Think you missed that he was talking to CCCmints. Fry on, brother!Agreed but I am just a simple man on a limited budget
Now I am lost, and not sure what you mean, because I did run the test in the same tent, same meter, clearly I have missed something here, or I am just fried and have missed something here
The problem with that is, the value doesn't take into account how well the light spreads over a given space.
Your comparison is worthless. Post a picture of your test, I'll post mine, and then we can talk about why there is an important difference in having 16 points vs 49 points. I tested 1000w HPS properly, you did not. My data should be fine for HLG since they've provided it. Unless you're saying your quantum boards are performing better than they're advertised, then I'll assume their data is accurate.Yeah, and the other difference is that I actually compared an HLG to an HID, where is your direct comparison?
Clearly, you missed the bit about the test being relative, as in I compared the HLG directly against HID, what about you?16 points is more than enough to see how the light is spreading, I find it seriously funny, that there you are, over there sitting on your high horse when your methodology is flawed.
But best of all, you killed it with your uniformity blag
At this point, I realize you are one of those shit talkers who is always right even when are wrong, and instead of just admitting it, you come up with some next level BS in order to keep your ego intact.
On that note, I can see you really do not have a clue or anything useful to offer the community, so I am going to jog on, and leave you and your funny graphs to it
.
Ok cool just checking it's annoying how many tent companies oversize their tentsI meant a 4-foot x 4-foot (120cm x 120cm) tent
Its not an obvious point. Quantum board's light uniformity is trash, especially in comparison to my fixture. Go ahead and plop HLG's data into a graph generator and see for yourself. If it makes you feel better to believe my data is fake, that's fine with me. But if you assume its real, and compare it to your HLG-550 graph, you'll see the obvious difference.
To be fair, you're avoiding frigginwizard's main point entirely - that you are comparing an "off the shelf" light to your custom designed COB setup. *Obviously* yours is going to be better - just like it would be better than a PLC-6. I agree that the uniformity of the HLG-550 is not very good - but that's not a flaw of Quantum Boards in general - its a flaw of the HLG-550's layout. If you were to take 4 QB-288 boards, put them on separate heatsinks and put them in the corners of a 36-40 inch square frame so each board is centered in a quadrant (of a 4x4 tent), the uniformity issue is greatly improved.
I will concede to that point. Its not fair to speak as if quantum boards in general are the same as the HLG-550. More boards in a better configuration should provide great results. I'd like to see how a 6 quantum board design performs. From my tests, I've concluded that the LED:HPS ratio is optimal at 750:1000, so 6 quantum boards would be interesting. I might look into putting one together and post the data here for everyone.
I look forward to seeing your results.
So what was your last yield on a 1000 watt hps?
about a pound
So with a ballast that pulls like 1100 watts, yeah?
I’d hope so.
meh, still decent weight, pretty sure it should cover his growing expenses, even with prices dropping so low
That is correct, as that is basically the difference in photon output.
no, it is, you're just intentionally playing stupid because you know I'm right.
or more boards, it isnt like his custom COB rig is only 6 COBS like the PLC-6. Hes just pretending not to get my point, because then he has to admit that maybe his new light isn't quite the modern marvel he thinks it is, but is in fact a minor step backwards in efficiency.
