# HPS, MH, Floros, Phillips Cermamic Metal Halide has 'em all beat.



## ThatOneDude (Jan 9, 2008)

Greetings fellow weed growers and lovers! I'm new here but not new to other forums. I've seen a ton of noobs asking about lighting and all anyone has to say is HPS, MH, Floro or LED. Time to stir some shit up and help some of you out and get you out of the dark ages. 

LEDs won't be refined for a couple of years, I've seen grows fail, I tried them myself as supplemental lighting, and for clones. To say the least, I wasn't impressed. They need work, they may be the best thing out there at some point but for now, you're better off with floros in my opinion.

HPS lights are great for flowering and for you noobs out there, YES you can veg under them too! Every post about lighting here seems to tell people that you NEED MH for vegging and HPS for flowering, THEY ARE WRONG! I've had grows with just MH. While HPS is better for flowering, But there is something better then both of those bulb even if you pay the jacked up price for the "super duper specially enhanced king of all" version of either of those bulbs. 

Forget all of those OVERPRICED "enhanced" horticulture bulb for both MH and HPS. People get hung up on how many watts and how many Lumens without understanding what they are for. It's advertising, it's sales, it's all about exaggerating something and making it seem more important than what they can be used as. The news does the same thing every night, exaggerates the story to get viewers to increase sales. I'll let you know now, I'll put a 400 watt CMH bulb up against their 600 watt "enhanced bulb" and embarrass them all, as for a 400 watt enhanced bulb it doesn't even come close.

Take a look at the comparison on the light spectrum chart, it doesn't take a expert to see the difference.

All of that and check out the second picture....... yeah, that bulb is lit and being held. The bulbs run that much cooler then HPS and MH bulbs. No air cooling hood needed! most of the heat goes vertical on the bulbs. 

And check out the pics of the grows. As you see, they are different grows, the bulb is proven. 

These bulbs run about $50
They work on standard HPS ballasts of the same wattage
They run much cooler which put them closer to the plants and makes them much more effective.
They range in watts up to 400 watts. there is no 600 or 1000 watt out there right now but they are coming.
Not for digital ballasts, they require a hard strike to fire up.

There's endless advantages to these bulbs. 

Got Questions? Comments? Sarcasm? Hit me with it.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 9, 2008)

There are pics following a grow along from start to 4 weeks into flower in my gallery. *The pics of the grows are not my grows*, I grabber a verity of photos to show these bulb are alreay being used. One pic shows a CMH and HPS set up, the guy is doing a comparison, I'll let you know what he ends up with but you can see the color difference on each side of the trees.

I will post my grow soon. 6 DJ Short Grape Krush in a ebb & flow hydro set up in a cabinet under a 400 watt CMH.  
I have a few that are at 2 weeks from seed now, the undersides of the leaves are really purple! I'll put my grow up in it own thread, I'd like to keep this thread to lighting.


----------



## oldgrayhair (Jan 9, 2008)

I'm probably 4 months from going to CMH here as well. Huge thread over at IC, your info here, reading on the Phillips site, etc, have convinced me there isn't much to lose giving them a try.

I really want to know if you can actually grab the bulb...that is nuts...I can't even grab a 60 watt incandescent!

For us battling heat issues, these could be fantastic. Hope to still be around to share my results when the time comes. 

But I'll definitely be following your threads and grows to get more insight.

Peace - OGH


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 9, 2008)

hey man that is a great thread and some very interesting info. time to take another look at ALL the options....I wonder how readily available these might be, I'll have to check the local hangout....really, man this is good info. thanks so much for taking the initiative to bring this forward. cheers!


----------



## 2kstyle (Jan 9, 2008)

No digital ballast? really, not even the lumatek ballast?


----------



## TheOrangeJuicer (Jan 9, 2008)

definately going to keep track of this thread...


----------



## 2kstyle (Jan 9, 2008)

I found this on the bghydro.com forum:

Hi , thanks for the reply.
As you seem to know about ballasts, I do have some detailed questions/comments.

As far as i can see, the only benefit to using a "digital" ballast would be one of lumen maintenance. Ie the ballasts ability to get more out of the bulb as it ages
The improved efficiency is barely worth taking about and I don't believe that you really get higher lumen output per watt input. The manufacturers can claim all they want, but I've yet to really measure any appreciable difference in lumen output. 

Designing a EB for HPS is relatively simple, ( note that I said relatively and not just plain simple) in that it doesn't present the same resonance issues that your typical MH bulbs does. Due to the shape of the arc tube, HPS will only have a few narrow bands of acoustic resonance . It would generally be safe for say a 400 Watt to operate around 35kHz given it's arc tubes particular dimensions. MH on the other hand is a minefield between 20KHz to 100KHz with wide bandwidth acoustic resonances ( determined by it's arc tube dimensions ( being that most are a short ,fat, with nice curved/elliptical ends that make a lovely tuned cavity over a wide frequency range) so it requires a much more complex control system to ensure that the bulb isn't being driven in a "sweet" spot until it explodes. 
For MH EB's we are left with a few rules : 
1) We can use a low frequency square wave to side step the resonance issues ( ala GE ... say 150Hz) but this will negate any efficiency increases that may or may not be present by running above 20KHz
2) we can operate between 20 - 100KHz and try to pick a magic frequency that will work with resonance . Very difficult and inherently unreliable due to subtle bulb to bulb differences.
3) If we choose to operate in this region we must implement some form of spread spectrum frequency modulation ( white noise perhaps) , to ensure that we don't allow resonance to occur within the bulb. This increases the cost/complexity of the ballast and in doing so decreases the reliability somewhat.
4) Operate the bulb at a high enough Frequency that we are out of the acoustic resonance region ( above 120KHz say ) but then that can lead to EMI/RF problems. And the higher the frequency generally the higher the switching losses which would decrease the efficiency.

All this makes me wonder how Galaxy have made their ballasts. Having a ballast run both HPS and MH would make me think that they have put some effort into designing a good ballast , but that was until it blew apart 2 Ceramic metal Halide retro fit bulbs . It was clear that they failed due to resonance issues as I could see it/hear it until they cracked the arc tube.
The Bulb ? Philips Master color CDM400S51/HOR/4K/Alto . These are wide spectrum CMH bulbs designed to operate in HPS ballasts. They were the only CMH 400W bulbs I could find that would operate in the Horizontal position and it seemed like a good fit for the Galaxy. The shape of the CMH arc tube was much closer to the HPS tubes so I figured that it would be alot less likely to have wide bandwidth acoustic resonance issues than say a Horiltux blue and it would required a special pulse ballast . Ie it should work with normal HPS ballasts.

Where did I go wrong in my hypothesis ? Is the Galaxy really just a HPS EB that might run the odd MH ? Sure seems so. If it did have spread spectrum ( in one form or another , then acoustic resonance should not have been a problem.
So far I've had a lumatek .... it was a high power RF transmitter and Lumatek's service was so pathetic it set a new low that I didn't think was 
possible. Oh sure they've fixed the RF problems now.
Now this Galaxy that will vapourize CMH's ... are there any other ballasts that can actually do what they claim ?

I'm really begining to think that EBallasts still have a l o n g w a y to go before they have matured enough to be called a good replacement for magnetic ballasts ( in the higher power ranges atleast)

What frequency do Lumatek's run at ? ( the new an improved ones) Above 120KHz ? Below 20KHz ? somewhere in between... how are they controlling acoustic resonance with MH lamps?
Will the new Lumatek's run pulse start /Ceramic metal halides ? will they run the Philips MasterColor HPS/MH that I really want ?

Sorry for the rant, but I'm very frustrated at just having watched 120$ go up in smoke again !

Cheers

SB7

Seems like your right but, he didn't try the lumatek digital ballast yet. Anybody tried this setup?


----------



## mdgtptrl (Jan 9, 2008)

I think new lighting is really cool... definitely keeping track of this thread...


edit: deleted the edit. just me being a dumbass.


----------



## Dats (Jan 10, 2008)

I read through a very long thread on icmag about cmh bulbs, It seemed to me that the only people that were all about these bulbs were the people that were selling them. Seemed like alot of hype and not alot of results. One thing that I did find interesting that I did not know until I read thread was that digital ballasts are not UL approved. Thats kind of scary.


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

i found this, 39,199 lumens, 15,000 hours to half life, 4057k.....

Philips HPS Retro-White 400W

40$


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

this is a kickass link, all about all kinds of lights, from t5's to hps...

White Paper - Fluorescent Vs. Metal Halide in Hi-Low Bay Applications

going to go make a thread for this one...


----------



## ultranyte (Jan 10, 2008)

Wow can you really touch that bulb without burning your fingers?
just that is enough to sell me on it, since I would be able to use it in small spaces.


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

MasterColor® HPS-Retro White 400W Ceramic Metal Halide Bulb by Horizen Hydroponics

100$ for a 400w...


----------



## Dats (Jan 10, 2008)

I have a feeling that the pic of him holding the bulb was just after it came on. I would be willing to bet that you cant hold it after it been running for a minute.


----------



## kagenical (Jan 10, 2008)

Dats said:


> I have a feeling that the pic of him holding the bulb was just after it came on. I would be willing to bet that you cant hold it after it been running for a minute.


Quoted for Truth!


----------



## Dats (Jan 10, 2008)

I could take a pic of me holding a hps bulb with it on as long as the light had just come on and I took the pic quickly.


----------



## oldgrayhair (Jan 10, 2008)

Being that I run 2 x 400 HPS side by side, and was born a skeptic , I'm looking forward to giving one of these a shot right next to a new HPS when the time comes for new bulbs in 3-4 months.

From my background in reef tanks I learned to hate electronic ballasts, so I only I heavy duty magnetics at this point.

Really I'm not looking for the CMH to grow plants better...though that would be great  I'm really am interested in the heat displacement. If I can knock by closet temp down by 3-6 degrees simply by using these, without losing growth, I'll be a happy camper.

Time will tell - OGH


----------



## stinkincatfish (Jan 10, 2008)

great thread

i could use some temp control come spring, and will also be ready for a new light soon.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

Dats said:


> I have a feeling that the pic of him holding the bulb was just after it came on. I would be willing to bet that you cant hold it after it been running for a minute.


It's not me holding that bulb but, I have a 400 watt here. I'm setting up my cabinet now, I'll be able to tell you from personal experience how hot they run in a few days and if I can actually hold it. The part that is a fact is that the bulb runs a lot cooler then HPS or MH bulbs. By the way, I don't sell them that's why I didn't post a like to where you can buy them, I don't represent anyone and I'm not making anything off of the info I provided. Phillips makes them and they are also on the Venture Lighting website. I bought the Phillips so I don't know about the one from Venture Seems to me that you're a little closed minded...... Just my opinion.

You only need one bulb to cover th MH and HPS spectrum
They are less then half the cost of the enhanced bulbs
They run at a cooler temp
You can put them much closer to the canopy
.....really dude, where's the hype? If you prefer, stay with the lighting you have, there are plenty of people out there that are looking for solid facts, do you have any? or are you just stating your opinion and ranting a little? Do you have anything to say that you can back up about lighting performance? Any comparision charts/graphs? Mine are posted, let's see what you have before you knock them.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

oldgrayhair said:


> Being that I run 2 x 400 HPS side by side, and was born a skeptic , I'm looking forward to giving one of these a shot right next to a new HPS when the time comes for new bulbs in 3-4 months.
> 
> From my background in reef tanks I learned to hate electronic ballasts, so I only I heavy duty magnetics at this point.
> 
> ...


