Light ???

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
Except in my greenhouse, I don't use the light meter for specifics. I use it only as a point of reference.

Say you have an imaginary 4 quadrants for your garden's footprint. At the same height relative to the lights quadrant A is coming in at 2,500 f.c. Quadrant D is coming at 6,250 f.c. Plant #7 needs more light and is in Quadrant A. So.........you move it over to Quadrant D as a garden tweek.

Not understanding the Texas comment. As you know it's a big state and there must be a thousand different micro climates. My normal August weather at 4:00 p.m. is 35-37C and around 25% RH if we haven't had rain in a week or so.
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
Watt by itself means little, what's more relevant (besides spectrum...) is PPFD.
It is meaningless in the real world as it doesn't take into account NONE of the factors that go into what a plant actually receives. But you have to remember this is a pot forum and folks like to take the easy way out.

Too much light on a plant can cause saturation... which can happen if you supply too much light at once, or give it too many hours light.
That right there my friend is the ONLY relevant, meaningful issue - finding out the plant's light saturation point where too much is not only detrimental to plant health (bleaches out the chlorophyll etc.) but reduces photosynthesis.

If you got bucks to burn buy a chlorophyll density meter.

This guy's antics are definately worth watching. He uses a chlorophyll meter so you can see first hand how valuable that meter is.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCM9NFQyhED5EkAl7dWVsYfQ

That was some interesting info about the temps, CO2.
 
Last edited:

TheChemist77

Well-Known Member
Unless you have a unique setup with multiple bulbs or experiment with diy leds a light meter is a waste of money and the serious grower would imo be better of getting some pro advice. Any good light and hood manufacturer can give you a light recipe (based on professional meters) for your setup and tell you exactly how much ppfd per sqft / m2 a certain light with a given hood at a certain distance will result in.

2x600 or 1 kWatt, either would work very well in that space (I'd got for 1k).

The difference in efficiency between (quality) 600w HPS and 1000w isn't really large enough anymore to consider if you got a small space like that. The best light is largely dictated by the space.

Watt by itself means little, what's more relevant (besides spectrum...) is PPFD.

Too much light on a plant can cause saturation... which can happen if you supply too much light at once, or give it too many hours light.

The ideal PPFD (which is pretty much the spread, if you raise the bulb, you spread out the ppf decreasing the density) is figured out for all indoor grow species. Some plants don't give a fuck about the length of day, like roses (don't need dark hours at all and still don't get saturated and should get 20-24 hours light).


*************
Effect of different photosynthetic photon flux densities (0, 500, 1000, 1500 and 2000 μmol m−2s−1), temperatures (20, 25, 30, 35 and 40 °C) and CO2 concentrations (250, 350, 450, 550, 650 and 750 μmol mol−1) on gas and water vapour exchange characteristics of Cannabis sativa L. were studied to determine the suitable and efficient environmental conditions for its indoor mass cultivation for pharmaceutical uses. The rate of photosynthesis (PN) and water use efficiency (WUE) of Cannabis sativa increased with photosynthetic photon flux densities (PPFD) at the lower temperatures (20–25 °C). At 30 °C, PN and WUE increased only up to 1500 μmol m−2s−1 PPFD and decreased at higher light levels. The maximum rate of photosynthesis (PN max) was observed at 30 °C and under 1500 μmol m−2s−1 PPFD. The rate of transpiration (E) responded positively to increased PPFD and temperature up to the highest levels tested (2000 μmol m−2s−1 and 40 °C). Similar to E, leaf stomatal conductance (gs) also increased with PPFD irrespective of temperature. However, gs increased with temperature up to 30 °C only. Temperature above 30 °C had an adverse effect on gs in this species. Overall, high temperature and high PPFD showed an adverse effect on PN and WUE. A continuous decrease in intercellular CO2 concentration (Ci) and therefore, in the ratio of intercellular CO2 to ambient CO2 concentration (Ci/Ca) was observed with the increase in temperature and PPFD. However, the decrease was less pronounced at light intensities above 1500 μmol m−2s−1. In view of these results, temperature and light optima for photosynthesis was concluded to be at 25–30 °C and ∼1500 μmol m−2s−1 respectively. Furthermore, plants were also exposed to different concentrations of CO2 (250, 350, 450, 550, 650 and 750 μmol mol−1) under optimum PPFD and temperature conditions to assess their photosynthetic response. Rate of photosynthesis, WUE and Ci decreased by 50 %, 53 % and 10 % respectively, and Ci/Ca, E and gs increased by 25 %, 7 % and 3 % respectively when measurements were made at 250 μmol mol-1 as compared to ambient CO2 (350 μmol mol−1) level. Elevated CO2 concentration (750 μmol mol−1) suppressed E and gs ∼ 29% and 42% respectively, and stimulated PN, WUE and Ci by 50 %, 111 % and 115 % respectively as compared to ambient CO2 concentration. The study reveals that this species can be efficiently cultivated in the range of 25 to 30 °C and ∼1500 μmol m−2s−1 PPFD. Furthermore, higher PN, WUE and nearly constant Ci/Ca ratio under elevated CO2 concentrations in C. sativa, reflects its potential for better survival, growth and productivity in drier and CO2 rich environment.
**************

