dogsnova mentioned 12" as being a good distance. For this light, we get roughly:

148% of Full Sun PAR and 21,392 foot-candles! (more than 2x that of full sunlight!). That's still a heck of a lot of light - and realistically, probably a good upper limit, if plants can be kept relatively short, also. Maybe 10" in a pinch, but that's pushing it. Hope the plants don't make any sudden moves at that level--!
----

Again, real-world levels might be a bit lower from various losses. Measuring directly under the light with a quality light meter would be better, but these might be useful as a 'rule-of-thumb', for grows using Enhanced Spectrum HPS and Electronic Ballasts - which are becoming more of the norm nowadays.


Hope that helps...enjoy! :icon_cool


Regards,

-TL

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Awesome post TL!

Very understandable, both your explanations and your graphs.

I do have a digital light meter, but I've been too beat to do much more than keep up with the essentials.

Now that you've posted this data, however, I'm much more motivated to get some numbers.

a *lot* of work went into that post, and I've never seen the issue broken down so well before.

you rock bro

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

you know, I was just thinking about your post, and why it is that plants generally grow so much bigger and yield so much more outdoors than indoors, considering that it's possible to provide them with equal or greater light intensity indoors, and then I thought of Heath's latest tree grow.

Heath shines brighter than the sun.

 

[dogsnova]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

TL awesome post + reps if I can....

In all of my testing I have found that 12" to 15" is MY strains optimal distance for an air cooled 400w HPS...

Your post just explained exactly why that is...


Here is a little bit of outdoors (Mother nature) used in my garden .....

I start day one of flowering with the most light intensity my girls can handle. i.e. I start the light at aprox the 12" mark and then work my light up to the 15" range by the end of the flowering cycle...

This is opposite from what most indoor growers do (not Mother nature)..

Why is this?

Most indoor growers start their lights up high at the beginning of the flowering cycle and work the intensity down as the flowering progresses, and this is opposite of what happens outdoors..

Outdoors; the light intensity during the (flowering cycle) is by default at it's highest intensity on day one and gets less intense as the earth moves away from the sun with each passing day.. By the end of the outdoor flowering cycle not only is the light intensity much less outside but the (overall) spectrum outdoors has also changed from an average of 4K to aprox 10K+.. Sure outdoor light spectrum is a whole different subject, but I thought I would put it in here.. Here is a good example of what I mean.. Most people think the outdoor spectrum turns more of a red/orange color as fall time progresses, but that's just not the case.. The outdoor spectrum as fall progresses actually shifts to much more of a bluish spectrum...

This now leads us to discuss the differences between outdoor strains and indoor strains.. For the most part the two strains react differently to blue light... One example would be.. Too much blue light during flowering with an (indoor) indicia strain and you will likely get a pore calyx to leaf ratio... Not enough blue light during flowering with an (outdoor) sativa strain and your yield will more then likely suffer..

Starting out the flowering cycle with high canopy light intensity and working your way towards a lower canopy light intensity helps prevent oxidation to the mature flowers that is in turn caused by radiant heat coming off the HID bulb.. By pulling the HID light up off the canopy towards the end of the flowering cycle I've found this greatly decreased the sunburn effect to my mature flowers.. Just as TL posted about..

The next point and by far the most IMPORTANT is... Our favorite girls have evolved over millions perhaps Billions of years with the light intensity HIGH at the beginning of their flowering cycle and gradually getting lower by the end of their flowering cycle.. It's programmed into their genes

Just to illustrate the light intensity thing a little differently...

I like to think of it like drag racing (lol).... A drag race is won or lost within the first 60 feet of the race.... BTW so is the yield in your garden... Light intensity during the first half of the flowering cycle has a big effect on yield.. Not so much on the second half of the flowering cycle..


Just some food for thought.....

 

[Velodrone]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

TL awesome post + reps if I can....

In all of my testing I have found that 12" to 15" is MY strains optimal distance for an air cooled 400w HPS...

Your post just explained exactly why that is...


Here is a little bit of outdoors (Mother nature) used in my garden .....

I start day one of flowering with the most light intensity my girls can handle. i.e. I start the light at aprox the 12" mark and then work my light up to the 15" range by the end of the flowering cycle...

This is opposite from what most indoor growers do (not Mother nature)..

Why is this?

Most indoor growers start their lights up high at the beginning of the flowering cycle and work the intensity down as the flowering progresses, and this is opposite of what happens outdoors..

