Welcome to UK420

Register now to gain access to all of our features. Once registered and logged in, you will be able to contribute to this site by submitting your own content or replying to existing content. You'll be able to customize your profile, receive reputation points as a reward for submitting content, while also communicating with other members via your own private inbox, plus much more!

This message will be removed once you have signed in.


Golden Syrup

Which kind of lighting unit do I choose?

47 posts in this topic

@@Golden Syrup There is nothing here I disagree with mate. The figures (as long as not given by some company trying it on) don't lie.

But as I have been reading quite a bit recently I have discovered that for me personally there is more to choosing a light than "Light"..

There are other factors involved in choosing a light. As one chap might say they want "Basic" HPS because they're great, give excellent results and cost a laughable 5% of LED units, the next chap might say the want less fire fire risk, or more distance from plant tops, less consumption..

What I ended up telling myself after weeks of numbers, youtube videos, emails etc etc is that if I could choose any of the setups I have to choose from for FREE which would I choose and why. Take the initial sting of purchase price out of the equation and go from there. I then wound up asking myself a different row of questions rather than the age old "Which is more powerful for my £££'s".

Once I started looking a different factors rather than Lumens, PAR & UMOLS I started to discover there is more to a light unit than I thought..

GV.

Edited by GreenVision
8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@GreenVision

If money isn't a consideration then what you're saying is absolutely spot on, however I don't personally feel you can factor in consumption and then not the price of the unit, or the PPF as these are all linked to one another in making an informed choice which is what this is all about, the saving on electrics offsets the price of the unit, and there is no point in any of that if the PPF isn't the same or more as what we're currently using otherwise we're looking at a loss in yield.

With the exception of your point on fire hazard, less consumption from LEDs doesn't offset the price of the unit as quickly as other technology does thats what less consumption is about, paying less of the electric bill and there is no point in that if the units has cost thousands of pounds.

As for more distance between the unit and plants, you can do that with any lighting source that all comes down to PPFD too, as the higher the unit the more spread across an area the PPF is and thus lower the PPFD. With unit costs into consideration (because lets be real, we've got to factor in the unit costs otherwise we're not making an informed choice, and if we're not doing that then why are we doing it?) in most examples it would work out better to just raise existing lamps and then add another, as it'll still work out better over all to pay the extra bit on the electric per month than spend thousands of pounds of units so you can hang them higher... it might take 10 years or something for the extra cost of the electricity bill to add up to what it would've cost to buy X amount of LED units.

I'm not taking a bash at LEDs here I've repeatedly said that they work, you can grow really nice weed under them as I've smoked plenty but in nearly all of cases they just aren't very efficient because of the really high unit costs.

8 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@Golden Syrup fantastic idea for a thread mate, very useful bringing a lot of bits of info together in one place and answering some questions that seem to pop up repeatedly. Good one taking the time to lay it all out :yep:

My experience over the last 6 months using a 630 watt Dimlux fixture in-between two 400v DE sodiums (running at 600 watts in a 2.4x1.2m) tent have been pretty pleasing, its hard to commit on the individual plants as most are from seed however I have noticed all the plants are drinking about 20% more water throughout flower than without the ceramic in....visually they look pretty happy too, these are about 10 days into 12/12 sitting right under the ceramic.

gallery_91208_12265_585042.jpg

:v:

12 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@Golden Syrup Your first line is 100% correct again mate. If you ignore Price then you must therefore ignore consumption too as you cant deduct the savings in consumption.

But electricity consumption isn't just about the price I pay for leccy, its the KW hours that get recorded too.. I didn't want to mention this on UK420 as any time we talk about negatives within growing detection its called scare mongering. But I recently had a phone call from my new energy supplier at the new Gaff. They wanted to get me on a better tarrif, but a few mins into the cal the chap asked for meter readings. Once all said and done he did a calculation then started asking some "Odd" questions.

I have always played the game like I don't give a shit about getting caught, but anything I can help to avoid it I will.. Its scared me enough to know I need to drop my wattage. If LED's can offer the same yield for 400w less then I have to say to myself that i just cant put a price on even the slightest bit of extra security..

Then there is these newer smart meters. We have already had the letter about it from them.

As I say mate, the decision isn't a straight forward one. Once I am in full veg I am running 3 600w or 4 400w MH bulbs for 18 hours a day!!.. Its literally sending my leccy meter AWOL.

7 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@GreenVision

Whilst I don't agree entirely with the risk of using electric you make some very valid points that should be in the thread for anyone who DOES have those sort of concerns. But bare in mind if you're matching PPFD like you said you might save 400w~ of eletricity off the kWh but the leccy meter is still going to spin like crazy mate it's just the nature of the beast esp in big spaces. A watts a watt as they say and LEDs aren't that much more efficient than traditional and newer lighting! But any leccy off the meter in that respect is a good thing :v:

@@Devcal

Great to see plants under that pleasing full spectrum :B): I noticed that they started drinking a lot more under the ceramics/full spectrum too! On average in the height of flower I tend to have to change the 200L butt once every 4 days! Your set up is a great example of mixing lighting to get the best results!

Edited by Golden Syrup
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@GreenVision

Whilst I don't agree entirely with the risk of using electric you make some very valid points that should be in the thread for anyone who DOES have those sort of concerns. But bare in mind if you're matching PPFD like you said you might save 400w~ of eletricity off the kWh but the leccy meter is still going to spin like crazy mate it's just the nature of the beast esp in big spaces. A watts a watt as they say and LEDs aren't that much more efficient than traditional and newer lighting! But any leccy off the meter in that respect is a good thing :v:

I have to be honest and say its my main goal when I change my lighting. I want to achieve the same good yield with less watts running.. And with my hand on my heart I don't care what setup does it... lol..