As I said, I'm getting my cabinet set up or the next few days, hopefully by the weekend I'll be able to try it out inside the cab and see what temps I'm getting, between the HPS and CMH bulb. My cabinet is 36wX30hX31D and I'm not using an air cooled hood. A 4 inch inline fan on a Speedster is what I'll be working with to start off. I'll see see if I can 400 watts into that tight of a space and run at decent temp.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

Dats said:


> I have a feeling that the pic of him holding the bulb was just after it came on. I would be willing to bet that you cant hold it after it been running for a minute.



I had to try it for myself, I hooked up the ballast and left the light on since my last post (I can't see the time on it, I guess because it was posted today) but, it's been on for over an hour and I can hold the bulb at the end like that picture shows in my gallery. The cabinet, PARTIALLY CLOSED OFF, is at 88 degrees *without* the fan on. The end of the bulb is cooler then incodecent bulbs I have touched. Sorry I can't be more specific with actual temps on the bulb but I don't have that kind of equipment.


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

i'm getting some. i'll do a log.

this looks fucking awesome. from what i'm seeing, it's an hps with an added ceramic tube filled with halide gas. the hps ignites the cmh.....

they are supposed to run cooler  summer bulbs!


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 10, 2008)

kindprincess said:


> i'm getting some. i'll do a log.
> 
> this looks fucking awesome. from what i'm seeing, it's an hps with an added ceramic tube filled with halide gas. the hps ignites the cmh.....
> 
> they are supposed to run cooler  summer bulbs!


Hey kp, would you be kind enough to send me a link when you get one and start the thread, or post one in here?

please and thankyou.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 10, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> I had to try it for myself, I hooked up the ballast and left the light on since my last post (I can't see the time on it, I guess because it was posted today) but, it's been on for over an hour and I can hold the bulb at the end like that picture shows in my gallery. The cabinet, PARTIALLY CLOSED OFF, is at 88 degrees *without* the fan on. The end of the bulb is cooler then incodecent bulbs I have touched. Sorry I can't be more specific with actual temps on the bulb but I don't have that kind of equipment.


88 degrees is too hot. you don't want to go over 86. 78 is ideal, imo.


----------



## Inneedofbuds (Jan 10, 2008)

i'm confused, its a metal halide that runs on an HPS ballast? can I still use this bulb on a MH ballast? If so, it would be perfect combo for the Hortilux blue. Hortilux veg (slightly more blue), phillips flower (slightly more red). And where did you get that spectral chart for this bulb?


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> Hey kp, would you be kind enough to send me a link when you get one and start the thread, or post one in here?
> 
> please and thankyou.


sure will 

i'm just looking for some pre-emptive feedback... i don't want to go into this blind, as the bulbs cost 100$ each...


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

Inneedofbuds said:


> i'm confused, its a metal halide that runs on an HPS ballast? can I still use this bulb on a MH ballast? If so, it would be perfect combo for the Hortilux blue. Hortilux veg (slightly more blue), phillips flower (slightly more red). And where did you get that spectral chart for this bulb?


it's an hps with an added component. hps ballast is required.


----------



## cbk123 (Jan 10, 2008)

Yo, KindPrincess, I found the bulbs for $48. The web page is 400 Watt ED18 Metal Halide HPS-Retro White. It seems there's a different bulb for vertical operation than for horizontal--so choose the right one.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 10, 2008)

cbk123 said:


> Yo, KindPrincess, I found the bulbs for $48. The web page is 400 Watt ED18 Metal Halide HPS-Retro White. It seems there's a different bulb for vertical operation than for horizontal--so choose the right one.


where'd you spring from?

You paid the protection to advertise?

what is this thread?

You want a banner?


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 10, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> where'd you spring from?
> 
> You paid the protection to advertise?
> 
> ...


haha

bit suspiscious, eh?


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 10, 2008)

i like the bit at the end, it's almost a command... so choose the right one.


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 10, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> i like the bit at the end, it's almost a command... so choose the right one.


i must obey


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

cool link, but i see where skunk is going. spam....

i'll give these a try as soon as i get a chance


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> i like the bit at the end, it's almost a command... so choose the right one.


lol!


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 10, 2008)

these bulbs though would make closet growing much less of a headache if this blasted hps heat is greatly diminished... 

i might have to make a purchance..


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

lumberjack_ian said:


> these bulbs though would make closet growing much less of a headache if this blasted hps heat is greatly diminished...
> 
> i might have to make a purchance..


i think they still get hot; notice the hps rod is still blue, not red yet....


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 10, 2008)

'IF' indeed.

The starter of this thread is pushing too hard.

If he's a member of other forums and these things work then we would hear about them that way. He wouldn't need to sound so desperate.

the end of the light is the coolest anyway.

I'd ratherwait for evidence they are worth the money. I'm quite happy for you to provide the evidence lumber, up to you.


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 10, 2008)

I am intrigued....there seem to be some valid reasons why this could work? I look forward to moving ahead with progress on this....


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

tahoe58 said:


> I am intrigued....there seem to be some valid reasons why this could work? I look forward to moving ahead with progress on this....


yep, the spectrum is one not frequently used in pot growing. i would love to see how they do at 4000k as opposed to 2400 or 6000...


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 10, 2008)

I need to see where I can order one from or maybe in town at the local hydro-hangout....


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> 'IF' indeed.
> 
> The starter of this thread is pushing too hard.
> 
> ...


I started the thread and I've got nothing to sell you man. I just gave the info that I had learned. To a lot of people, it's a better way to go, it's cheaper then an HPS bulb, and has plenty of other benifits, but, once again, I'm not selling the bulbs. If your looking for them in a hydro store, they will be marked up, there's a number of websites out there that sell the bulbs. Mine cost $53, if you want the link to where I bought it, pm me but there a plenty of places that sell them.


----------



## stickyicky77 (Jan 10, 2008)

tahoe58 said:


> I need to see where I can order one from or maybe in town at the local hydro-hangout....


I am not sure if this is the same bulb. I have been considering this one i found advertised in " the growing edge" hydro magizne EYE Hortilux Lamps. I not sure if this one comes in 400w


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

kindprincess said:


> i think they still get hot; notice the hps rod is still blue, not red yet....


They don't get red hot, I still have it on from eariler today and I can still touch the bulb.


----------



## cbk123 (Jan 10, 2008)

That's right--OBEY...Buy this Bulb. Haha. Shit man, I've just been following this here thread, getting a little interested myself--doing research. Thought I would try and help out by showing where they were cheeper...I'll keep my mouth shut next time.


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 10, 2008)

cbk123 said:


> That's right--OBEY...Buy this Bulb. Haha. Shit man, I've just been following this here thread, getting a little interested myself--doing research. Thought I would try and help out by showing where they were cheeper...I'll keep my mouth shut next time.


no no...

i'm gonna use those bulbs to get my light when i get the money...

i like you still!

its just that the thread kinda seems like an infomercial for a while... haha


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 10, 2008)

hey thanks for that....I took a look. and they (EYE) also have CMH bulbs....so I'm not sure if this is some other "hybrid"....making for some interesting reading and thinking time.....MY BUD NEEDS TO BE READY TO DO THIS PROPERLY!!!!! 


stickyicky77 said:


> I am not sure if this is the same bulb. I have been considering this one i found advertised in " the growing edge" hydro magizne EYE Hortilux Lamps. I not sure if this one comes in 400w


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

cbk123 said:


> That's right--OBEY...Buy this Bulb. Haha. Shit man, I've just been following this here thread, getting a little interested myself--doing research. Thought I would try and help out by showing where they were cheeper...I'll keep my mouth shut next time.


it didn't go unappreciated 

but you have to admit, even from your perspective; the first post you make on this site is basically an add. helped me, but you have to understand how the mods see it too...


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

tahoe58 said:


> hey thanks for that....I took a look. and they (EYE) also have CMH bulbs....so I'm not sure if this is some other "hybrid"....making for some interesting reading and thinking time.....MY BUD NEEDS TO BE READY TO DO THIS PROPERLY!!!!!


it's def sparking my interest; one of those links provides a spectrum chart; check it out...


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 10, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> I'd ratherwait for evidence they are worth the money. I'm quite happy for you to provide the evidence lumber, up to you.



i'm only going to be taking on vegging responsiblities here for the next half a year or so... but i'll def test it out in a couple months if i don't completely forget


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 10, 2008)

yea I've been comparing that between the different OEMs and against hps and regular mh.....I like the fact that the spectrum is fatter in the lower wavelengths...below 400....the temp is mid...highly efficient 95L/W and 90+CRI...though 400W is "only" 38,000 lumens compared to my super hps which I believe is suppose to be 55,000?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

kindprincess said:


> it didn't go unappreciated
> 
> but you have to admit, even from your perspective; the first post you make on this site is basically an add. helped me, but you have to understand how the mods see it too...


Haha, I am in sales, I just don't sell light bulbs. It's just habit for me to be "selling" in the way I talk. I also like to instigate a little, it helps keep people's interests up and makes things a little more fun......until someone's feels get hurt, then it's just fucking hilarious! Seriously, I'm not pitching light bulbs folks, just showing another option for our lighting needs. Sorry it sounded like an infomercial but I'm to the point when it comes to benefits of a product.


----------



## cbk123 (Jan 10, 2008)

You must be the CEO of Phillips! Found you Out. Haha
I was wondering what type of ballast you are using? Brand? Does it seem to light the bulb well. Thanks


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

LOL Yeah, I'm the CEO of Phillips and I figured I could sell more bulbs to pot growers then I could to warehouses or businesses so I decided to pitch them here. I bought my ballast at HTG Supply, I bought a 400 watt HPS set up so I have that bulb too. There are sites that sell just the ballast for about $50 that you wire up yourself.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

The simple fact is guys, I accomplished what I set out to do. Showed all of you there are other options out there and that you can save a few bucks....actually a good bit. One bulb replaces 2 bulbs that are each twice the cost......and from what I see, it's one of the most popular thread here right now.


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 10, 2008)

but you used two identities to do it?


----------



## stickyicky77 (Jan 10, 2008)

tahoe58 said:


> yea I've been comparing that between the different OEMs and against hps and regular mh.....I like the fact that the spectrum is fatter in the lower wavelengths...below 400....the temp is mid...highly efficient 95L/W and 90+CRI...though 400W is "only" 38,000 lumens compared to my super hps which I believe is suppose to be 55,000?


They do have a 400w and a 430w. check this out Hydrofarm - Eye Hortilux BUSD430B Hortilux Super HPS Enhanced Spectrum Bulb, 430W


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

kindprincess said:


> but you used two identities to do it?


I don't have 2 identities.


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 10, 2008)

i think she thinks you and cbk are the same person??


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> People get hung up on how many watts and how many Lumens without understanding what they are for.


- It think your being a little over zealous in your analysis of the spectral graph from phillips website. Indeed i think you don't know what lumens are and what that method of measurement is used for. 

-The graph lists relative energy clearly on the left, meaning that it's normalized over the wavelength. E = ch/Lamda(wavelength), but in this case they are just using RE = ch. Just thought I'd point that out.

- I find it EXTREMELY HARD TO BELIEVE that a lamp putting out 39000 lumens, 3/4 of what a phillips hps alto puts out @ 50000 lumens has a higher relative energy at every wavelength in the visible spectrum and does it at a cooler temperature. No way imho. 

