Cfl - 6500k 2700k question

celeblas

New Member
Hey guys,

I am really new here and also this is the first growing for me. Of course i have some questions about growing as i am a newbie :). I am gonna grow 2 x critical jack autoflowering seeds and use cfls for lighting. My pots' size are 15 liters (4 galons). My growth room's dimensions are 82cm (32inches) x 60cm x 60cm (24inches).

My question is about lighting. I have 4 x 25w 6500k (1500 lumens) and 6 x 18w 2700k (1170 lumens) cfls. I will buy another 150w 6500k (9000 lumens) cfl. I think these cfls will be enough for two plants. But i am not sure if i have to use all of them at the same time or 1 x 150w, 4 x 25w (all 6500k) at the veg period, and 1 x 150w, 6 x 18w (6500k and 2700k together) at bloom period. All your suggestions will be appreciated. :thanks:
 
mixing of light spectrum is good for your plants.i would recomend buying more 2700k bulbs instead of the 150w 6500k.
6 x 25w 6500k with 2x 2700k should do fine for veg 18/6 or 24/0 light period. for flowering is suggest using 8 x 18 watt 2700k and 2x 26 watt 6500k doing 12/12 light period. Also keep the lights 1-2 inches near the plants and remember to put some lights on the side of the plants. Reflectors also help alot.
 
...My growth room's dimensions are 82cm (32inches) x 60cm x 60cm (24inches).

My question is about lighting. I have 4 x 25w 6500k (1500 lumens) and 6 x 18w 2700k (1170 lumens) cfls. I will buy another 150w 6500k (9000 lumens) cfl....

The above listed is enough to cover your grow area and is just slightly above the minimum I would recommend. For Flowering you would want the reverse ratio of 2700 to 6500 kelvin.
 
I recommend buying all 100 watt cfls because they produce the most lumes per watts consumed. 23 watts consumed produces 1600 lumes. No 150 watt is going to get you 9,000 lumes. Some company lied to you. a 300 watt will give you 4200 lumes, which is less than 3 100 watters.

I would use at least 8 100 watters for two plants and cram them into a 2x2 area. Check this thread to see why. Click here
 
LEDRF depending on the CFL brand he's talking about using it has 8200 lumens. That's a 40w = 150w. And about your Smaller CFL's vs the 150w there's no comparring them. As you can't find small Cfl that are 6500k with 1400 lumens. There only 5000k. The lumens doesn't matter to the plant its all about the color temp. Lumens is just for brightness of the human eye. There's only one CFL that will give you 6500k with 2400 lumens and that's a 3way CFL. $10 a bulb. So he would need 3way base sockets to use them.
 
I was refering to the warm CFLs 2500k, as they are better for flowering and work well for veg, that I have seen so far. However, I have never seen a cfl grow produce more bud than a hps grow.

They do make medium base (standard) cfl full spectrum for $10 a bulb, but they aren't truly full spectrum.

I haven't been able to find the percent of energy used with a red coated cfl, to see how many of the lumes goes to that wavelength. Would be interesting to see if those are worth throwing into the mix.
 
BTW, PAR, photosynthetically active radiation, which is just the nm (namometers) of wavelengths, is visible light as far as light used by plants. 390nm-750nm. So to say that lumens is just visible light that humans see doesn't make sense. Those wavelengths we see are the wavelengths plants use.

The importants of par is how much of those wavelengths a bulb produces in percent to the lumens output. So a HPS will produce 100 percent of it's lumens in the 600nm range, which is mostly yellow, but a tad green wavelength. The sun produces 60 percent and above for all visible waveslengths.

Interestingly enough, a 1000w 2100k hps puts out only 90 percent of the 600nm wavelength. It makes up for it by producing more 620, at 60 percent, verse the 40 percent of a 400w hps 2100k. Also the 100ow produces 15% of 640-680nm, whereas the 400w only like 8 percent.

MH 5200k, ,400w bulbs produce about 10% 600nm. Their 100% spike is for green/yellow at 590nm. 625nm is 25%. They make up for this with a 45% 510nm, which is light blue. 30% 470nm, darker blue, and 30% 437nm, dark blue. They also have 40% of 400nm, purple.
 
They make up for this with a 45% 510nm, which is light blue. 30% 470nm, darker blue, and 30% 437nm, dark blue. They also have 40% of 400nm, purple.

You have so many things wrong in this post it's hard to explain. 510nm is green light. Please read the link I gave to you in the other post.

Par and Lumens have NOTHING to do with each other. PAR is a measurement of light that is skewed to the absorption action spectra.
 
Lumens is related to par, because PAR stands for photosynthetically active radiation, which is the wavelengths from 400nm - 700nm, wavelengths that are also visible to the human eye. If you think otherwise, I would need to see concrete evidence that contradicts what I've learned from text books.

Lumens is the brightness of a light, which includes all the wavelengths it produces. Thus, if the lumens is 22,000 and the percent of relative energy of say 600nm is 100 percent, then the 600nm wavelength is 22,000 lumens. The full output of that light is being produced in that wavelength, but not in say 510, which might only be 10 percent.

Keep in mind, the photosynthetically active radiation is just the radiation the lights emits that we see and plants use for photosynthesis. Lumens is all the brightness of all the radiation produced by that bulb.

HPS uses 100% of 600nm. That is not green. Pure green light is about 560. This is easy to check, for example the folloing link. https://withfriendship.com/images/b/9817/visible-spectrum.gif

550-560 is pure green. 600 is pure yellow.

HPS also produces other wavelengths but not at 100 percent. That is, the 100 percent of 600nm isn't 100 percent of the total brightness we measure in lumes. But we could isolate that wavelength and it is using 100 percent of that relative energy. That is 600nm is 100 percent effective in an HPS bulb per it's lumens/brightness.

I don't know if CFLs have anything at 100 percent for relative energy. I can't find a chart for them, even at places that sell the bulbs, trying to boost how awesome they are.
 
HPS uses 100% of 600nm. That is not green.

Pure green light is about 560. This is easy to check, for example the folloing link. https://withfriendship.com/images/b/9817/visible-spectrum.gif

550-560 is pure green. 600 is pure yellow.

It's obvious that you have not read ANY of the links I have given you. This will be the last one that will hopefully shut you up and make you learn something before trying to give any more advise.

THIS LINK IS FROM NASA AND TELLS YOU WHAT COLORS ARE WHAT WAVELENGTH!

Just in case you are too lazy to click a link and thus are still talking from your backside...
The visible indigo light has a wavelength of about 445 nm
The visible blue light has a wavelength of about 475 nm.
The visible green light has a wavelength of about 510 nm
The visible yellow light has a wavelength of about 570 nm.
The visible orange light has a wavelength of about 590 nm.
The visible red light has a wavelength of about 650 nm.

This will be the communication to you until you get a basic understanding of lighting and photosynthesis.
 
Hose, that only betters my argument for HPS. HPS has the highest output at 600nm, which would be orange according to nasa. Now it makes more sense why HPS does so well. Thank you. :)

I was really starting to wonder why in the hell HPS did so well when its max relative energy was 600nm, which I thought was yellow based on a color chart, but turns out, according to nasa is orange. Orange is used very well to produce big buds, so now it makes sense.

HPS even produces a lot at 620, and an okay amount at 650, red, according to nasa. Still, LED by SG claim to produce a lot more of that same light spectrum. I am searching this site for hps verse sg 602, right now. And just for sg602 grows, just to see if they produce 1 to 2 foot, thick buds. Big corn cobs. It will make me feel more confident about buying LEDs.
 
Back
Top Bottom