Those are the temps I recommend as a long as they are in between 25-30C I don't make an effort to change it.
The above is based on tests with a mexican variety.


I'm 99% sure that article @RM3 linked to earlier, the article http://www.gavita-holland.com/index.php/item/lumens-are-for-humans.html is written by that forum admin turned gavita employee 'whazzup'. For really good discussions - not conversations - about lighting (HPS) look up his posts at icmag (member since 2006...), thcfarmer and other forums.

********From that article*********
Roughly these are a few examples of recommendations for a high light recipe of around 700 µmol m-2 s-1. Calculations made with 10% reflector / wall losses:

400W a) - 1 x 1 m - 1 m2 at a ppfd of ~ 650 µmol m-2 s-1
600W b) - 1,2 x 1,2 m - 1,44 m2 at a ppfd of ~ 690 µmol m-2 s-1
1000W c) - 1,5 x 1,5 m - 2,25 m2 at a ppfd of ~800 µmol m-2 s-1
********

1000watt on 4x4' would roughly produce 1400 ppfd minus 10% reflection/wall loss is roughly 1250 left. Doable especially with good climate control. By using the same light on 5x5 or 4x6 you're likely to get more yield. Since the light pattern also won't be completely uniform, there will likely be peak areas that exceed the 1500ppfd in a small/minimal space.

I tried to find something about midday depression at WUR but the term doesn't translate literally to something useful. Considering the enormous amount of electricity spent in the greenhouse industry here, light schedules are extremely important and I expect to find some better info but found a bunch of papers about assimilation saturation, and comments how that with some species typically occurs at midday. Which turns out to be often a result of low humidity and high temps outdoors... (like in Texas?).


damn, thats alot to swollow!! but i think i get it, i have my room on a thermostat, the ambient room temp is 62f but at the top of the canopy it never gets above 74f.. if the room gets above 62, the intake and exaughsts kick on till room is at 60f, i have a thermometer at canopy under lights and it has never been above 74 except in the summer i change room temp to 72f then the canopy temp gets to 84f..having my room in a cool basement helps keep temps low even in summer..so 2 600's are best for my 4x6 area although you say i could even switch to a 1,000 watt hps insted..ive been told putting 3 400,s over or 2 600's is better than a thousand watt hps because lights can be placed closer to canopy..also i am using cool tube reflectors now, but im buying new reflectors w 6 inch intake and exaughst holes but taking out the glass for better light.. thanks for the info!!
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
As you know it's a big state and there must be a thousand different micro climates. My normal August weather at 4:00 p.m. is 35-37C and around 25% RH if we haven't had rain in a week or so.
Everything is big in Texas :) But no, honestly I didn't expect a thousand different micro climates but generally dry and hot (and googled quickly up front...) weather.

My point was simply that what Riddle perceives as midday depression could possibly be addressed by better climate control and may be something he experiences more because he happens to be in a dry and hot climate or setup (usually the former influences the latter unless it's sealed). My non-ventilated T8 setup gets dry and hot. Non ventilated also means no CO2 refreshing, and possibly a build up of oxygen. Guess, what, those are all possible reasons for assimilation saturation and stagnation (stomatas - we call them leaf mouths, closing). In short, I suspect steering the climate better is a better way to go than just giving up for half an hour a day.