- See that big green spike in the middle of your wonderful retro white's SPD, that's totally useless light, and you can subtract that from all the performance numbers phillips puts out. (btw since human eyes are optimized for light around 500 nm "green", and lumen is a measure of the perceived power of light, adjusted to human eyes, it makes up a large portion of the lumens rated). The regular phillips alto achieves all those lumens purely in the longer wavelengths. It's not that human eyes are much less sensitive to this yellow/red light, but at least it's useful, and it's a $5 bulb, lol.

all imho


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

Also, just because you CAN grow plants with them, doesn't mean they are the ruler and god of all lights, evident by the crazy mofo's with grow journals on this site who grow way to big plants with cfl's, and visually they look successful.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

HashPlant said:


> - It think your being a little over zealous in your analysis of the spectral graph from phillips website. Indeed i think you don't know what lumens are and what that method of measurement is used for.
> 
> -The graph lists relative energy clearly on the left, meaning that it's normalized over the wavelength. E = ch/Lamda(wavelength), but in this case they are just using RE = ch. Just thought I'd point that out.
> 
> ...


LOL 95% of that went way over my head. Unlike what people seem to think, I'm not in the lighting business but more important than all of that tech talk are the results I've seen achieved along with the reduced heat output, the cost, how low to the canopy and so on.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

How's this, a regular phillips alto hps bulb @ a price much less than that retro bulb will outperform it in the flowering room every day, no exceptions, imho

I think anyone who spends time looking up information but none thinking about it is none the wiser, also imho


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

HashPlant said:


> How's this, a regular phillips alto hps bulb @ a price much less than that retro bulb will outperform it in the flowering room every day, no exceptions, imho
> 
> I think anyone who spends time looking up information but none thinking about it is none the wiser, also imho


Great! post some pics of your results. Let's see what you're talking about and how you are using them for flowering, we are all here to learn. If you have a better way, I'm open to hear about it.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

post some pics of yours


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 10, 2008)

Just got the bulb and ballast yesterday, my cab should be somewhat finished this week. Got the Light and Fan mounted today and waiting in the wings are 5 Grape Krush and a freebie seed RGD from Red at Legends currently under CFLs......but there are plenty of others that have had great success under them!


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

btw I don't have a digital camera, they are for girls. There are only two reason's a man needs a camera a) he is a photographer b) he has kids, or psuedo kids, in this case a marijuana plant. But since i'd be buying it soley to take pictures of a grow, i'd rather just spend it on weed.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

I do however have a wonderful nikon "analog" sLr and I'd be happy to send you a signed 8x10 if you'd send me your address.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 10, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Just got the bulb and ballast yesterday, my cab should be somewhat finished this week. Got the Light and Fan mounted today and waiting in the wings are 5 Grape Krush and a freebie seed RGD from Red at Legends currently under CFLs......but there are plenty of others that have had great success under them!


I'm sure there are, just like there are many who have had great success flowering with a dozen or two cfl's (just go to the grow journals and look at the most popular threads). That doesn't make it the best option for lighting as this post's title implies. I think it will breed disappointment in many who now purchase this bulb after seeing the first few pages of this post. I think ultimately you will have less yield with that particular bulb than with a run of the mill hps costing at most $15, just as those people who grow with cfl's, looks great, doesn't mean it's going to yield a bumper crop.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

Looks like I hit a nerve with you my friend. Sorry about that some people are a little soft skinned I guess. Looks like you can talk the talk but can't show anything to back it up. Thanks for stopping by.


----------



## blonddie07 (Jan 11, 2008)

CMH bulbs cant compete to HPS or MH.... do some research guys....

if cmh was good enough for growing it would have been used by many greenhouse growing companies. and its not a new product... its fairly old.. about 10 years or so..


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> They don't get red hot, I still have it on from eariler today and I can still touch the bulb.


They're not that expensive anyway really. Last night I was tired and didn't do the sterling conversion... still though, they're still a fair bit more than an average bulb.

How long do they last?

Everything about the bulb makes sense, but for you to put your finger on a cool part of the bulb and when it hasn't warmed up yet, take pic's as though to say this is some type of miracle bulb is a sales pitch. What reason would you have to deceive us, even in a small way?

You use the spectrum debate? What do you really know of this?

Of course they'll work, cannabis grows in every spectrum (mostly)... I've got 2 plants now 4 weeks veg' under 24/0 UV from a 300w lamp.

Then what about that other guy? The one with zero posts who just comes from nowhere and makes one post to 'help kp out' with a friendly link?

This is RIU, you'll find no idiots here.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> They're not that expensive anyway really. Last night I was tired and didn't do the sterling conversion... still though, they're still a fair bit more than an average bulb.
> 
> How long do they last?
> 
> ...


Hahah, I found a few......


----------



## Dats (Jan 11, 2008)

Maybe Im just a real skeptic about new things. But I looked at a few threads on various forums about cmh and they all seem to be the same. It will have 2 or 3 people hawking these and making all sorts of crazy claims about the lights being the greatest lights ever made. This technology is not brand new. Im sure people would have tried them by now somewhere. And if they could really be a suitable replacement for hps when flowering the internet would be buzzing about them. I call shens until I see some real results.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

blonddie07 said:


> CMH bulbs cant compete to HPS or MH.... do some research guys....
> 
> if cmh was good enough for growing it would have been used by many greenhouse growing companies. and its not a new product... its fairly old.. about 10 years or so..


That's 100% right, CMH bulbs are not new, they have been out for a while.....but they have evolved recently and there are plenty of people using them to grow under. Check out IC's forum, there's a bunch of people learning about them and already using them there......and they have done the research and have the harvests to back up their success along with the rest of the FACTS I posted.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

Dats said:


> Maybe Im just a real skeptic about new things. But I looked at a few threads on various forums about cmh and they all seem to be the same. It will have 2 or 3 people hawking these and making all sorts of crazy claims about the lights being the greatest lights ever made. This technology is not brand new. Im sure people would have tried them by now somewhere. And if they could really be a suitable replacement for hps when flowering the internet would be buzzing about them. I call shens until I see some real results.


The results are out there, a few are pics of the results others have had are posted in my gallery. I was skeptical at first too. As for it being the greatest thing ever made, I think your really running with something there but if that's the way you read it, you have the wrong perception. Call what you want, I'll stick by them until someone proves them wrong. I see plenty that are trying to knock them, but they haven't been able to post any facts yet...... just something to think about.


----------



## email468 (Jan 11, 2008)

glad you started this thread - keeping an eye on it.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Hahah, I found a few......


Yes... i answered one of your other posts where you claimed that one cannot grow in gravel.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> The results are out there, a few are pics of the results others have had are posted in my gallery. I was skeptical at first too. As for it being the greatest thing ever made, I think your really running with something there but if that's the way you read it, you have the wrong perception. Call what you want, I'll stick by them until someone proves them wrong. I see plenty that are trying to knock them, but they haven't been able to post any facts yet...... just something to think about.


results of what exactly? 

How would looking at pictures of finished buds show any difference between that and a normal bulb? Are you saying that these bulbs give better yields?

Have there been side by side comparison tests done?

I thought the selling point of the ceramic would be that the bulb runs cooler. How much cooler do these bulbs run?


----------



## ultranyte (Jan 11, 2008)

that's the funny thing about this post, half the people are concerned about total yield output (those clearly not reading everything) of course this bulb is much weaker..
and the other half are concerned about the heat reduction with the bulb

I'm still interested in the comparison of HEAT, anyone doing tests with full results?


----------



## email468 (Jan 11, 2008)

ultranyte said:


> that's the funny thing about this post, half the people are concerned about total yield output (those clearly not reading everything) of course this bulb is much weaker..
> and the other half are concerned about the heat reduction with the bulb
> 
> I'm still interested in the comparison of HEAT, anyone doing tests with full results?


personally i wanted to keep an eye on this for a potential "summer-time" bulb!


----------



## abNORML (Jan 11, 2008)

I am using this retro-white bulb right now. I am wondering if I should keep it throughout the grow or to put the old HPS regular in after the first couple weks of flower...wish I knew FOR SURE that this bulb is better than the HPS.


----------



## email468 (Jan 11, 2008)

abNORML said:


> I am using this retro-white bulb right now. I am wondering if I should keep it throughout the grow or to put the old HPS regular in after the first couple weks of flower...wish I knew FOR SURE that this bulb is better than the HPS.


unless you want to experiment - i would stick with the tried and true HPS. 

Also - how old is your bulb? I think you be changing out your MH every 18 months at least.


----------



## abNORML (Jan 11, 2008)

email468 said:


> unless you want to experiment - i would stick with the tried and true HPS.
> 
> Also - how old is your bulb? I think you be changing out your MH every 18 months at least.


I have had this bulb for over a year but have only used it for 6 weeks so far. It may stay a little cooler than an HPS regular bulb but I am telling you all right now it still gets warm and this wll not be a miracle " summer bulb ". 

The plants are diggin' the light, and I am glad I got this bulb instead of a standard MH, but definately no miracles here. I am going into flower in about 4-5 days and I'll decide what to do for lighting @ 2 weeks into flower. I will use this retro bulb for first 2 weeks to minimize stretch.


----------



## email468 (Jan 11, 2008)

abNORML said:


> I have had this bulb for over a year but have only used it for 6 weeks so far. It may stay a little cooler than an HPS regular bulb but I am telling you all right now it still gets warm and this wll not be a miracle " summer bulb ".
> 
> The plants are diggin' the light, and I am glad I got this bulb instead of a standard MH, but definately no miracles here. I am going into flower in about 4-5 days and I'll decide what to do for lighting @ 2 weeks into flower. I will use this retro bulb for first 2 weeks to minimize stretch.


good deal - thanks for the info.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

No point buying one then.

The only reason to want a better bulb in veg' is for faster growth.

I've been vegging two plants under UV 24/0 for 28 days. They are both showing signs of sex. One female and one male.

This is just with UV as their sole source of light.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> Yes... i answered one of your other posts where you claimed that one cannot grow in gravel.


Is that the same thread were you told the guy that he shouldn't do it either? I think you said it was an experiment for you and only someone with experience should try it?.... um, here's actually exactly what you said. "I wouldn't rec' you do this unless you have good enough experience. i did it just to see if I could." yeah, that's the one.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Is that the same thread were you told the guy that he shouldn't do it either? I think you said it was an experiment for you and only someone with experience should try it?.... um, here's actually exactly what you said. "I wouldn't rec' you do this unless you have good enough experience. i did it just to see if I could." yeah, that's the one.


You can't see the difference? 

I said that he couldn't do it, you said it couldn't be done.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

I never said it was a miracle bulb but, what I have said a number of times is the it does the job of both HPS and MH bulbs for much less of a cost, the spectrum is better, the bulb runs cooler and works on a standard HPS ballast.


----------



## abNORML (Jan 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> I never said it was a miracle bulb but, what I have said a number of times is the it does the job of both HPS and MH bulbs for much less of a cost, the spectrum is better, the bulb runs cooler and works on a standard HPS ballast.


I'll drink to that. I am happy with the bulb so far. According to the light spectrum graph it seems like this bulb is better than an HPS for flowering? I may just use it the whole time. I think my HPS bulb is more lumens though..


----------



## abNORML (Jan 11, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> No point buying one then.
> 
> The only reason to want a better bulb in veg' is for faster growth.
> 
> ...


You mean you are using those funky blue UV lamps ?


----------



## Glasuan (Jan 11, 2008)

I am still totally lost on this bulb. The only reason i would consider it, is for the cooler running.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 11, 2008)

abNORML said:


> I'll drink to that. I am happy with the bulb so far. According to the light spectrum graph it seems like this bulb is better than an HPS for flowering? I may just use it the whole time. I think my HPS bulb is more lumens though..


