techniques for HUGE yields

Vertical has it's merits, where yOur previously reflected light is now directly cast. This is mOre efficient, but I'm not certain it's more productive per lumen than sog or scrog, which are less efficient w/ reflectors, but more lumens per square inch if the lamps are the same. This is because you get the direct cast light, plus the less powerful reflected light.

Vertical does not get this same intensity as it is cast only once, you don't get the other side of the lamp reflected onto a specific point. Apples and oranges.

SOG- best yield with no plant limit, especially over time
ScrOg, Fim lst- best yield with limited plants
Vertical/tube: most efficient use of light (no relectors).

All is my oppinion and subject to Callin BS. Ha

Originally Posted by JayBio420

Vertical has it's merits, where yOur previously reflected light is now directly cast. This is mOre efficient, but I'm not certain it's more productive per lumen than sog or scrog, which are less efficient w/ reflectors, but more lumens per square inch if the lamps are the same. This is because you get the direct cast light, plus the less powerful reflected light.

Vertical does not get this same intensity as it is cast only once, you don't get the other side of the lamp reflected onto a specific point. Apples and oranges.

SOG- best yield with no plant limit, especially over time
ScrOg, Fim lst- best yield with limited plants
Vertical/tube: most efficient use of light (no relectors).

All is my oppinion and subject to Callin BS. Ha

J,
check out my light setup, I appreciate your opinion. . . I have a Sour Bubble and Tahoe Og vegging 2 months, pinched/fimed Tahoe and still about 3 1/2 ft and a BUSH. I was going to just put it in and see if it can reach the 78" top to my tent. If so, will bend, lol. . . IMO, the largest yields come from the longest veg periods. Thanks, GL to all.

Just run coco with a drain to waist with 4 sativas in a scrog. go with 10 gal pots water 2 times a week under 1k lights with only 1 strain more than one strain require u decide a middle ground for nute efficiency since each strain takes a different liking to certain levels of eitehr a calmag, base,or whatever running too many dif strains makes output less than maximized.
Running perpetual means u hav perpetual pests and problems which means perpetual $ wasted on preventative and corrective measures neither of which are cheap. if you hav 6k worth of lights ur not gonna have a ton of time to cultivate and pamper a ton of plants which unless you want this to be your only job might end up being the case if you run a perpetual. Just speaking from experience. That shit only works if you're trying to do commercial scale and those guys dont get on here and talk about how to run a clean one. (well the ones that dont get caught "legal or not") as for co2 thts not worth it unless u have a completely sealedass room which i still wouldnt do in my house nooooo fuckin way. Tried it never saw a dif worth the $ and hastle of getting refills which is awkward as well going and getting tanks filled at always the least convient times. Unless you have a completely computer monitored room CO2 is a luxury item id cross off the list until you get a steady output established. Just get a bigger intake fan and pull more air exhanges in and out of the room should do a base equivalent.

Hope tht helps and doesnt come under too much sctiny from all the "experts" out there we're all here to learn and help eachother keep it friendly everyone

DWC is the only technique you will need for huge yields.

for yields a vertical stadium or colisseum grow is the most efficient i have seen to date. no one can pull close to 2gpw with a horizontal bulb (more like 1.5gpw MAX). with a vertical colisseum i have seen people pull 2.5gpw. you are using more than triple the footprint as a horizontal bulb when you hang the bulb vertically and surround it with plants.

Originally Posted by ScoobyDoobyDoo

for yields a vertical stadium or colisseum grow is the most efficient i have seen to date. no one can pull close to 2gpw with a horizontal bulb (more like 1.5gpw MAX). with a vertical colisseum i have seen people pull 2.5gpw. you are using more than triple the footprint as a horizontal bulb when you hang the bulb vertically and surround it with plants.

And like I and the other guy tried to explain, no one ever does the math on this. The Horizontal has at least TWICE the lumens in that smaller area.

Here is a simple scenario involving inverse square law.
Same light bulb. Same distance from plant. Lets say 100,000 lumens measured at 12" from the bulb with no reflector and the plants are 12" from the light.Also allow for light to fully penetrate and ignore vegetation in both scenarios.

Vertical - closest part of plant gets full 100,000 lumens, 1 ft deep into the width of the plant gets 25,000 lumens, 2 ft deep into the width of the plant gets 6,000 lumens
Horizontal + reflector that is just flat. So the tip of the plant is getting ~180,000 lumens with the best reflectivity hood. 1 ft down gets 45,000 lumens 2ft down gets 12,000 lumens

Notice how having even a flat reflector doubles the penetration? Most reflectors are more closer to 120 degrees so you get even better penetration.

