LED vs. HID Double Ended Bulb

[Sativied]

Ah, you from Netherlands? Lol now everything makes sense. Hahahahahaaha

Such immaturity and resorting to ad hominem out of a lack of actual arguments... and you call me "son", and you judge my credibility. How's school vacation so far sf....

Yall hopped up on all those hydro chem ferts. Haha jk (kinda)

Not kidding, just talking out of your ass. First, I don't grow dutch style in any way, on the contrary, you leaf plucking flushing yellow harvest believers would fit in much better. Second, plenty of organic growers here too. Sannie for example, quite popular breeder amongst some growers here on RIU, owns the largest grow forum and his "Sannie's [organic] Way" has its own following.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_nature

+

Go meddle with genetics and chemical ferts to improve everything. Hopefully you don't destroy everything in the process.

=
Case in point.

Plants take up ions regardless of whether you use organic or salts. It does not matter to the plant. It matters to ignorant growers. That's the irony of organic growers, they think they are closer to nature but don't understand the circle of life...

 

[genuity]

yea GG grow was damn good,only thing i seen that "i" would of done diff,is the light distance on the hps side(24" off tops of plants).."I" myself run my 1000 @18 the whole grow cycle(but you have to make sure to keep it cool)which i know he did talk about....and with that,i think the hps side would have had much more mass(bud)......

 

[Sativied]

@skunkd0c: I think it was I who wasn't clear because we're saying the same thing, I meant on the contrary of heat being a problem not on the contrary of what you posted. As indeed, I would have to use electric or gas heating 6-8 out of 12 months, which is more costly than the part of the HPS spectrum LED growers consider useless.

i agree his grow was not exactly upto scientific standards lol but it was a good grow i would not read too much into it

It's a good comparison for his purposes, not a good comparison of LED vs HPS for me as I simply see no good valid reason to change to LED based on that side by side while that is the implied outcome. If you do a side by side with such varying canopies rather than a sog as I described above you already get a difference every time. That's just being realistic and not reading more into the results than one should. The fact 1+gpw hps grows are far from uncommon makes any claim based on comparing LED to subpar HPS results invalid when it comes to gpw claims.

 

[skunkd0c]

@skunkd0c: I think it was I who wasn't clear because we're saying the same thing, I meant on the contrary of heat being a problem not on the contrary of what you posted. As indeed, I would have to use electric or gas heating 6-8 out of 12 months, which is more costly than the part of the HPS spectrum LED growers consider useless.

It's a good comparison for his purposes, not a good comparison of LED vs HPS

yeh thanks for clearing that up lol i didn't think Holland was much hotter than the uk
hps really do heat the canopy/plants better
than electric radiators heating the room/air


yep that is a fair statement he would have to do a much larger test and repeat it over time and produce consistent results for it to be a real comparison between the two types of light
i would like to see one system or two used not lots of individual pots and fewer clones
maybe a screen of just a few clones grown hydroponically in the same system
1 res per section or the same res could feed all the plants
this would not be perfect but give less variation between clone feeding and watering wise than lots of soil pots
some clones just end up a little better than others when they get a better start rooting wise etc

i would not rush out and buy a led and this is mainly because hps works for me
i do not believe that hps are better anymore, i used to think this and it was correct
leds have come a long way they are in some cases comparable from what i have seen

if i were having problems with hps then led would look like a more attractive alternative or "saving grace"
i do not buy into the belief that led bud is superior so there is no real justification for me buying an led
unless it is just out of curiosity and grows like the apache v hps do make me a little more curious its all good stuff, but still too expensive lol

 

[skunkd0c]

organic + LED toys for bros who like to be part of something...

this is something i have noticed too, when organics meets led its murder !
reminds me of the intro of the tv show heart to heart

two elite cultures combine to form a super culture

 

[Sativied]

yeh thanks for clearing that up lol i didn't think Holland was much hotter than the uk
hps really do heat the canopy/plants better
than electric radiators heating the room/air

Pretty similar weather as far as I know. Lots of gray skies. Professional greenhouses here have a similar dilemma. In their case it's about millions, not a couple of hundred bucks of electricity. Gas is expensive and typically requires the entire space to be heated, while the HPS+reflector directs most of it's heats towards the canopy. It puts, in practice, a big dent in the efficiency claim of LED sellers who often claim reduced HVAC costs as an advantage of LED.

some clones just end up a little better than others when they get a better start rooting wise etc

Advantage of a SoG with like 25 plants and little to no veg is that you can remove some and keep only those that are similar on both sides and have a pretty fair comparison that can be repeated by other growers.

and grows like the apache v hps do make me a little more curious its all good stuff

It's definitely at a point that it's starting to become interesting to keep any eye out on LED grows. I used to look once every 2 year or so, now every couple of months. If there's a significant reduction in watts pulled, I wouldn't even mind the investment that much because home growing saves me a lot of money and stealth is a major factor.

i do not buy into the belief that led bud is superior so there is no real justification for me buying an led

Same, at most I think it may be easier for some people in some situations to grow high quality bud under LED than it is for them in those situation to do with HPS. As with many of those typical beliefs, there's often some truth in it. It's not their perception of LED grow I disagree with, it's their conclusion about HPS.