What I have read about the difference is lumens tied into the distance that the bulb is from the plants canopy. You have to keep the HPS bulbs higher because of the heat. These run cooler, you make up for the loss in lumens because you are closer to the canopy. There was more to it then that but either that's understood, or remembered. I'll go back and get more about it and post it up here.


----------



## cbk123 (Jan 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude--This is off topic, but you said that you got one of those build your own ballasts from HTG supply--I was wondering what they sound like when they're running--are they fairly silent?


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

abNORML said:


> You mean you are using those funky blue UV lamps ?


Not sure what you mean. It's a tanning lamp. 300w UV.

I use ordinary HID's too. Just wanted to see what vegging in a very high UV environment would do for them...


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 11, 2008)

abNORML said:


> I'll drink to that. I am happy with the bulb so far. According to the light spectrum graph it seems like this bulb is better than an HPS for flowering? I may just use it the whole time. I think my HPS bulb is more lumens though..


In which respect does the spectrum have an impact in flowering?

Just because the bulb works and gets results, this does not mean we are going to be any better off investing extra cash in a gimmick.

So the lost lumens are made up by the light being closer... so, what? We end up where we started? Only paying a little extra for the bulb.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 11, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> So the lost lumens are made up by the light being closer... so, what? We end up where we started? Only paying a little extra for the bulb.


I'm glad someone brought this up, if you want to get your light closer why not use those 40000 lumen flourescents (T5 or T12, I'm not up on the flourescent term.) I have my 400W hps 8-9" off the top of my plant (notice the singular), with a cool tube, how much closer do you want a HID bulb?

Also how can a bulb that has 3/4 of the lumens as a standard hps produce more relative energy at every visible wavelength, while also producing less heat. Is this not impossible? I think the GE graphs are a bunch of horse manure.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 11, 2008)

10 pages trying to convey to this guy that the bulb he bought is for enhanced spectrum indoor lighting, to provide an easier colour on the eyes. He's totally wasted his money, since the bulb is not only not designed for growing, but also performs at a lower level than a regular hps.


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 11, 2008)

Here's my suggestion (you could also use 600W, they're more efficient):

400W phillips alto hps bulb $10
400W ballast $90
6"x19" cooltube reflector $85
6" Inline fan $140
ducting $20
duct tape $1

And if you feel you must enhance the spectrum:

3 or 6 pack of 15W 6400k cfl's $12 
wiring for the cfl's $20

Total: $420 

This should alleviate all concerns about spectrum and heat. Seriously why pay $100 for a 430W bulb that adds 30W of blue light when you can add other cheaper bulbs. (I'm not advocating cfl flowering here)


----------



## abNORML (Jan 11, 2008)

When I bought my 400w system I ordered an HPS bulb and a regular MH adapter bulb and they upgraded the MH to the retro-white. I got the the whole thing delivered to my house for 160 dollars. I got my setup from inside sun.


----------



## kindprincess (Jan 11, 2008)

about the gravel; check any or my hydro threads. it's all i use.

as for the bulbs; talking with a few friends today, we came to the conclusion that the wider spectrum may help some things. tighter buds, etc. but, we also came to the conclusion that this bulb would be best utilized by adding it to existing setups, with hps or mh.

so, imho, a change over is no good; but adding one to enhance spectrum seems a good idea, better even than adding some 6500k cfl's. 

i haven't decided to buy one yet, but i'm getting closer  i'm a sucker for experimentations


----------



## HashPlant (Jan 12, 2008)

kindprincess said:


> ...so, imho, a change over is no good; but adding one to enhance spectrum seems a good idea, better even than adding some 6500k cfl's.
> 
> i haven't decided to buy one yet, but i'm getting closer  i'm a sucker for experimentations


I agree, but if you are using two or more HID bulbs why not just use a proper 6500k metal halide in combination with a 2100k HPS, two bulbs two ballasts 2 cool tubes (not those double ones, unless your grow area is large and you are using 1000W, they will be sufficiently high that the light from the two lamps will mix before it hits the garden). And use this setup throughout veg + flowering.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 12, 2008)

Yes, my flower area now is set up with 3 400w lights, 2 hps and one MH. There will also be a 300w UV lamp too on the next flowering batch.

You can never have enough light, IMO... and if you can give multi spectrum, then this is certainly the best way to go.


----------



## email468 (Jan 12, 2008)

skunkushybrid said:


> Yes, my flower area now is set up with 3 400w lights, 2 hps and one MH. There will also be a 300w UV lamp too on the next flowering batch.
> 
> You can never have enough light, IMO... and if you can give multi spectrum, then this is certainly the best way to go.


won't argue with that said the dual-spectrum light owner!


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 12, 2008)

hey Skunk....your choice of the combination.....how did you make that determination? I'm curious? thanks in advance.....


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 12, 2008)

tahoe58 said:


> hey Skunk....your choice of the combination.....how did you make that determination? I'm curious? thanks in advance.....


No specific logic... i feel. Cannabis loves HPS during flower for plentiful yield, so i'm thinking one blue light will be enough to heighten potency. The UV lamp too of course, but on this next grow it's time will be mostly used by the two plants that have been vegging beneath. This way i can get a completed harvest from a plant grown under just UV. Only problem is that the bud will be seeded.


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 12, 2008)

problem....? you lost me? sorry if I'm just being still asleep? 

Re: combination - I had read in a couple of places that the ideal combination (according to those sources....) is 2:1 MH:HPS.....that's why I asked.....but as we have so often identified, there are many unique circumsatances that makes one make the choices we make. in this case, there was an inclination to seek quality and maybe compromise yeild and speed. Ideally, what I am going to do is install the suitable ballasts and hardware for 2 MH (100W) and 1 HPS (250W) and 2 UV lights the arrangement being uvfloods of some nature on the inside far back corners blanketing the entire cab....and the central HPS flanked by 2 MH......or at least that is the plan wthat I have with my current understanding and knowledge.....which will change....hahahahahahaa


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 12, 2008)

tahoe58 said:


> problem....? you lost me? sorry if I'm just being still asleep?
> 
> Re: combination - I had read in a couple of places that the ideal combination (according to those sources....) is 2:1 MH:HPS.....that's why I asked.....but as we have so often identified, there are many unique circumsatances that makes one make the choices we make. in this case, there was an inclination to seek quality and maybe compromise yeild and speed. Ideally, what I am going to do is install the suitable ballasts and hardware for 2 MH (100W) and 1 HPS (250W) and 2 UV lights the arrangement being uvfloods of some nature on the inside far back corners blanketing the entire cab....and the central HPS flanked by 2 MH......or at least that is the plan wthat I have with my current understanding and knowledge.....which will change....hahahahahahaa


 
Yeah, and where did that ratio come from? I'm sure it came from JC (Jorges Cervantes). These guys like people to think they're on top of everything, and they follow the growing trends... then they just publish information that may or may not be correct. What do they care, they're making money.


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 12, 2008)

I believe the first time I read about it was in a thread of a nolongerinexistence forum (but dated in 1999) and that was a comment from an individual that had that as his own experience....but I could be wrong....?


----------



## abNORML (Jan 12, 2008)

The one angle body seems to be looking at is this- as I said, the company that gave me this upgrade bulb upgraded the MH that I ordered, not the HPS...maybe instead of looking at the possible impact of flowering, maybe look at enhanced vegging.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 12, 2008)

abNORML said:


> The one angle body seems to be looking at is this- as I said, the company that gave me this upgrade bulb upgraded the MH that I ordered, not the HPS...maybe instead of looking at the possible impact of flowering, maybe look at enhanced vegging.


In what way would it enhance vegging?

Make them grow faster? Mature faster?

I doubt it... and who cares, a lot of people use fluoro's just to slow down the veg' cycle. You can grow sog and speed up the veg cycle to 5 days if you want to... in fact you don't even need a veg' cycle.


----------



## object16 (Jan 12, 2008)

The salesman hype these lamps. There is no benefit at all to CMH. HPS is perfect for flowering and offers more photons = more photosynthesis = heavier yield. The threads are started by salesman. They know growers buy a lot of light, and post on growing forums. But do use pulse start MH such as Ushio Pulse strike, they really are a good lamp worth using, if ur not vegging with fluoro.


----------



## stickyicky77 (Jan 12, 2008)

I decided to go with this 400w bulb EYE Hortilux Super HPS. I just picked it up today with a E ballast and hood.


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 12, 2008)

that is certainly a good choice.....that will do you proud I'm sure! thanks for the update!


----------



## LightBulbDude (Jan 16, 2008)

I feel compelled to come to the rescue of the poster who put in the link to the light bulb site for the HPS-Retro White. I'm actually the owner of the site and am in no way affiliated with the previos poster. Good luck to you guys.


----------



## KAOSOWNER (Jan 16, 2008)

LightBulbDude said:


> I feel compelled to come to the rescue of the poster who put in the link to the light bulb site for the HPS-Retro White. I'm actually the owner of the site and am in no way affiliated with the previos poster. Good luck to you guys.


 
Thatonedude/lightbulbdude..............lol I am still not buying this crap, i will stick to what works and let everyone else experiment. If someone gets some sort of conclusive evidence that is positive for growing. please let me know, but i doubt you will get any that will be beneficial. But this has been an interesting thread and i am sure that is all cmh will ever be for growers.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 17, 2008)

He doesn't want to give up does he...


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 21, 2008)

I've never seen a place with so much crap the higher post count members. You guys really have you're heads inflated, stop trying to flatter yourselves, the thread is for info, not your lame ass power trip.

I hate to bust everyone's bubble but, I'm not logging in as anyone else. 

I have had my light up and running a few days and here is what I personally have experienced.
I really don't think the bulb is running much cooler then a MH/HPS bulb. I'm getting a MH conversion bulb and I will report back with what the temp differences are or I may go with an air cooled reflector. I'm in an umbrella type of reflector and with a 4 inch fan and carbon scrubber, the cab is at 80 degrees. 

A MAJOR downside is the effect from exposure to the bulb. As I said, I'm still building my cabinet and the hydro set up so, I was under the light a good bit yesterday and my arms were itching like crazy and got some red blotches. I read another persons post that said her and her husband had the same thing from sticking their hands under the bulb. I don't know what causes it, but I'm getting a MH conversion bulb until I find out. 

Save your drama and your wanna be detective work for the soap opera or try to post your guesses elsewhere. If you want more info, stick around, I'll be back with more facts......and it will be under this log in.


----------



## email468 (Jan 21, 2008)

A kick-ass, detailed grow journal of your own showing real results using nothing but ceramic metal halide lights from start to finish will shut everyone up. Anything else (white papers, spectrum graphs, etc..) is a sales pitch.



ThatOneDude said:


> I've never seen a place with so much crap the higher post count members. You guys really have you're heads inflated, stop trying to flatter yourselves, the thread is for info, not your lame ass power trip.
> 
> I hate to bust everyone's bubble but, I'm not logging in as anyone else.
> 
> ...


----------



## whitebombs (Jan 21, 2008)

[email protected]


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 22, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> I've never seen a place with so much crap the higher post count members. You guys really have you're heads inflated, stop trying to flatter yourselves, the thread is for info, not your lame ass power trip.
> 
> I hate to bust everyone's bubble but, I'm not logging in as anyone else.
> 
> ...


Yes info' with pic's would be nice... rather than "CMH has 'em all beat"

So far, the bulb doesn't run much, if at all, cooler. It has less lumens, and it causes irritation to the skin... 

Looking forward to more facts.


----------



## natmoon (Jan 22, 2008)

I read through the pdf file from phillips and they state that the arc of the tube still heats up eventually to 1000 degrees c so after full temperature has been reached all though they are cooler than a standard hps bulb they still kick of a load of heat.