That right there my friend is the ONLY relevant, meaningful issue - finding out the plant's light saturation point where too much is not only detrimental to plant health (bleaches out the chlorophyll etc.) but reduces photosynthesis.
"It is well known that a higher light intensity leads to higher photosynthesis rate. This starts out linear (1% more light = 1% more photosynthesis) but with higher intensities the added value of more light reduces (1% more light < 1% more photosynthesis), and with very high intensities light saturation occurs (1% more light= 0% more photosynthesis) and light stress occurs. [Which indeed ends up actually reducing photosynthesis]"

lightresponse.jpg

"lichtverzadiging" is saturation point. Yellow is wasted.

That's from one of many research docs that specifically tests light and co2 saturation for specific species, in this case Ficus.

If you got bucks to burn buy a chlorophyll density meter.

This guy's antics are definately worth watching. He uses a chlorophyll meter so you can see first hand how valuable that meter is in the link - testing Great White mycos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r4m7XR0NA9Y
https://www.youtube.com/user/BrightGreenThumb
I do actually and it's been on my wishlist for a while, got some digital money at amazon I need to burn, and I have seen them and maybe even mentioned it about a year ago. Not sure if those at amazon are any good. Will check out those videos first. I wanted it specifically for my hydro setup where I control the nutrients more but doing another round on soil first where the point is to do as little as possible.
 
Last edited:

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
It's actually possible to get better results using PPFD above 1500umol*m^2*s^2 indoors with taller plants assuming no side lighting. This is obviously because it will put lower leaves closer to 1500umol*m^2*s^2, of course you'll fry the tops a bit!

1500umol*m^2*s^2 of pure 660nm would likely burn a hole in the top of the plant before penetrating.

Also keep in mind that PPFD does not take into consideration that red photons have less energy than blue photons. It simply measures the photon flux density, not the PAR density. Granted, that might be moot point.. lol :joint::joint::joint: I read somewhere that blue photons actually damage the photosystems when absorbed, and are used more to signal the plant that it's under intense light.

 
Last edited:

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
A lot of lighting companies will hype up their lamps' PPFD or PAR density, but won't tell you it's at the cost of a significantly reduced footprint.

This is more of an LED thing. They will cram a ton of LEDs together, put a tight lens on it, then boast the highest PFFD of all lights, with a footprint that's too small to grow even one plant. (it's usually/always to cover up for the fact that their product is crap)

Total power output or total PPF (not PPFD) out is more important when considering a light source than PPFD or PAR density (intensity).

Putting a tight lens on a product concentrates the light, but does not produce any extra light.

Oldest trick in the new book.
 
Last edited:

Sativied

Well-Known Member
Reading that site I got the image from some more, might be interesting to mention, it's from energiek2020.nu

"Together with government, the ambition has been formulated that all greenhouses constructed after 2020 are to be near-independent of fossil fuel. Growing in these greenhouses will be sustainable and cost-effective. Moreover, the aim for these new greenhouses is to supply sustainable heat and electricity."
http://www.energiek2020.nu/fileadmin/user_upload/energiek2020/docs/Algemeen/Leaflet_Engels.pdf (english leaflet)

82% of the nearly 7,000,000,000kilowatt greenhouses use every year is used for light. To put that in perspective, that's enough to power New York for nearly 2 years. And to put that in perspective, New York is in square miles 10 times larger than the area covered by greenhouses here (so bright it's visible from space...).

Needless to say, lots of light steering/color/spectrum tuning research (link), phytochrome balance, mcree curves (no surprise greengenes mentioned those at riu) for specific species, a mix of botany and technology. And anything to reduce electricity cost of the lighting, including putting money in proper research. Just an example: tomato growing with 50% less electricity, budget $250K.

Or Light color research:
http://www.energiek2020.nu/fileadmin/user_upload/energiek2020/onderzoek/licht/docs/Lichtkleurenonderzoek-1.pdf
None of the research seems to be published in english unfortunately.... BUT, you can download, and upload to google translate and it will actually produce a surprisingly readable translation (without the images)

*******
4.2
Hypothesis missing link for increased production
The following general hypothesis underlying the research that will lead to
answering the research questions formulated in 3.4:
Exposure with a spectrum in which the photoreceptors sent into the plant in a more natural balance
to increase the production potential of high wire fruit vegetable relative
exposure to conventional grow lights.