I don't go in for great looking gear roll with the tide / wagon for the sake of it.. I'm the only one that ever sees my grows. But I know its possible to make my grow more effective where the watts are concerned. I struggle a little with the CMH I think because of the odd wattage numbers.. I see 315w and its rattles my feathers a little.. TBH I dont really know how to compare them in the grow area.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

@@Devcal

Great to see plants under that pleasing full spectrum :B): I noticed that they started drinking a lot more under the ceramics/full spectrum too! On average in the height of flower I tend to have to change the 200L butt once every 4 days! Your set up is a great example of mixing lighting to get the best results!

Cheers mate, once funds allow I will be swapping one of the sodiums for another Dimlux I think, and I'll probably stick a Maxi unit in the veg room rather than the MH's ;)

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

I have dabbled a little with HPS, LED and CMH. I have grown the majority of my ganja under HPS. No bigger than 600W. I have done a couple of grows under LED (around 600W draw). Maybe 5? Perhaps 6... I have done a single grow under CMH.

I can't comment at all on yield. I have a feeling the CMH once tuned in will out yield the other technologies, but that is just a feeling. I'm sure that better HPS systems than what I used might be able to beat it.

The one thing I am sure on though is effect. In the war with HPS and LED I always believed that HPS would out yield LED and to get anywhere close to the same yields with LED you would need to spend big. Now whether that is true or not to me was irrelevant. LED produced nicer tasting weed. Hands done. Maybe that is to do with heat as others have suggested to me, or maybe it is down to the different light spectrum. Whatever, it was certainly very noticeable in the end product. When I was running a HPS and LED flower tent at the same time, it was always the LED weed that I went for first.

Now after a single harvest under purely CMH I am amazed. The taste is there. As strong as LED weed. I can't yet work out if the taste is more defined or not. But the "hit" feels stronger. That then leads on to a much, much stronger high. In short, it feels like this weed is something different to what I have smoked before. I've just harvested 17 plants on the hunt for keepers and I've probably tried around half of them so far. Each and every one is smoking like a keeper. I haven't found a bad smoke in the lot yet!

Now that is just my experience and it's not very scientific. I haven't done any direct comparisons but to me I won't be looking toward any other light technologies for the near future. Have been holding back from going completely over to CMH but this week my veg cupboard will be changing over too :)

HPS = normal

LED = super tasty

CMH = super tasty and a hell of a hit

:v:

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

years ago I did a fair bit of research on this (forgotten most of it now) , anyhow , I came to the realization that that the best way to measure efficiency (not spectrums or anything) was a ratio between lumens and heat ... all light produces heat and the more lumens the more heat , heat is a by product for growers , so the light that produces more lumens for less heat is the most efficient .... unfortunately lights arent measured in this way so its purely academic

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post

@@SkyRider

Yep! The difference is huge between HPS V CMH/ Full spectrum cannabis, someone here mentioned it that HPS weed is "flat" which I think is a better word than bland, compared to full spectrum weed. The heat thing definitely plays a part as we know some terpenes evaporate over certain temps, but the full spectrum makes for some much tastier and more potent weed. I get bored smoking the same cut under sodium but not under full spectrum!

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Over a decade ago I used to frequent some North American sites.

One guy was proud of the fact that he had spent $25k testing bulbs but just what is the point of that? If we pick a standard, say 600w hps, which is the best lamp? Whatever the answer, there is a good chance that the answer is wrong next year. iow, the worst 600w hps lamp of today is probably better than the very best 600w hps from 18 months ago.

I know par and umols etc have their place but for comparing yesteryear with today, all we have is lumens. I remember a 400w hps being 40k lumens circa 2003. A few years ago a 400w hps was 55k lumens. Might well be more now.

Like many I love the new cmh. Won't surprise me if LEDs beat the shit out them in 10 years time...but not today punk...

Share this post


Link to post

@@lazi Lumens aren't a barometer of how good a lamp is for growing, they are used to measure what we see as brightness from a lightbulb.

Umol, micromoles or par is a measurement of light energy a plant can receive and use, the measurement of light photons for plant growth I'm sure isn't a new thing.

Between the very best and worst there is only a small percentage of performance difference for most hps, Lumateks 600w dual spec is 90 or so umol down from gavitas for example and both haven't developed or changed their bulbs since release.

Just as likely to have the same plus on negative impacts as the extra par from a lamp are light intensity throughout the growing cycle, environmental control, wall reflectivity, reflector performance, replacement or cleaning of reflective surfaces etc.

Edited by ~Sanctuary~
3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@Golden Syrup

Good thread this dude :yep:

Been reading up on some chaps' techniques elsewhere and it seems that the addition of the UVB is a huge factor in the quantity of trichomes, flavour wise though I don't know the relation but I'm thinking of sticking a couple of UVB lamps in (I've read about 10 to 15 % of total lighting for the UVB) after noticing after using standard Halide during my last run for the first time, that flavours were improved and more frostiness, but could be genetics too so need a few runs of different strains before judgement (I ran Halide until the stretch was done 7200K and then switched to sodium dual spec until the last couple of weeks when I switched back to the halide to finish off).

When I get around to it, I'll report in :yep:

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

@@botanics

Adding UVB lamps beyond adding lamps that have got high UV anyway (MH/CMH) it's beyond my experience! Please do let us know how you get on :) In theory you could apply as much UVB as some unique parts of the world that would add a proper truly trippy effect to the weed I imagine :smokin:

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now