There is much less heat at the tip of the bulb where the guy had his fingers than a hps but you would not want to and should not touch the bulbs after they have reached their full temperature.

Touching your bulbs at all ever can cause greasy finger spots which also help to crack bulbs and/or shorten their life.

The bulbs do have a great full spectrum though and seem to be well worth checking out.

Also of note is the disclaimer from phillips of serious skin burn and eye inflammation from short wave uv radiation and philips also state not to use these bulbs where people remain for more than a few minutes without the proper shielding.
So you would have to switch them of when you go into your grow room unless you want to end up looking like thisforever


----------



## ronbud1963 (Jan 22, 2008)

Well IMO about the bulb causing skin burn becase of extra uv is a good thing for PLANTS.We know the stongest weed comes from places with the highest uv,so in my book thats a good thing.So you have to wear long sleves and sunglasses big deal i think the trade off is worth it.Im going to get one for my next grow,its time for a new bulb anyway.Stay Safe!!


----------



## tahoe58 (Jan 22, 2008)

het Nat. thanks for that review and insight. I agree with you. and there were some comments about skin lesions and stuff too, makes me think that the fatter spectral properties might well be valuable. I remain intrigued. cheers man!


natmoon said:


> I read through the pdf file from phillips and they state that the arc of the tube still heats up eventually to 1000 degrees c so after full temperature has been reached all though they are cooler than a standard hps bulb they still kick of a load of heat.
> 
> There is much less heat at the tip of the bulb where the guy had his fingers than a hps but you would not want to and should not touch the bulbs after they have reached their full temperature.
> 
> ...


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

email468 said:


> A kick-ass, detailed grow journal of your own showing real results using nothing but ceramic metal halide lights from start to finish will shut everyone up. Anything else (white papers, spectrum graphs, etc..) is a sales pitch.



Want to see "detailed" grow reports? Venture outside of Rollitup and check any REPUTABLE forum that has more the a few people with high post counts that think they know everything... IC mag, hg420 and so on. CMH lighting is being talked about everywhere. It's time to let go of your security blankie and venture outside of just this forum for your information. I've seen the posts here, there are some that know what they are doing but it's more then obvious that most threads are "controlled" by the same people over and over again, answering newbie questions the same way every time........

Funny, I get PM's from people asking me about where they can get the bulbs, or telling me that they hear about it on other forums they are on...... but just like most threads here, there are the same "high post count" people that wouldn't dare think for a second that they themselves didn't know about something.

And for you idiots that still think I'm trying to sell light bulbs, I'm a stay at home dad fresh out of the mortgage business, where I made my enough money that I can stay home with my don't have to work for a while. HAHAHAHA a light bulb salesman. Some of you idiots really crack me up. I grow as a hobby, and as I keep telling all of you, I don't sell light bulbs. 

Want to see a grow report? Look at any forum that is not controlled by the same redundant people regurgitating the same basic info over and over again with the people backing them up time and time again.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

.....I also told you in the original post, I'M HERE TO STIR SHIT UP. and I will continue to do so until I'm banned. AND I PLAN ON OPENING A FEW PEOPLE EYES AND GIVING SOME OTHERS INFO THEY WOULD NOT OTHERWISE GET FROM FROM THE KNOW IT ALLS HERE.


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> .....I also told you in the original post, I'M HERE TO STIR SHIT UP. and I will continue to do so until I'm banned. AND I PLAN ON OPENING A FEW PEOPLE EYES AND GIVING SOME OTHERS INFO THEY WOULD NOT OTHERWISE GET FROM FROM THE KNOW IT ALLS HERE.


well... you're kinda just acting like an ass...

can you show us good grows?

with pics big enough to differentiate leaves... haha


this is kinda pathetic

and trust me... i'm no know-it-all
i'm just learning

... but you sound like an ass... why would i listen to you?

you don't seem charismatic enough to open peoples eyes to much of anything...

sorry to burst your bubble...


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

I am an ass and I haven't asked you to listen to me, I said check out other sites that will back it all up. I don't want you to listen to me, I want you to see there are other options out there. Better options. Love me, Hate me, makes no difference to me, I'll never meet you....but I did give you information that no one here did.......


----------



## VincentN (Jan 26, 2008)

hey wassup man i would like a llink to the website that u order the bulb from i think it help alot of pplz on here keep up the good work....


----------



## GoodFriend (Jan 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> I am an ass and I haven't asked you to listen to me, I said check out other sites that will back it all up. I don't want you to listen to me, I want you to see there are other options out there. Better options. Love me, Hate me, makes no difference to me, I'll never meet you....but I did give you information that no one here did.......


i do frequent another place, thanks though...

why wouldn't you just make those pictures availible here for us? and have that info here? instead of just mocking the site why not help it?

smoke some more of yer shit and mellow out buddy... this site ain't half as bad as you make it out to be


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

You can get them at an electrical supply store, not Home Depot or Lowes. or there are a number of places on line. I didn't know that when I got mine and it may be a couple of bucks cheaper. I ordered mine from Phlips MasterColor Ceramic Metal Halide ~ CMH ~ HPS-Retro White


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

lumberjack_ian said:


> i do frequent another place, thanks though...
> 
> why wouldn't you just make those pictures availible here for us? and have that info here? instead of just mocking the site why not help it?
> 
> smoke some more of yer shit and mellow out buddy... this site ain't half as bad as you make it out to be


Honestly brother, I hope I see that soon........
Since I've started the thread, I've been labeled as a light bulb salesman and it's been said a number of times that I'm logging in under other user names...... none of which is true. I didn't start the crap, the know it alls with the high post counts did. Now, I look like the ass, later they will, I'm patient and I know I'm right. Good luck bro, I got the basics out there for you, from there, you have to do some research on your own if you're interested. I'm no expert and never claimed to be, just posted the facts. I have seen the results, seen the debates, and after the dust settled I paid my $53 for the bulb and shared the info here. There are pics of OTHER people's grows in my gallery. Want to see more, check out some other forums.... there are plenty of people out there are much more open to CMH and have a number of members posting grow logs. I myself don't do grow logs, growing weed really isn't that difficult that I feel the need to track it.


----------



## natmoon (Jan 26, 2008)

Its quite clear that the spectrum that is provided by a cmh is much better than other hid lamps.
Any good grower using these bulbs would certainly get better results going by the specifications alone.

A strange thing that i found was pictures of these bulbs being fitted into work areas and factories where people are working underneath of them and yet a disclaimer in phillips own pdf documents about not using these bulbs were people are due to eye strain and skin lesions????

So does the _*adequate shielding*_,especially in a growers capacity,reduce the light output to the same or worse levels than can be achieved by using a separate normal hps/mh bulb?
This is a factor as the cmh bulbs are a lot more expensive.

I am going to contact phillips myself and ask them about this as i am well interested but i want to know some facts from the horses mouth




> RECOMMENDED WARNINGS, CAUTIONS,AND OPERATING INSTRUCTIONS
> WARNING: &#8220;These lamps can cause serious skin burn and eye inflammation from short wave ultraviolet radiation if outer envelope of the lamp is broken or punctured. Do not use where people will remain for more than a few minutes unless adequate shielding or other safety precautions
> are used. Certain lamps that will automatically extinguish when the outer envelope is broken or punctured are commercially available.&#8221;This lamp complies with FDA radiation performance standard
> 21 CFR subchapter J. (USA:21CFR 1040.30 Canada: SOR/ DORS/80-381).


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

I'm guessing it's the distance from the bulb. After a certain distance, it most likely dissipates. I say this because I'm in shorts a lot, when I'm working on the cab, my hands itch first, most exposure, it takes longer for my legs to start. 
Before I realized it was the light, I would scratch and then keep going, then blotches and bumps start showing up.

Tech guys are saying if you put it in an cool tube or air cooled reflector you will loose the uvb benefit


----------



## natmoon (Jan 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> I'm guessing it's the distance from the bulb. After a certain distance, it most likely dissipates. I say this because I'm in shorts a lot, when I'm working on the cab, my hands itch first, most exposure, it takes longer for my legs to start.
> Before I realized it was the light, I would scratch and then keep going, then blotches and bumps start showing up.


Great lol
This is my whole point really.
What effect does it have on marijuana if its doing that to people after only a few minutes of exposure to our own skin?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

Honestly, it's hard for me to give an opinion right now. I'm growing from seed and I have a CFL cab for seedlings and clones. I didn't get the ebb & Flow cab set up as fast as I had planed so they were under CFL's about a week and half longer then I had planned. At the same time I switched them under the CMH light , I also switched Neuts. I put the plants into small DWC containers because I don't know sex yet and I need to be able to move them back out of that cab to a mother cab once the clones are ready to go. 5 plants right now are sitting about 12-15 inches under the light in an umbrella type reflector, no glass "sheild" between the bulb and plants. I would say that they have really taken off but who's to say whether it's the light or the new neuts. I went with Dutch Master Gold, Max, Zone and Silica and I follow their online neut calculator, up to about 1100 ppm now. Previously I used Floranova Bloom from seedling to harvest. before that floranova grow & bloom. The entire setup is a new build, ebb& flow, CMH light, and Neuts. I'm use to growing DWC. On top of all of that, I'm growing a strain I have never grown before, DJ Short Grape Krush.


----------



## natmoon (Jan 26, 2008)

I have no doubt that the plants would grow well in that spectrum.
I need to know if the radiation that they emit destroys thc and how long is safe exposure to the lamps.
Growing green leaf is cool but what about the potency of the trics,does it degrade them even faster than normal light?
They are no good to me if i am unable to tend to my plants properly and have to keep switching the lamps on and off just to enter the room.
I am not knocking your idea by the way i am very interested,i just want some tried and tested and harvested info before i will buy one at 3 times the price of my usual bulb.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

Positive effects on plants, negative on skin from what I have read. UVB light, some growers supplement HPS lighting with it but you have to play around with how how much the plant can handle from direct UVB lighting. CMH puts out less so the plant can take it for th full light on period.

Cost 3 times your normal bulb, where are you getting bulbs for $17? ....for a 400 watt HPS bulb?


----------



## natmoon (Jan 26, 2008)

The cmh emit shortwave radiation but i saw no mention of this being anymore or less uvb than any other hps or mh bulb.
Also of concern is the fact that my 400 watt hps dual spectrum bulb emits 58,000 lumens and the cmh emits only 34,000 lumens.


----------



## natmoon (Jan 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Positive effects on plants, negative on skin from what I have read. UVB light, some growers supplement HPS lighting with it but you have to play around with how how much the plant can handle from direct UVB lighting. CMH puts out less so the plant can take it for th full light on period.
> 
> Cost 3 times your normal bulb, where are you getting bulbs for $17? ....for a 400 watt HPS bulb?


Online price is 16.08 shop price is 22.95

Grolux 400 Watt Dual Spectrum Grow Lamp - 58000 Lumens 194773​ £22.95​ *£16.08*​


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 26, 2008)

Are your prices are in pounds?
I got mine for $53 USD and now I'm hearing about $35 at local electrical supply places.


----------



## natmoon (Jan 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Cool, I've never seen them at that price!


Grow Lights > Grow Lamps > Grolux Dual Spectrum Grow Lamps


----------



## natmoon (Jan 27, 2008)

My hydro supplier has got back to me already with this statement.

CC:[email protected] Subject: RE: cmh bulbs Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:30:03 -0000


> Hi Nat,
> 
> First of heard of them  looking around there seems to be allot of mixed reports as to whether they are worth the extra money, and the fact that theyve been available for some years now without any uptake into the market does not bode well.
> 
> ...