With a 'natural balance' is a photoreceptor balance like a natural daylight spectrum
and designed with "conventional grow lights' SON-T [most common hps] lamps and combinations of red and blue
Referred to LEDs. The spectral composition of these types of lamp leads to a completely different
photoreceptor balance than the spectrum of light. The said types of lamp rays (virtually) no
wavelengths in the reddened area (700 to 780 nm; see Figure 4), so that the phytochrome balance
extreme is sent in the direction of active phytochrome (see Figure 3).

In addition, the light spectrum is a continuous spectrum, while SON-T and red / blue LEDs do not light
radiate in many parts of the PAR region (400-700nm). This leads to a different stimulation of the
different photoreceptors compared to daylight. The proportion of blue light (400 to 500 nm) within
PAR-area is also significantly lower: ± 4.8% at SON-T and often 5-15% in the combination LED
red / blue, as compared to ± 30% in daylight. As a result, with the said lamp types the
cryptochromes and fototropinen stimulated significantly less than with the same amount
micromoles of daylight
*******
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
If you got bucks to burn buy a chlorophyll density meter.

This guy's antics are definately worth watching. He uses a chlorophyll meter so you can see first hand how valuable that meter is.

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCM9NFQyhED5EkAl7dWVsYfQ

That was some interesting info about the temps, CO2.
Forgot to add the source, easy to google (ppfd cannabis sativa L. ) but for the sake of completeness and 1 more free page:
Photosynthetic response of Cannabis sativa L. to variations in photosynthetic photon flux densities, temperature and CO2 conditions
http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12298-008-0027-x

EDIT: full 8 pages:
https://docs.google.com/file/d/0ByW-RytTeYMQYmYzYjU2ZDctMGJiMC00ZTRiLWE4YzctMThjYmE0ZGRhYWE2/edit?pli=1

It's actually still a bit more expensive than I remembered but I was referring to this thing:
http://www.amazon.com/atLEAF-Digital-Chlorophyll-Meter-Software/dp/B008DG2B96/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1424635409&sr=8-1&keywords=chlorophyll meter
Not a whole lot of reviews...
 
Last edited:

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
"The said types of lamp rays (virtually) no
wavelengths in the reddened area (700 to 780 nm; see Figure 4), so that the phytochrome balance
extreme is sent in the direction of active phytochrome (see Figure 3)."
If you look carefully at the spectrum generated by HPS, the red to far-red ratio is about 2:1 which I think plays a large role in why it's been successful as a flowering lamp. Also, yellow-amber wavelengths cause the active state of phytochrome (Pfr) to be lower than red wavelengths as well, working sort of like far-red and contributing to shade avoidance effect.

80cri white led phosphors have a red:far-red ratio of around 6:1, but has a similar yellow-amber peak where most of the light is centered around.

A higher %Pfr (percent of phytochrome in active state) during the day effectively shortens night lengths by making it take longer for %Pfr to reach 0% (all phytochrome in inactive state). The highest %Pfr can theoretically go is ~85% with pure 660nm light, and the lowest it can go is ~0% with 730nm light. This is apparent by comparing the absorbance ratios of both forms at different wavelengths to see where %Pfr would converge at that wavelength. This is why phytochrome is easier related to dichromic color vision allowing plants to see a gradient.

In addition, the light spectrum is a continuous spectrum, while SON-T and red / blue LEDs do not light
radiate in many parts of the PAR region (400-700nm). This leads to a different stimulation of the
different photoreceptors compared to daylight. The proportion of blue light (400 to 500 nm) within
PAR-area is also significantly lower: ± 4.8% at SON-T and often 5-15% in the combination LED
red / blue, as compared to ± 30% in daylight. As a result, with the said lamp types the
cryptochromes and fototropinen stimulated significantly less than with the same amount
micromoles of daylight
*******
This is also interesting because the 3000k 80cri phosphors used in white leds also contains about 13% in the blue region.
 
