Epistar/BridgeLux/noname: A red LED Under The Microscope - Real and Electronically

Originally Posted by Gastanker

No need to use a reference as that's just a feature to compare any two spectrum - simply overlays the two when calculating intensity.
Warm White:

Ok. That's why nothing happen when I adjusted it wildly out of range.

It looks like most of your charts have saturation on all three channels, and I don't know if your lamps have a covering glass or without
but i think there should be spectral lines visible from CFL or maybe the lights are still to unfocused and using a webcam in black box with a slit the best option for seeing the lines.




I manged to make a nice chart of my 120W grow light, and since you have upped the standard with naming the title, I will up it one more, by using a very advanced 'gradient background' and disabling legends.


Edit:and the spectra shot.

Bravo, one upped for sure

I tried the black box method and it didn't work at all for me for some reason - seems like the DVD had to be directly against the lens to diffract the light for some reason. No glass on my LEDs but I did fail over and over again to snap a decent pic of CFLs. I'll have to dig up my box of optics and find a legitimate prism for the dark box method. And I assume it doesn't matter but I was using a standard digital camera and not a phone.

Originally Posted by Gastanker

Bravo, one upped for sure

I tried the black box method and it didn't work at all for me for some reason - seems like the DVD had to be directly against the lens to diffract the light for some reason. No glass on my LEDs but I did fail over and over again to snap a decent pic of CFLs. I'll have to dig up my box of optics and find a legitimate prism for the dark box method. And I assume it doesn't matter but I was using a standard digital camera and not a phone.

Thanks and a little more up !

I'm thinking about the reference image use, say you take a spectral picture of the light coming from a white paper next to a green leaf,
and another spectral picture of the green leaf, then in the program you use absorbency, the program will use the reference image to calculate
what is coming back, and deduct what's missing and show a chart, what is not reflected or absorbed is passing though and can be measured and used with transmittance I think.

When using absorbency & transmittance the program react to movement to two points on the ref. image, so this must be the use.

wait a minute, - back from taking pictures of color lighter on a white box and see if it works.

Looks like it did. But using a full spectrum light to the experiment would have been better to illustrate the difference, but it's clearly visible on the two images chosen.

The 4 colorful models.


A screenshot of the spectrogram, ref + purple lighter.

This thread has inspired me to do some... science! I had forgotten about spectrometers, the last time I used one was in school, and now I plan to use this technology in this great state to do amazing research ( Colorado whoooo!). Some friends are growing my genetics outside,and I have the same genetics inside. I plan on doing a spectral analysis of both plants, and plan on comparing intensity, and it's changes, at multiple distances throughout the canopy, and multiple times through out the plants life. It looks as though my SDTWxGDP will be the clear favorite for analysis as it has the most vigor, and stunning amounts of color. The plants will undergo the same training and will have spectral intensity measured from the ground up.

This is important to me, as it will let me compare the light a seedling gets at 6" from the ground versus 3' up. Spectral absorbancy will be studied, at the end of the study I will modify my lights and timers to create a "hybrid system" that will loosely replicate the sun cycle through out the day. This is a far cry from full spectral control, but I feel it is the next eventual step for someone looking to enhance the abilities of an indoor system, or at least produce fruit strikingly similar to outdoor produce, but without any hair, bugs, or leaves in it.

+Rep to Rasser please!

Sincerely,
ILove

Tanks. Very interesting and It's good to hear from someone who can use it for something practical and understand what the hell I was talking about, since I barely did.
Please post some pictures when you get it working.

How about this - Strip pigments from the leaf with a solvent. Test absorption of solvent. This is essentially how they map spectral absorption in plants in labs - they just do a much better job separating the different chlorophylls, caratenoids, and tertiary pigments. And of course they have nicer spectral equipment. Would be nice to have a cannabis specific spectral chart.

That sounds like a very very good idea for a hobby project to do on those big leafs that's garbage anyway.

Place a transparent plastic beaker-petri dish on a white light board illuminated by incandescent light and a webcam looking down through.
take two shots, one of the clear solvent and one of the chlorophyll filled solvent and compare. Sounds like a good project for students of all ages.

I remember something about the solvent being water or fat solvable,
so in this case where we do what the chlorophyll, butane and IsoAlcohol
is maybe not the best choice, but what is, water or a mix of water and alcohol. ?

Chlorophyll is soluble in ISO. In this paper they use chloroform and n-propanol - http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.230...47699101445277

Here they used acetone and methanol - http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/1...83917908060061

Hmmm, I think I have a bit of acetone laying around...