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 27, 2008)

Lumens Lumens Lumens, CMH has less than HPS......but can you get an open reflector HPS or MH light this close to your canopy? It's SPD's that plants use, not Lumens. Plants don't have eyes, they don't care how bright the bulb is.
Have you ever seen the lights in a stadium at night, Hundreds of them to light the place up but can you get close and look at one, of course not, your eyeballs would fry, from your seat, your eyes see a lot less lumens because of the distance.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 27, 2008)

here are some random pics from another site where people are on to CMH growing. These are not my grow, just being honest!

This IS MY Dj Short Grape Krush Freak, I used it to test my new ebb&flow set up. It's been in there for a little over a week, before this, it was in my CFL box. I'm growing from seed so the other plants are in DWC so I can move them out until I know the sex. The system is being tested and adjustments are being made until I have have enough rooted clones to drop in it. It's about 25 pounds (50 Liters) light on Hydrotron so I can work in there easier.


----------



## skunkushybrid (Jan 28, 2008)

Those clones need nutes bad. Good thing to remember about clones and one thing I've learned. They are as old as the mother they came from.

This is a sort of riddle for me still, only slight but i'm almost there.

Just because the plant is smaller does not mean it needs less nutes, it just needs less water.

7 days after potting up I've given clones a nute dosage of 1.0ec. I expected to see some burn, but there was none, in fact the little bastards were begging for even more.

I concluded from this that it is not so much the size of the plant that matters but it is mostly the age of the plant that counts.

Try upping your ec, slowly... see what i mean.


----------



## Sublime757 (Jan 28, 2008)

So I see a lot of talk about an advantage of a CMH being able to get vloser to the canopy than our beloved security of an HPS.

As you can see the bulb is about 8"-9" away from the canopy. Also there is NO glass between the bulb and plants. The tape measure goes all the way into my reflector and is about 1/4" from touching the bulb. 430W HPS Hortilux

"But Sublime, your grow room must be hot as hell?"

WRONG, MOTHERFUCKA! Lights on temp is 76-80, lights off 70-72. How do I manage this impossible feat? Unfortunately being a total badass, which I am, has no place in the growroom. Instead I ventilate. Air is pulled from the vent fan duct from my bathroom, piped through the attic, and exhausted through a pipe and out the roof. 

Until I see more substantial evidence on CMH's, other than the half-ass post on the other forums, my closed-minded ass will remain safe and warm wrapped up in my HPS.


----------



## Sublime757 (Jan 28, 2008)

Here's a quick shot of my opium poppy in the early stages of flower.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 28, 2008)

Sublime757 said:


> "But Sublime, your grow room must be hot as hell?"
> 
> WRONG, MOTHERFUCKA! Lights on temp is 76-80, lights off 70-72. How do I manage this impossible feat? Unfortunately being a total badass, which I am, has no place in the growroom. Instead I ventilate. Air is pulled from the vent fan duct from my bathroom, piped through the attic, and exhausted through a pipe and out the roof.


That's a great setup....for someone that can/wants to do all of that but, I haven't seen to many others that want to go the extreme of cutting a hole in their roof's to vent heat out. A lot of people's grow rooms or cabinets are in basements. Instead of running a vent up 2 floors and cutting a hole in my roof, I'd prefer to look into more realistic options. It's great you can do what you did, but, it's not really an option for for the majority of growers.


----------



## natmoon (Jan 28, 2008)

So far i still havent heard from phillips and i am still waiting for tom green to get back to me.
One definite negative i have discovered is that there is a substantial wastage in the 530-540nm range emitting a fair amount of useless green light,visible to us but useless as far as i know for cannabis leaves.
I have no idea if the actual flowers themselves can utilize green light or not but i know its no good for leaf.

Personally i think so far that these bulbs would be good for vegging if you only have a hps ballast or for vertical positioning amongst plants as a compliment to a normal hid lamp during the flowering phase


----------



## Sublime757 (Jan 28, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> That's a great setup....for someone that can/wants to do all of that but, I haven't seen to many others that want to go the extreme of cutting a hole in their roof's to vent heat out. A lot of people's grow rooms or cabinets are in basements. Instead of running a vent up 2 floors and cutting a hole in my roof, I'd prefer to look into more realistic options. It's great you can do what you did, but, it's not really an option for for the majority of growers.


Umm I never cut any holes. I smiply tapped into the existing pipes going out the roof.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 28, 2008)

Sublime757 said:


> Umm I never cut any holes. I smiply tapped into the existing pipes going out the roof.


Growing in an attic or top floor? I don't know how big your grow room is but by venting out of the roof, do you have to use odor control? I'm in a cab in a finished basement of a 3 story house......no chance I can tap into something to vent out of my roof. But that's a cool set up to be able to keep those temps that low with the light that close to the canopy!


----------



## Sublime757 (Jan 28, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Growing in an attic or top floor? I don't know how big your grow room is but by venting out of the roof, do you have to use odor control? I'm in a cab in a finished basement of a 3 story house......no chance I can tap into something to vent out of my roof. But that's a cool set up to be able to keep those temps that low with the light that close to the canopy!


Yes, attic. An odor is controlled via carbon scrubber. I wish I had a basement I could grow in. But no, mine's full of mexicans.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 29, 2008)

Sublime757 said:


> Yes, attic. An odor is controlled via carbon scrubber. I wish I had a basement I could grow in. But no, mine's full of mexicans.


I saw in your gallery, you had a 5'10" plant with that 430 watt light. You have a a lot more cubic feet to heat up then I do. I've got a total of 27-30 inches in grow height by 36 wide and 30 deep. 400 watts cmh with a 4 inch fan and carbon scrubber temps are running High 70's -82 degrees now. I cut a piece of white paneling and then cut out for the reflector in the center of that, mounted the carbon scrubber directly behind the light socket and vented it out of the cab into the ceiling. That was the best I could do to get the heat out. I'm thinking about modifying the opposite side of the reflector to fit a 120 mm, 93 cfm fan to blow directly on the end of the bulb blowing back through the other side to the carbon scrubber. If I can get to the mid 70's I'll be happy. Plants are not showing any problems at the current temps but the cab is not full yet either, I just started cutting the first clones so it's going to take a while.


----------



## Sublime757 (Jan 29, 2008)

Yeah those are very old pics. That plant went through 9 kinds of hell. But your setup sounds good for making due with what you have. And the 120mm fan idea sounds promising. I'd definitely try it if you're having heat issues.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jan 29, 2008)

Yeah......my old grows were with 2 600 watt lights in an open basement no air cooling needed, just floor fans and 4-5 foot plants in DWC buckets and CO2. It's been a big change for me switching to this cab growing, height, heat, and cramming all the crap into a stealth cab is new to me. Just got 2 new orders of seeds today. Serious' AK-47, Seedmans Alta Tunda, Mandala Safari Mix (left over $ on the prepaid card, not something typical for me) along with a haze/skunk freebie will be SOG style on about a 2 week turn time on clone to flower, DJ's Grape Krush will be veged for a while, not a good strain for SOG. 
If you have any cooling ideas, don't be shy, advice is always welcome but no room for an ac unit.....I looked into Peltiers and thermoelectric cooling, but my hood stays cool all the way around so they wont help.


----------



## goatamineHcL (Mar 2, 2008)

so do these bulbs have to be used in hps ballast or can you put them intoa a 400w mh ballast?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Mar 3, 2008)

Only with an HPS ballast.


----------



## goatamineHcL (Mar 3, 2008)

thanks hopefully well get to see a nie difference then i mioght pick one up


----------



## atavistic (Mar 10, 2008)

Ordered a 250 watt for an upcoming small closet grow. Might blend in existing 250 watt HPS for a side by side comparison. Have seen some evidence indicating much less stretch in flower under ceramic.


----------



## tsnow (Mar 11, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> I'm in a cab in a finished basement of a 3 story house......no chance I can tap into something to vent out of my roof.


 Man you might be able to do even better if your in an unfinished basement. Just vent out the sewer line. Interesting read, thanks for the post..


----------



## trapper (Mar 11, 2008)

like the man said he gave us an intro,its up to us to research and decide,aint democracy a bitch.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Mar 17, 2008)

400 watts CMH in a cabinet, bare bulb in a 2 foot umbrealla reflector, NO AIR COOLED HOOD, NO COOL TUBE, no glass between the bulb and the plants. I can be in a grow space less then 8 square feet and still run in the high 70s - low 80's. Why would anybody have a grow space less then 8 square feet.......because it's 36 wide by 30 inches deep, I control the height anywhere from 10 inches to 30 inches. I keep the bulb 4-6 inches from the canopy. The way everthing works together is pretty cool, I designed it all so that the LESS space I have, the COOLER it runs. I had a bad male/female ratio so I'm left with only 2 females in the ebb & flow hydro system. To supplement, I threw a mix pack of Mandela beans in dirt, added a shelf and took them direct from sprout to the flower cab. They went from sprout to the flower cab on 3/10. CMH IS WORKING GREAT FOR ME, there a thread with plenty of pics and detailed cab info over on IC .......but I still don't have anything to sell you and I only have one username........lol some of your members here blew it for me on this site. I've never seen so many "followers" once the "he's a salesman" crap started, then somehow I had differnt logins to bump the thread.......just dumbasses. Try something new, give things a chance, take a risk once in a while, let your asshole un-pucker, think outside the box and maybe, just maybe, you'll learn something new. Best of luck those of you who had an interest in seeing a different option, there are plenty out there. HPS and MH are not your only choices, they are not even your best choice, CMH is, just like I said when I started the thread.


----------



## DLiver420 (Mar 17, 2008)

The idiot/intelligent ratio on forums typically runs even higher than in daily life. Most of these people don't have anyone to listen to their conspiracy theory rants in person, so they come here and spout off to a captive audience. Don't take offense, if you had posted "Water is wet and cures thirst" you still would have had a gaggle of morons saying you were a lobbyist for the bottled water conglomorate. 

Remember: The average IQ is 100 (100 is not real smart). That means half of all people are dumber than that.

Thanks for the info.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Mar 17, 2008)

Funny you say that, here's something that had me pissing myself laughing. Sublime and I talked, we tried to learn something from one another, it was a civil discusion. In his sig he has a quote from Skunkykushhybrid, "This is RUI You'll find no idiots here" the ironic part is that comment was made to me eariler in this thread......, the one that wants to learn is carrying a quote from someone that just wanted to jump on the bandwagon early on and tried to say I was here to sell light bulbs.....but he can't find any idiots.....um, dude, I'm not sure if this is the first time you've heard this but, if you look around and you can't pick out the idiot......it's you, there's always one around.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 10, 2008)

In the begining of the thread, I showed pics of some CMH grows and a couple of people still challenged it...... Here's a few pics from a couple of days ago of what I have going on.

400 Watts CMH in an umbrella reflector in a cabinet 
The cab is 36"wide, 30" deep and I control the height anywhere from 10 inches to 30 inches high..... if you want more details, just ask. It's a hydro cab, ebb&flow but due to a bad male/female ratio, I had to suppliment with some Mandala Mix seeds in dirt. with a little creativity and some hillbilly enginering, I got them in there and everything is working together.

*I can have a total grow space of less then 8 square feet and still keep the cab in the high 70's/low 80's......and I'm not using a cool tube or an air cooled hood. *My plant tops stay about 6" from the bulb, at 4 inches I had slight light burn.

For cooling, a 4" inline fan and a 4" fan blowing on the bulb. That's it!

So can a CMH bulb get results? or are we just talking about temps......