Last edited:

churchhaze

Well-Known Member
Another very strange phenomenon to note about HPS lamps vs fluorescent and LEDs is when you turn HPS off, they continue to glow a dim red from being hot. This dim glow has a very low red:far-red ratio and actually contributes to lowering the active state of phytochrome after lights out. Realizing this, a lot of people have speculated that this could be another reason HPS is such a winner.
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
.ive been told putting 3 400,s over or 2 600's is better than a thousand watt hps because lights can be placed closer to canopy.
Placing the light closer to the canopy is not really a goal or benefit by itself.

Aim a classic flashlight with a cone shape beam at the wall, note the light circle. Back off a few feet, notice the circle increased in size but is less intense (because density decreases). In the same way raising a grow light decreases the ppfd, it decreases the light on a given surface. But, it also increase the surface that receives light. No need to hang it lower or higher than needed to get a somewhat uniform footprint in the space you got to work with.

Random example ripped from growershouse.com, hps bulb on 4x4', PAR readings:
footprintpar.jpg

In the first, at 24" height, you can see that that difference between the corners/edges and the center is larger than in the other two which provide a more uniform pattern. If you go too high you end up directing too much light towards the walls instead of the plants, if you go too low you concentrate the light in the center of the surface instead of spreading it out uniformly. That's why a light meter (or spending that money on a light setup from a reliable manufacturer who can provide reliable data) can be handy.

You need about 3ft for a 1kW but that differs per hood and not all 1000watters are good for 4x6. It's not uncommon to attach a gavita to the ceiling and let the plants grow towards it. The taller they get and the more they fill the canopy the more direct light and the higher the ppfd they receive. Not saying it's better than 2x600w, just that both options would work for that space.
 

UncleBuck

Well-Known Member
I'm giving a 30 minute midday break and now have my remote temp sensor just below the canopy. Also just picked up a used Sun Blaze T5HO-24 on craigslist yesterday to supplement the 250w HID. It has 4 6500k veg bulbs in it.

For flower I'm thinking
(2) 3000k generic bulbs
(1) ATI True Antic (approximately 420nm) or (1) ZoomMed Reptisun 10 UVB
(1) ATI Coral Plus (around 15000K+) or (1) ZooMed OceanSun 10000k 420 Daylight

Any comments/suggestions from people that have been members of RIU for more than three months? Thanks :-)
you know that midday depression is crap, right? it's triggered by high temps, so does not apply to climate controlled indoor grows.

it's spam from idiots who think they understand science.
 

bellcore

Well-Known Member
I want reading into the science too much. A break during the day to allow heat to dissipate is the reason I jumped to accept it.
 

Bamabudy

New Member
I have been trying the 24/7 light cycle growing my mother plant she is very healthy and looking great using 400 w MH and 4 100 w equivalent LEDs. Will it hurt are shock my plant at all if I change to 18/6 to keep in veg while I clone off of her?
She is a Dutch passion Orange bud chose because of easy to grow and this will be my first go at cloning. ( any advice about cloning wil be appreciated also.☁☔⛅
Happy growing.
 

TheChemist77

Well-Known Member
right now i have 2 cool tube reflectors, would i be better off getting new reflectors w the 6 inch duct hookups but take out the glass?
 

Uncle Ben

Well-Known Member
Sativied, great stuff there. The YouTube videos are indeed worth watching just to see how that meter registers relative to his experiments.

Having said that, with all the challenges and inputs required in the Netherlands why not move your ops to an area around say, 35* latitude, grow outdoors or in a greenhouse depending on the crop and ship it back? Aren't the greenhouse grown tomatoes you're buying just a "tad" bit expensive?

I grow alot of my own food and it's damn cheap & delicious. Have to admit that the first avocado cost $30,000 but I'm getting a helluva load of excellent citrus, maters, herbs and soon gourmet avocados, mango, and pineapples from the greenhouse. We cook (and can/pickle) a lot so 10 varieties of fresh herbs and all kinds of veggies sure comes in handy. Do YOUR part for Affordable Healthcare.....reject charlatans like Obama.

Garden.jpg
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
Having said that, with all the challenges and inputs required in the Netherlands why not move your ops to an area around say, 35* latitude, grow outdoors or in a greenhouse depending on the crop and ship it back?
Pre-hydroponics I would have said "the soil". Turns out turning sea into land results in great fertile soil (clay). It's not just grow ops, those are just part of the machine. Rotterdam, largest port in Europe, is also hard to take along yet it and its location itself is a vital part. Logistics is essential in a competitive market with fresh food. Some veggies are shipped to New York the same day they are harvested in NL.