Outdoors; the light intensity during the (flowering cycle) is by default at it's highest intensity on day one and gets less intense as the earth moves away from the sun with each passing day.. By the end of the outdoor flowering cycle not only is the light intensity much less outside but the (overall) spectrum outdoors has also changed from an average of 4K to aprox 10K+.. Sure outdoor light spectrum is a whole different subject, but I thought I would put it in here.. Here is a good example of what I mean.. Most people think the outdoor spectrum turns more of a red/orange color as fall time progresses, but that's just not the case.. The outdoor spectrum as fall progresses actually shifts to much more of a bluish spectrum...

This now leads us to discuss the differences between outdoor strains and indoor strains.. For the most part the two strains react differently to blue light... One example would be.. Too much blue light during flowering with an (indoor) indicia strain and you will likely get a pore calyx to leaf ratio... Not enough blue light during flowering with an (outdoor) sativa strain and your yield will more then likely suffer..

Starting out the flowering cycle with high canopy light intensity and working your way towards a lower canopy light intensity helps prevent oxidation to the mature flowers that is in turn caused by radiant heat coming off the HID bulb.. By pulling the HID light up off the canopy towards the end of the flowering cycle I've found this greatly decreased the sunburn effect to my mature flowers.. Just as TL posted about..

The next point and by far the most IMPORTANT is... Our favorite girls have evolved over millions perhaps Billions of years with the light intensity HIGH at the beginning of their flowering cycle and gradually getting lower by the end of their flowering cycle.. It's programmed into their genes

Just to illustrate the light intensity thing a little differently...

I like to think of it like drag racing (lol).... A drag race is won or lost within the first 60 feet of the race.... BTW so is the yield in your garden... Light intensity during the first half of the flowering cycle has a big effect on yield.. Not so much on the second half of the flowering cycle..


Just some food for thought.....

I will agree w/ some of what you said. There is one aspect that I think that you might be forgetting though. The sun emits 3.827 x 10 to the power of 28. By the time the rays come down and hit your plants it's closer to 1,370 watts of converted energy per m2!

Most people do not have that light intensity. With that being said, we need to keep them close!

 

[Two Tokes]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

TL, Thanks for the awesome inforamtion and thanks to everyone else for the discussion. Blown away.

 

[dogsnova]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

I will agree w/ some of what you said. There is one aspect that I think that you might be forgetting though. The sun emits 3.827 x 10 to the power of 28. By the time the rays come down and hit your plants it's closer to 1,370 watts of converted energy per m2!

Most people do not have that light intensity. With that being said, we need to keep them close!

I definitely agree.. The suns intensity is way to strong for HID to compete...

IMO if studied correctly, Mother nature provides us plenty of clues as to what she's doing..

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Here's the punk rocker, Mr Sun.

b

I usually don't repost pics, but that one bears reposting.

thank you also for your explanation of how your purple ladies came to visit and stayed.

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

This is my first attempt at a video.

That shows my fan setup a lot better than I can describe it.

 

[dogsnova]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Nice demo SS...

 

[Troublesome2]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Love the video Mr. Sun Its nice to watch a video from time to time rather than reading and lookin at pics all the time. Iv got the same fan and will be using it for this purpose when i start my hot ass 600 hps up. ALWAYS HELPFULL Mr. Sun

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Nice demo SS...

Love the video Mr. Sun Its nice to watch a video from time to time rather than reading and lookin at pics all the time. Iv got the same fan and will be using it for this purpose when i start my hot ass 600 hps up. ALWAYS HELPFULL Mr. Sun

thanks bros!

The process was actually a lot easier than I thought, except it took about 3 hours to upload with my DSL connection.

another incentive to ditch DSL for cable .

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Very interesting observations dog, thanks for posting them.

I experienced the results of having this LED light too low on the Sunset Kush grow, so I appreciate what you're saying about not going too low, or even raising up to a height that won't damage the flowers.

It's hard for me to keep the LED light at 19-20", but much lower and the leaves start to fold, and the plants have excellent growth and don't show any stretching due to lack of intensity.

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

.

 

[Setting Sun]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

I will agree w/ some of what you said. There is one aspect that I think that you might be forgetting though. The sun emits 3.827 x 10 to the power of 28. By the time the rays come down and hit your plants it's closer to 1,370 watts of converted energy per m2!

Most people do not have that light intensity. With that being said, we need to keep them close!

but not too close, because obviously the plants will get burned/bleached, but coverage and penetration also suffer if you get too low. I learned about compromise and sweet spots growing with low-power lights, whereas 1000w will cover a multitude of sin, well, some anyway .

 

[Propa Gator]

Re: 420 Cannasumer Reports Competition - GrowLEDHydro 300w LED vs. 400w HID

Mr Sun, do you compromise your noise tolerance for that fan? I heard it
Video don't lie, sounds and works like mine. Well

If you pushed the girls a bit more into the corners, you could drop a 250 right down in there
Your DR80s are so much better than my IKEA conversions, 250 vert perfect IM(not so)HO!