Here's a few random pics taken 2 or 3 days ago
My Grape Krush is begining first week of a 3 week flush. 
The other plants are Mandala Safari Mix and 2 HazeXSkunk just LST'ed on the right side of the cab.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 10, 2008)

The Safari Mix Solo Shots

These were put in the cab after a 1-2 weeks veging under CFLs. They were about 3 inches when put into flower on 3/10.


----------



## email468 (Apr 12, 2008)

they look fine to me.


----------



## vbp6us (Apr 13, 2008)

Here are my girls using a 400W CMH. Day 11 @ 12/12:


----------



## chronichaze09 (Apr 13, 2008)

cant find these anywhere... any1 have some sites?


----------



## Puff (Apr 13, 2008)

Seems interesting, thanks for the information but it has turned into a pissing contest.


----------



## Tanuvan (Apr 13, 2008)

Will these fit in the lumatek digital ballasts?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 14, 2008)

I was told they won't work with a digital ballasts because they require a hard strike to fire up.

Legalize It, Looking good, you really have that tub full!


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 14, 2008)

Puff said:


> Seems interesting, thanks for the information but it has turned into a pissing contest.


Looks to me like the pissing contest is over. Last week I pm'ed a bunch of those people from eariler in the thread letting them know my pics were up, as you can see, none of them have anything to say anymore. They thought I was trying to sell them light bulbs, I wasn't. I'm not in the lighting business, never was.  They just didn't want to believe it.


----------



## email468 (Apr 14, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Looks to me like the pissing contest is over. Last week I pm'ed a bunch of those people from eariler in the thread letting them know my pics were up, as you can see, none of them have anything to say anymore. They thought I was trying to sell them light bulbs, I wasn't. I'm not in the lighting business, never was.  They just didn't want to believe it.


you PM'd me and i never thought you were in the light bulb business. 
is your claim that the pics you provide prove that ceramic MH bulbs beats the rest?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 14, 2008)

email468 said:


> you PM'd me and i never thought you were in the light bulb business.
> is your claim that the pics you provide prove that ceramic MH bulbs beats the rest?


 
You're right, you never made any comments suggesting anything like that. But you did post a few comments that showed you were open minded and maybe wanted to know more. It was out of respect that I PM'ed you. There were a few people that were interested, or wanted see first hand info, I pm'ed them too. You suggested that I do a grow report, I did, just not here at RUI.

Yes, my pics are proof that it's better then HPS. I'm still waiting to see 400 watts HPS in 8 square feet without an air cooled hood or a cool tube 6 inches off of the canopy....... once we get to that point, we'll start comparing. I put a HPS bulb in my set up....for about 10 minutes when it got up to 98 degrees and was still climbing, I put my CMH blub back in. I tried it again a few days later with the hood raised all the way up, still to hot, it was at 96 degrees.

So yes, those pics are my proof and you do see a comparision, maybe not what people were looking for but, My CMH bulb is doing something MAJOR that a 400 watt HPS bulb can't.....grow weed in my cabinet at a tempature that doesn't fry the plants.


----------



## email468 (Apr 14, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> You're right, you never made any comments suggesting anything like that. But you did post a few comments that showed you were open minded and maybe wanted to know more. It was out of respect that I PM'ed you. There were a few people that were interested, or wanted see first hand info, I pm'ed them too. You suggested that I do a grow report, I did, just not here at RUI.
> 
> Yes, my pics are proof that it's better then HPS. I'm still waiting to see 400 watts HPS in 8 square feet without an air cooled hood or a cool tube 6 inches off of the canopy....... once we get to that point, we'll start comparing. I put a HPS bulb in my set up....for about 10 minutes when it got up to 98 degrees and was still climbing, I put my CMH blub back in. I tried it again a few days later with the hood raised all the way up, still to hot, it was at 96 degrees.
> 
> So yes, those pics are my proof and you do see a comparision, maybe not what people were looking for but, My CMH bulb is doing something MAJOR that a 400 watt HPS bulb can't.....grow weed in my cabinet at a tempature that doesn't fry the plants.


i try to stay open-minded but you do realize that people grow with higher wattages and use HPS and don't fry their plants. as far as i can tell it is just another bulb in our arsenal and certainly not better than HPS (one grow can't even tell if it is just as good as HPS - let alone better). if you want to make it your favorite, sounds good to me. heck - i'm thinking on giving CFLs a try to see how they do.

Ed Rosenthal would really piss you off - he says MH is a waste of money - just use HPS!


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 14, 2008)

email468 said:


> i try to stay open-minded but you do realize that people grow with higher wattages and use HPS and don't fry their plants. as far as i can tell it is just another bulb in our arsenal and certainly not better than HPS (one grow can't even tell if it is just as good as HPS - let alone better). if you want to make it your favorite, sounds good to me. heck - i'm thinking on giving CFLs a try to see how they do.
> 
> Ed Rosenthal would really piss you off - he says MH is a waste of money - just use HPS!


 
Henery Ford said all cars will only ever run on gasoline.....then diesel engines came out, now electric, solar, hybrids...... 

The most knowledgable people in the world at one point thought the world was flat....they turned out to be wrong.

Old Ed, has smoked, grown and seen more weed then I could ever imagine, but that doesn't mean he knows it all either....
I'm certainly not going to knock his knowledge but everyone has thoughts and opinions on what's best, they only last so long because they only look at what is in front of them. Light bulbs, like everything else, keep changing. The more we buy, the more companies dump into R&D.

I haven't seen much success from LEDs but, I'll bet that's where things end up (or some variation of an LED/plasma type of bulb)

Evloution happens. Whatever is made today, there will be someone tomorrow improving on it. It's Ed's time now, later on someone else will come out and say where he has been wrong. Then they will be the top dog until the next person comes along.


----------



## email468 (Apr 14, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Henery Ford said all cars will only ever run on gasoline.....then diesel engines came out, now electric, solar, hybrids......
> 
> The most knowledgable people in the world at one point thought the world was flat....they turned out to be wrong.
> 
> ...


Absolutely and completely agree. Part of being an expert means being wrong sometimes - can't avoid it (and shouldn't want to)! I think we will be seeing LEDs (or some form of them) in our future.

I would mention only one small, insignificant quibble. And I only point this out because you are a good sport and I believe you'll understand that I mention it with kind intentions. The flat-earth thing - not very many knowledgeable people ever bought into that. I understand you completely and using it as analogy did not undermine your argument at all. But you may find it interesting that not many folks bought into the flat earth (or at least anyone who thought about it at all). Any culture that lived near a seashore figured the Earth was round (or at least curved) since they saw the hull disappear and then the masts as ships sailed towards the horizon. A flat Earth would mean the ship would disappear all at once. Heck - the ancient Greeks had the circumference of the Earth figured out pretty close. They were off since they didn't know the Earth bulged. More proof of a round Earth available to the ancients was the circular shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse (which happen 2 and sometimes 3 times a year).

I would humbly recommend replacing flat-earth with earth-centered solar system and you'll have a great and accurate analogy.

Again, please do not take this personal - i am just passing along some info that i've gathered and thought you might enjoy it. I realize it is very trite and has no bearing on our discussion.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 14, 2008)

email468 said:


> Absolutely and completely agree. Part of being an expert means being wrong sometimes - can't avoid it (and shouldn't want to)! I think we will be seeing LEDs (or some form of them) in our future.
> 
> I would mention only one small, insignificant quibble. And I only point this out because you are a good sport and I believe you'll understand that I mention it with kind intentions. The flat-earth thing - not very many knowledgeable people ever bought into that. I understand you completely and using it as analogy did not undermine your argument at all. But you may find it interesting that not many folks bought into the flat earth (or at least anyone who thought about it at all). Any culture that lived near a seashore figured the Earth was round (or at least curved) since they saw the hull disappear and then the masts as ships sailed towards the horizon. A flat Earth would mean the ship would disappear all at once. Heck - the ancient Greeks had the circumference of the Earth figured out pretty close. They were off since they didn't know the Earth bulged. More proof of a round Earth available to the ancients was the circular shadow on the moon during a lunar eclipse (which happen 2 and sometimes 3 times a year).
> 
> ...


LOL, I'll just leave it and be wrong. I'm okay with that.  So I'm guessing you, like myself, spend some time stoned watching the History or Discovery channel.


----------



## DrWatson (Apr 14, 2008)

hey you know what works better than a 400w chm...1000w of any kind of light....


----------



## email468 (Apr 14, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> LOL, I'll just leave it and be wrong. I'm okay with that.  So I'm guessing you, like myself, spend some time stoned watching the History or Discovery channel.


your analogy was completely fine and accurate. there were plenty of folks who did think the world was flat (i'm sure some still do) but i thought you'd like the trivia. Yes, i do watch documentary DVDs (and many are from the History channel) but don't have a TV (I watch them on my computer) but spend a lot of time reading.


----------



## natmoon (Apr 17, 2008)

I don't know if anyone saw my old post about cmh bulbs anyway i got my hydro store to stock them but with the new 7200k MH bulbs the cmh bulbs have already been made redundant really as they will not outperform the new MH bulbs

Grow Lights > Grow Lamps > Ceramic Metal Halide Lamps


----------



## Bain (Apr 18, 2008)

natmoon said:


> I don't know if anyone saw my old post about cmh bulbs anyway i got my hydro store to stock them but with the new 7200k MH bulbs the cmh bulbs have already been made redundant really as they will not outperform the new MH bulbs
> 
> Grow Lights*>*Grow Lamps*>*Ceramic Metal Halide Lamps


 
I'm not familar with the new bulbs, how do we know they will outperform the CMH bulbs?


----------



## natmoon (Apr 18, 2008)

Bain said:


> I'm not familar with the new bulbs, how do we know they will outperform the CMH bulbs?


Because of the spectrum that they operate at.
Its nothing to do with anything else.
Anyone who knows about lighting knows that a 72ook MH bulb will do well in veg.
Previously the old Mh bulbs were 4000k and they did really well so you can imagine what 72ook can do for veg.
Basically thats how you know


----------



## IndoMan (Apr 19, 2008)

What ballast are you using with the CMH light


----------



## Bain (Apr 19, 2008)

natmoon said:


> Because of the spectrum that they operate at.
> Its nothing to do with anything else.
> Anyone who knows about lighting knows that a 72ook MH bulb will do well in veg.
> Previously the old Mh bulbs were 4000k and they did really well so you can imagine what 72ook can do for veg.
> Basically thats how you know


 
Right, but CMH are usable in both veg and flower, considering they have somewhat different uses isn't it hard to say that it is obsolete. While recently I've heard of some people using MH for the whole grow, isn't the bulb you're referring to mainly for veg?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 21, 2008)

Bain said:


> Right, but CMH are usable in both veg and flower, considering they have somewhat different uses isn't it hard to say that it is obsolete. While recently I've heard of some people using MH for the whole grow, isn't the bulb you're referring to mainly for veg?


 
I just didn't want to be the only one out there to bring it up.....
I don't know about the newer MH blub, post up whatever you have about them. But if you want to compare, compare 'em bulb for bulb don't forget about Flowering, Heat, UVB output and Cost. Are better for more than just vegging?


----------



## Tanuvan (Apr 21, 2008)

Who sells a bulb/ballast combo for these?


----------



## HashPlant (Apr 21, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Henery Ford said all cars will only ever run on gasoline.....then diesel engines came out, now electric, solar, hybrids......


I doubt henry ford was trying to make a disambiguation between diesel and gasoline when he made that statement, i think what the statement is meant to convey is petroleum products. 

Hybrids still run on gas, or do you know otherwise?

Do you know anyone who owns an electric car?