And that's the trade-off.

Less lumens over more area, or more lumens in a smaller area.

You could argue the reflector causes a loss in lumens, but planting verticly leaves more 'holes' at the top of the plants for light to just pass through to the wall as well. SOG/SCRog is fairly efficient in canopy space and not letting light pass through to the floor. And yes I have seen vertical SOG/SCrog done to maximize this.

Think about leaf orientation as well. The leaf can roll a little bit to become more perpendicular with the light, but horizontaly it can be mostly perpendicular to have the most surface area possible exposed when the light is above and use that energy for other things.

There are too many variables between growers to say that their light orientation is the reason they yield more.

Originally Posted by Opm

And like I and the other guy tried to explain, no one ever does the math on this. The Horizontal has at least TWICE the lumens in that smaller area.

Here is a simple scenario involving inverse square law.
Same light bulb. Same distance from plant. Lets say 100,000 lumens measured at 12" from the bulb with no reflector and the plants are 12" from the light.Also allow for light to fully penetrate and ignore vegetation in both scenarios.

Vertical - closest part of plant gets full 100,000 lumens, 1 ft deep into the width of the plant gets 25,000 lumens, 2 ft deep into the width of the plant gets 6,000 lumens
Horizontal + reflector that is just flat. So the tip of the plant is getting ~180,000 lumens with the best reflectivity hood. 1 ft down gets 45,000 lumens 2ft down gets 12,000 lumens

Notice how having even a flat reflector doubles the penetration? Most reflectors are more closer to 120 degrees so you get even better penetration.

And that's the trade-off.

Less lumens over more area, or more lumens in a smaller area.

You could argue the reflector causes a loss in lumens, but planting verticly leaves more 'holes' at the top of the plants for light to just pass through to the wall as well. SOG/SCRog is fairly efficient in canopy space and not letting light pass through to the floor. And yes I have seen vertical SOG/SCrog done to maximize this.

Think about leaf orientation as well. The leaf can roll a little bit to become more perpendicular with the light, but horizontaly it can be mostly perpendicular to have the most surface area possible exposed when the light is above and use that energy for other things.

There are too many variables between growers to say that their light orientation is the reason they yield more.

look, first off...you're argument doesn't mean anything. i'm not trying to be a dick here but you are talking up and down about "lumens." please go and google the definition of a lumen. it is the measurement of light visible to the human eye. it means ABSOLUTELY nothing when it comes to growing plants. the lighting variables and measurements you should be concerned with are PAR value, footcandles (fc), and spectrum. the only reason lumens are even reported on these bulbs is because before they were used for growing that was the manner in which they needed to be measured; what was visible to the HUMAN eye.

your example; although useful in some other scenario possibly; means absolutely nothing in the growing of plants. i would much rather have direct light coming from the bulb than light that is traveling 4-10" and then reflecting off an aluminum surface. anyone knows that.

that being said...try and think of it as simple as possible. we'll use a 1000w light as our example. most of us keep 1000w bulbs 18" from the tops of our plants. so, in a horizontal lighting setup i am going to be generous and say you get a footprint of 5x5 out of a 1000w bulb. this means that all canopy within that 25sq.ft. is receiving at least 5,000fc. in a vertical colisseum setup your canopy would be 18" from the bulb all the way around. so the diameter of your grow would be 36" (18" x 2). to get the circumference you multiply that by 3.14 and you get 113.5" which is roughly 9'6". now, multiply that 9'6" by 5' of vertical canopy (floor to ceiling) and you get your plant footprint of 47.5sq.ft. so...would you rather have 25sq.ft to grow in or 47sq.ft.?

if that still doesn't make any sense to you then find me a SINGLE grow on this or any forum in which a person is yielding more than 1.5gpw with a horizontal lighting setup. there are 3 journals on this forum alone that i know of people yielding 2-2.5gpw with a vertical colisseum setup. proof is in the pudding. NO ONE get's those yields with a horizontal light. the best (of which neither you nor I am) have tried and have never come close. there's a reason for that.

So light density has little to do with production?

That is what you are claiming with that scenario.

Why do you get popcorn buds at the bottom of the plant?

That is what I am trying to point out.