 

[Sativied]

I just realized I should be thankful for LED growers nonetheless. Someone's got to do the dirty work right, and since organic growers are used to that, here it is:

 

[skunkd0c]

i am grateful for all the testing its gone past the alpha stage now to beta stage
pre-release on the horizon

perhaps in a few years leds will be narrowed down to one or two lights/configurations (i hope)
far too many opinions and options for my liking

at the moment there is still a fair amount of argument over which type of led works better
reds and blues vs whites, beam angle, reflector or lenses cobs etc
the list of things these guys argue about is a long one
its still an over-complex mess of enthusiastic opinion
this kind of environment supports the mentality of "my configuration/spectrum is better than yours"
and it helps sell lots of different lights

i find this annoying i will wait for more testing before i invest too much money in led

 

[Greengenes707]

First ...thank you to all who complemented or even slightly gave the thumbs up...I know that took a lot from some of you to do .
I never claimed to be the best by any means. Just that this is what I do. And the LED works roughly the same. 20g's was much closer than I thought it would have been. I have gotten a little over .75g/w with hps in the past, but usually around 600-700g was my usual from 1K's. I am not a new grower starting off with led, or a grower that has any real need to use them. Hps was great...but led's are better at growing quality and do save money over time. But honestly not really my concern...they produce well more than they are worth in the first run...then over and over again for a long time. I don't need just energy to be the re coupe of the upfront cost...less than half the harvest can cover the light. Still leaving a good potions for what ever...and you better growers will have more to work with than I basing this off. I have normal job that supports me and my family. Then my gardens has been "self sustaining" it's self for quite a while. I'm not an outlaw trying to make a buck. I am tying to grow the best medicine I can and help a few people along the way. I am here to learn and hear what others do, use, and how it works...Not put anything down. But if you ask me a question I will give my experienced-opinion. My led talk is mostly based on actual use in my garden. A big reason it got into the garden in the first place was theory...it stays around because of it's performance. And then I share for others to learn from...or apparently judge like a dog show.

I believed in led's more than anything when I made the switch. And the switch wasn't great. It started out real good, but then didn't work on the bigger scale like it had in my first runs. But I kept in it...did a lot of research and shit on my own to figure out what was actually required by the plants and then also what each light source did...when you look at the numbers it all came down to the amount of photons that the hps was emitting comparatively....and all over the canopy. As we all know now, led's could hit intense levels dead center and dick high off the canopy...but they couldn't come close to the intensity that the hps was putting out on the outer edges of the canopy....that's where the real difference happened, and led's just weren't doing it using the suggested wattages and narrow designs by companies. Watt for watt, they have been hanging in for a while...but that's just silly expensive with no savings over time...so there has always been the need to push the savings on wattage use, and thus performance suffered.
With all that said...the new led I have and now these DIY's are not only able to hit the plants requirement in the center anymore...but now the whole canopy just like hps does. I was guinea pig of sorts for a while. Some have been guinea'ing much longer than I. But I am confident to say that there are a few options out at this very second that can compete/replace hps. And from now on with those options, it will only get better and hopefully cheaper. While current the lower performing companies eventually get to the point the bests are now...then hps soon be making an exit.

That is all just the amount of light I was talking about...photon for photon...as if color wavelengths doesn't matter. But there is the fact that color does matter. Each wavelength(nm) has a certain % of efficiency of photosynthesis and led's are hitting those and the rest of the spectrum better than hps. CMH hat the best full spectrum, but white led's are filling a lot of it on their own...and the parts they are hitting are the most important AREA's of the spectrum, not just one nm. I don't support blue and red mono chromatics...they can grow, but I do not think they are the better solution to hps as I do white and white/red led's.