Aren't the greenhouse grown tomatoes you're buying just a "tad" bit expensive?
I often literally said "vegetables and fruit costs nothing".

A quick search shows a kilo tomatoes results in as little as 0-15 cents for a greenhouse grower, as little as 'zero' cent sometimes. We could probably feed an entire country in Africa with the all the stuff we through away... It costs me roughly $1-$2 per kilo in a store, less if I go to the market (especially end of the day...). All year long.

upload_2015-2-23_19-8-51.png Every town or large neighborhood in every city "has market" once or twice a week. One street or square with lots of small stands with fresh fish, veggies, fruit, meat, chicken etc. Someone who would work 1 day per month at minimum wage can afford to buy food for a whole month.

I don't know how that compares to other countries, but logically they can't be very expensive because most are produced to compete.

"The Netherlands, the world's largest tomato exporter"
http://www.freshplaza.com/article/115594/The-Netherlands,-the-worlds-largest-tomato-exporter
"Although the Dutch tomato was once reviled, the Germans calling it a 'water bomb,' Dutch growers sought a solution to save their reputation. They came up with 'tomatoes on the vine,' explained Miranda van den Ende, manager of Tomato world. "This tomato was not picked when green, but ended up ripe in the shop.'"

I grow alot of my own food and it's damn cheap & delicious. Have to admit that the first avocado cost $30,000 but I'm getting a helluva load of excellent citrus, maters, herbs and soon gourmet avocados, mango, and pineapples from the greenhouse. We cook (and can/pickle) a lot so 10 varieties of fresh herbs and all kinds of veggies sure comes in handy.
Not many things I'd like more than to grow my own veggies. After seeing all those greenhouse veggies while googling I started looking for some space yesterday... Small houses here in cities, even smaller gardens. Something people have been doing for decades is grow veggies and herbs in so called 'people's gardens' (lost in translation).

Every piece is usually from a different owner.
upload_2015-2-23_19-39-30.png

Often near train rails too (railway co was once from government, owns land near stations as a buffer for growth, one of the few available areas)
upload_2015-2-23_19-41-2.png

I got several of such locations in my area, and a local supermarket is having a sale this week, plastic mini greenhouse for 50 bucks...
upload_2015-2-23_19-43-8.png
 

Sativied

Well-Known Member
After that hijack, some light info :D

Spectral Analysis of the Philips Elite Agro 315W
http://www.cycloptics.com/sites/default/files/USU_spectral_analysis.pdf

Check out the tables with characteristics of sun light vs various electrical light sources (HPS, CMH, HO T8 and T5 and CFL).

(tagging @GroErr, perhaps an interesting pdf for you too).

And on a similar note, that 400w HPI-T Plus I use (for a couple of weeks between T8 and HPS 600w) is not an HPS lamp... it's an MH. It works well for the short use I use it for and I can't say I mind I got that one, but it's definitely not what I asked for at the growshop.
 

GroErr

Well-Known Member
After that hijack, some light info :D

Spectral Analysis of the Philips Elite Agro 315W
http://www.cycloptics.com/sites/default/files/USU_spectral_analysis.pdf

Check out the tables with characteristics of sun light vs various electrical light sources (HPS, CMH, HO T8 and T5 and CFL).

(tagging @GroErr, perhaps an interesting pdf for you too).

And on a similar note, that 400w HPI-T Plus I use (for a couple of weeks between T8 and HPS 600w) is not an HPS lamp... it's an MH. It works well for the short use I use it for and I can't say I mind I got that one, but it's definitely not what I asked for at the growshop.
Hey Sativied, thanks, hadn't seen this one. The Elite Agro spectral charts are what originally got me interested in these bulbs, amazing coverage in the whole range we need for MJ.

Interesting they never mention which bulb, I run the 3100k but the 4200k could be the one they're referring to as their chart looks closer to it. I may try the 4200k bulbs at some point, I don't need it for vegging but if you were vegging/flowering under the same light and wanted to run a single bulb, I think the 4200k would be the one to use.
 
Top