My rant is over and I will be in the my garden enjoying some dream

EDIT:
My hps was 16" from the closest bud. Averaged around 18". Started off at 20-24" when I went from veg lights to pre flower. Dropped it down throughout the stretch. Led was about 20". It was all documented in the thread and updates.
Considering a hps bulbs off set from the glass, they were actaually probably dead even source to source. But my point is the hps was ran to its fullest of my capabilities. Nothing held back. I can do better and this run with some dialing in from the last. But I am proud of the last run as it was regardless. You guys are just better growers than me.

 

[SupraSPL]

your a fraud...Organics under LED says it all and someday you'll understand the irony of that combination.

LMAO, right back at you someday you'll understand the irony. I posted my results honestly and objectively. I get more out of my space with LED and the bud quality is significantly improved. I stand by that and if we were in person Id love to compare buds. You choose to ignore the difference in efficiency. 36% vs 45% means the LED is creating 25% more photons.

That's the irony of organic growers, they think they are closer to nature but don't understand the circle of life...

The "circle of life" is the trillions of organisms in organic soil. They have been through through billions of years of evolution. I would rather trust that and let it express itself in the bud than trust chem fert science. If I killed all of your gut bacteria and fed you through a tube, would that be an improvement or would you rather be 'closer to nature' and digest it for yourself?

my point is the hps was ran to its fullest of my capabilities. Nothing held back. I can do better and this run with some dialing in from the last. But I am proud of the last run as it was regardless. You guys are just better growers than me.

Thank you GG for your side by side, very objective approach and an awesome grow on both sides IMO.

Sorry I keep feeding the troll guys I cannot resist because he does seem intelligent just misled.

 

[HottyToddy]

This is a simple question. What happened to this thread ?

Thanks @medicinehuman
Had no clue it would turn into this. It's so simple to me now that I've been enlightened on photons with LED. I'm going to do a side by side this run so I'll post the updates in my grow journal for all of RIU to see. Then, replace whichever one performed best on all sensory levels.

 

[HottyToddy]

I for one appreciate you taking the time to do this side x side, and document it for us all. I still use HID, but I see the merit in LED technology. I think the price point is what causes people to look at it with skepticism, and the apparent fact that no companies have rolled out a plug-n-play light that doesn't require a bunch of DIY upgrades. Once that happens, and once the price point comes down a bit more folks will be inclined to give it a shot.

I second this @st0wandgrow

I'm going to give it a shot, though with half my flower setup.

 

[HottyToddy]

5 x 9 space?

Is that what this thread was about..lol

I'd go cmh if DIY led was out of the question. I would never spend the amount of money it would take to cover that with apache or Area 51...the only 2 companies whose setups I like.

In other news..I'll put my guppy water fert program against any hydro/salt regime..

View attachment 3206116

What ferts you running @Positivity ?

 

[skunkd0c]

The "circle of life" is the trillions of organisms in organic soil. They have been through through billions of years of evolution. I would rather trust that and let it express itself in the bud than trust chem fert science.

this seems a bit contradictory to me can you explain please

you're trusting science and technology over nature using artificial light (led) rather than natural (sunlight)
you do not like trusting chem fert science and would rather trust nature with your feeding program (organics)

why is it ok to trust in science with plant lighting but not plant feeding ?

 

[Positivity]

Because it rains outside...and bugs...lotsa bugs....and nosy neighbors...and ummm...ummm....burglars...ya know how they like to leave a stump.

That's why indoor lights are okay

My only problem with hydro/chems is the runoff that gets dumped. Sure some may be able to control that but I bet most don't.

 

[Positivity]

What ferts you running @Positivity ?

Just anything organic. Whether it's a top dress, aerated compost teas, blumats running into guppy/lily ponds, bokashi top dresses...

I do use GO Biothrive and bloombastic in flower. Tried to get away from it but it still works best for me. Makes it easy to give the plants just the right amount of food with zero runoff...and reused soil. So I'm not bottle free...

Like most things a combination of methods are usually best

Makes nice nugs

 

[stardustsailor]

Mahlberg and Hemphill (1983) have shown the
importance of daylight in controlling Δ-9-THC and CBC levels. They found that red,
blue and green filters had differing effects on the two cannabinoids, suggesting that
the effect of light was being mediated via enzymes involved in their separate
biosynthetic pathways. Pate (1983) has suggested that enhanced production of Δ-9-THC
in regions of higher light intensity may indicate a protective role for the
compound against the harmful effects of UVB radiation.

http://www.sciencelib.net/files/Cannabis - The Genus Cannabis - D. Brown (Harwood, 1998) WW.pdf#page=63

Just leave the ignorants at peace ,to their ignorance...
Do not feed the Trolls.They fart badly afterwards.

Cheers.

 

[PetFlora]

i am grateful for all the testing its gone past the alpha stage now to beta stage
pre-release on the horizon

perhaps in a few years leds will be narrowed down to one or two lights/configurations (i hope)
far too many opinions and options for my liking

at the moment there is still a fair amount of argument over which type of led works better
reds and blues vs whites, beam angle, reflector or lenses cobs etc
the list of things these guys argue about is a long one
its still an over-complex mess of enthusiastic opinion
this kind of environment supports the mentality of "my configuration/spectrum is better than yours"
and it helps sell lots of different lights

i find this annoying i will wait for more testing before i invest too much money in led

Why that won't happen...

1. Some grow tall, some grow short (SCROGs and SOGs). That alone changes the need for penetration (lenses and lens angles). BML lights work best uner 6" above canopy. Most panels sold today need t be > 18" ABOVE. If not, they would bleach/burn the hell out of the plants

2. Sats use/need a lot more white (~ 4500) due to growing taller and longer than Indicas

MAYBE, someone will design panels with individual adjustable white and red spectrums (beyond flipping a switch to add red), but how will we know how much adjustment to make and when?

 

[SupraSPL]

this seems a bit contradictory to me can you explain please

you're trusting science and technology over nature using artificial light (led) rather than natural (sunlight)
you do not like trusting chem fert science and would rather trust nature with your feeding program (organics)

why is it ok to trust in science with plant lighting but not plant feeding ?

The way I see it indoor growing is mostly caused by prohibition and only sustainable while we have a cheap source of energy. A green house grow would be a much better compromise to grow medical marijuana.

 

[stardustsailor]

The way I see it indoor growing is mostly caused by prohibition and only sustainable while we have a cheap source of energy. A green house grow would be a much better compromise to grow medical marijuana.

(...)Differences Indoor/Outdoor Cannabinoid Levels
Results showed no differences in cannabinoid levels between Known Provenance seizures from indoor or outdoor grown crops, although there was much cross-over in distributions, and there was a trend towards higher THCtot values in indoor grown seizures(...)
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0070052

^^^^ LEDS came to change that fact ,considerably ...

Indoor Artificial Horticulture also offers :
-All year round cultivation.
- Almost any type of 'environment' can be replicated.
-Pest free ,Heavy metal free ,clean ,pure, of highest quality herb .

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Effect of Electrical Lighting Power and Irradiance on Indoor-Grown Cannabis Potency and Yield
Abstract:  The floral development and potencies [Δ9-tetrahydrocannabinol (THC) contents] of cannabis plants were compared when grown indoors under high-pressure sodium lamps consuming electrical power at three densities (270, 400, and 600 W/m2). After a 3-week vegetative phase, plants were grown for 8 weeks, with lamps maintaining an artificial day length of 12 h. Foliar and floral yields were measured. Gas chromatography was used to measure the content of the psychoactive cannabinoid THC. Mean yields per unit of electrical power in each lighting regime ranged from 0.9 to 1.6 g/W, the highest being achieved in the lowest irradiance regime. The individual potencies of the separated leaf and flower materials were not affected by increasing irradiance. However, there was a corresponding increase in the overall potency of the aerial plant tissue. This was because of the plants in brighter conditions producing a higher proportion of floral material.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1556-4029.2011.02024.x/abstract;jsessionid=464846E51A801283C99C7EC35EF8B7CB.f01t03?deniedAccessCustomisedMessage=&userIsAuthenticated=false


Once more :

Light Quantity (Irradiance) affects yields .( floral biomass produced)
Light Quality (Spectrum ) affects potency.

HPS has a shitty light quality for maintaining mj potent over successive generations .
LEDS can actually increase mj potency over just few successive generations ..


I can keep posting lots (And I mean LOTS ! ) of researches ...
Am I going to make stupid people ,become smart ?

No ....

So ...
Better leave them ,to float happily in their absence of knowledge and understanding ...
Leave them to grow and enjoy their herb ,the way they want ...



.... mine- and every led grower's - is bigger and better,anyway ....

I don't care for them ,their High Intensity Dildos or their crappy weed ...

I do not know a single person going HPS => LED=> HPS ...
On the contrary I'm only seeing HPS=>LED=>LED#2=>LED#3 ....
There has to be a reason for that ,eh ?
Once you try LED herb ,you just can't go back to the crap ...
And yes ...
Compared to LED herb ?
Everything else is crap..

C-R-A-P !

(.....and probably it suits the internals of some people's skulls .... ...)

Cheers.
Only two things are infinite, the universe and human stupidity, and I'm not sure about the former.
Albert Einstein