Solar? Lol.

Despite the advantage of having all the information up to this date in history, you got it so wrong!

Henry Ford said this 100 years ago, and he's still very right. Maybe that will change, but what enormous standard are you holding him to? I mean 100 years! 

Henry Ford appears a very intelligent man, as do the many experts on this forum who continually give out advise for the benefit of others. Perhaps you should listen sometime instead of reinventing the wheel, or at least consider that someone who's done this 100's of times probably can tell you more than a spectral intensity curve. I suppose henry ford would have told you to know your role.


----------



## HashPlant (Apr 21, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> *I can have a total grow space of less then 8 square feet and still keep the cab in the high 70's/low 80's......and I'm not using a cool tube or an air cooled hood. *My plant tops stay about 6" from the bulb, at 4 inches I had slight light burn.
> 
> For cooling, a 4" inline fan and a 4" fan blowing on the bulb. That's it!


Um, 8 square feet is not a volume, it's an area.
If you mean 8 cubic feet, of course it's running cool, you have the same volume as a 6"x20' run of ducting, lol. LOL 8 ft^3, you're cab doesn't need an air cooled hood, it IS one! 

I mean that is an a tiny space to be growing in, the volume of an 18" cooltube is over 1 cubic foot, just inside the tube!

Even with the tiniest fan you'd be evacuating the air in that cab 10 times over in a minute. Lol, man you come to the wrong conclusion on almost everything, I'm interested to know what you do for a living?

Your plants are ok at best, i do see the conclusive proof that cmh are a waste of time. A 400W 6500k MH using ebb and flow kills that all day son.


----------



## DrWatson (Apr 22, 2008)

my 1000w just blew a capacitor yesterday


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 23, 2008)

HashPlant said:


> Um, 8 square feet is not a volume, it's an area.
> If you mean 8 cubic feet, of course it's running cool, you have the same volume as a 6"x20' run of ducting, lol. LOL 8 ft^3, you're cab doesn't need an air cooled hood, it IS one!
> 
> I mean that is an a tiny space to be growing in, the volume of an 18" cooltube is over 1 cubic foot, just inside the tube!
> ...


Yeah, that cab is a pretty cool design, Thanks
As for the plants being "ok at best"...... I hate to kill your credibility man but this is what was already said about them a few days ago: 
"Nice grow! Bummer about the high ratio of malesluck of the draw sometimes. Like the lemons/lemonade analogy; when presented w/ pollenmake beans!

The extended floral clusters are a sativa trait expressing themselves on an indica structured plantlooks interesting, actually. Will see how these turn out. 

As for flushingthe longer the better IMHO. Less productive, but increased quality. Keep up the good work.

Enjoy!

~dj~"

.......that's what the breeder of the beans, DJ Short had to say on my grow thread.....well, like I said before Hash Plant, thanks for stopping by.

I tried to upload some pics that I took tonight but the server must be down. I'll post 'em this week.


----------



## good2bkind (Apr 25, 2008)

This has been an excellent read. Sometimes I get on here, and it's like I'm involved in a soap opera. It's so fascinating-- there are the politics of ego and personality-- there is technology-- there is speculation-- there is learning, there is feedback.

I find threads like this addictive. I have not done anything but read this thread for the past 2 hours.

This thread is like a commons. I was listening to the local college station talk about the abandonment of the commons... places where people gather to talk and exchange information, places increasingly overtaken by corporations, places increasingly small and disappearing due to people retreating into privacy bubbles.

But what the discussion did not even attempt to disclose was that the commons is alive and well.

It's happening in hyperspace, it's happening here, and for me, it's just as real if not real-er (is that a word) because I am listening to people who know a lot more than me on a particular subject and I get to pipe in every now and then and if I want I can send them personal emails.

Whatever rollitup's drawbacks, I really love the format of this site, it seems the most accessible. I went to those sites mentioned above, ICM (International Cannagraphic Magazine) and HG420 (Home Grown 420) but they didn't have the immediacy and accessibility of this site-- I was very turned off by their ugly interfaces. If the creators of those sites aren't thinking about something as simple as that, they'll lose users.

Which is fine, people go where they go-- I personally prefer this neighborhood to those, this one resonates better for me personally, at this time.

As for the egos and bickering... we're humans and this is life. It's still good.


----------



## email468 (Apr 25, 2008)

good2bkind said:


> This has been an excellent read. Sometimes I get on here, and it's like I'm involved in a soap opera. It's so fascinating-- there are the politics of ego and personality-- there is technology-- there is speculation-- there is learning, there is feedback.
> 
> I find threads like this addictive. I have not done anything but read this thread for the past 2 hours.
> 
> ...


No doubt the community is alive and well here at RIU. I love it here.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 26, 2008)

good2bkind said:


> This has been an excellent read. Sometimes I get on here, and it's like I'm involved in a soap opera. It's so fascinating-- there are the politics of ego and personality-- there is technology-- there is speculation-- there is learning, there is feedback.
> 
> I find threads like this addictive. I have not done anything but read this thread for the past 2 hours.
> 
> ...


Very well said. Hopefull you were able to gain some knowledge and you were entertained, it sure beats sitting around watching TV.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 26, 2008)

Here are a few shots from early last week, these plants are currently 3 weeks 2 days into thier flush and stil have time to go. Pics taken under the CMH bulb so true coloring is bleeched out.


----------



## natmoon (Apr 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Here are a few shots from early last week, these plants are currently 3 weeks 2 days into thier flush and stil have time to go. Pics taken under the CMH bulb so true coloring is bleeched out.


Hey man i don't want to rag on you or for you to take my comments the wrong way but you can see from the structure of the buds and the leaves that the cmh bulbs lack the correct spectrum of light for growing with properly.

Even phillips themselves state that they are not efficient for growing with.
Sorry dude to be negative but they just don't have all the needed colours in the correct amounts.
I got my store to stock the bulbs but even the owner and phillips state that they are not good to grow with.

I know its a blow but if you want to put some trust in me get yourself a switchable ballast and use the new 7200k mh bulbs for veg and then put a dual spectrum hps bulb in for flowering.
I hope i haven't offended you as that is not my intention


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 27, 2008)

natmoon said:


> Hey man i don't want to rag on you or for you to take my comments the wrong way but you can see from the structure of the buds and the leaves that the cmh bulbs lack the correct spectrum of light for growing with properly.
> 
> Even phillips themselves state that they are not efficient for growing with.
> Sorry dude to be negative but they just don't have all the needed colours in the correct amounts.
> ...


No offense taken, we are all trying to learn. I've used the bulb through a full grow at this point, I'm not sure what the spectrum issue is supposed to cause but I haven't seen any problems. There is a number of people growing with them now, Ive seen grows where larger growers used both HPS and CMH using clones. I've also seen people using both together, CMH and HPS. As for my own grow, I've had some pretty heavy hitters watching it, as I posted before, DJ Short commented. If something was up or the bulb caused a problem, I think it would have been pointed out to me at that time but, it's not just him either. I've had 2 different/other breeders that asked me to do a "test grow" for them after seeing my results.....or just to get the attention that the CMH grow thread draws. Either way, I've been offered free beans to be grown under CMH. If all goes well, in another month, my cabinet will just be for vegging and I'll have a 1600-2400 watt flowering room depending on what I work out and with who.

It's not at all that I'm not hearing what you're saying Nat, you've been following the thread very objectivly and you've done a good bit of research on your own. I can only have a great deal of respect for that. We all gained knowledge and that's what the forum is about. Right now, I just have to much backing it up and it's drawn a ton of attention from some well known people/breeders. Phillips didn't produce the bulb to be a grow bulb but with what is taking place, maybe they will look into optmizing it for us.

Email468, I have to say, you have the most orginized grow threads I've ever seen. I got some great ideas from your format. You once made a comment to me to do a "detailed" grow thread, now I see what you meant. Im not even close to being that orginized but your thread helped me get started in that direction. Thanks!


----------



## natmoon (Apr 27, 2008)

Yeah man i hear what your saying.
I actually asked my net supplier to stock them and check them out and he is now stocking them.

My point is just that they exhibit a strange growth pattern during flowering from using solely cmh and that they are less efficient than using the new MH bulbs in conjunction with a dual spectrum hps.

Heres a link to where i among others got the cmh bulbs stocked at and i hope you get some good results and have fun with your experiment
Grow Lights > Grow Lamps > Ceramic Metal Halide Lamps


----------



## ceestyle (Apr 27, 2008)

DrWatson said:


> my 1000w just blew a capacitor yesterday


did it blow catastrophically? were you there? i'm curious to hear about what happens when they finally do blow ...


----------



## ThatOneDude (Apr 27, 2008)

Hey Nat, I checked out that link, they look expensive if I'm right with the conversion rate. Also, this is something that was posted on a CMH thread from another site. I'm not sure if helps or clarifies anything but, honestly, I was only thinking about where I am, not around the world. I am talking specificly about 1 type of CMH bulb, not all CMH bulbs are the same.

*"Euro Customers DO NOT BUY THE GREENS HORTI Philips CMH..ITS THE WRONG ONE>




>* 
the thing on cmh and philips cmh there are Features on the bulb we need.. 
the lamp we want is a 
CMH, 4K, open fixture rated..

I have scoured the Worlds CMH lamps the city was looked at same time as retro white..unless a new cmh comes out the retro white and CMH MHP(USA Versions are the Only option IN CMH 250, 400 watt..

lets compare the two..( USA RETRO WHITE and greens horti )
both philips obv..

cmh retrowhite .............................................Greens horti 

..................part#CDM250S50/hor/4k/alto....-..MASTER_CityWhite_CDO_TT_250W_828_E40_SLV
Life..........................20,0000...................................16,000
Init lumen..................20,750....................................22,500
mean lumen................16,600..................................*14,000ish*(not confirmed waiting on Philips UK)
lumen Maint................85%.....................................*75%**(not confirmed waiting on Philips UK)
Kelvin.......................4,000K....................................2,800K
CRI............................85........................................85
Open Fixture................YES......................................NO
(adv tech needs to update there site the lumen on the 250 is wrong on the site)
comparison of Lamp and SPD>>
shortest way of saying it the Euro City white is like HPS half of its overal energy is wasted in Unuesable ranges..it is better than hps though but not same as USA 4K Versions,
when you compare SPD you view the Whole SPD and then the % in the 500-600Ish range.. (ya the retro does wastes some but nothing like the city or hps %)"


----------



## Psilocobe (May 6, 2008)

Where can i buy these bulbs?? Ive googled but all I can find is forums that discuss the bulb.


----------



## mdgcmd (May 6, 2008)

Phlips MasterColor Ceramic Metal Halide ~ CMH ~ HPS-Retro White


----------



## mdgcmd (May 6, 2008)

I seen an experiment where one plant was grown under a CMH and an HPS. The plant grew like made but mostly towards the CMH. The theory behind this was bacause of the CMH more natural color temp. They said that they suspect that because the CMH was more like the color of the sun the plant had a preference for the CMH spectrum.


----------



## ceestyle (May 6, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> I seen an experiment where one plant was grown under a CMH and an HPS. The plant grew like made but mostly towards the CMH. The theory behind this was bacause of the CMH more natural color temp. They said that they suspect that because the CMH was more like the color of the sun the plant had a preference for the CMH spectrum.


ya seen it? i heard that !


----------



## Psilocobe (May 6, 2008)

Ive found another cheaper site: 400 Watt ED-18 Metal Halide HPS-Retro White

Is it neccesairy to use a cooltube for these lamps? I mean if the guy in the first post could hold the lamp with his hands so..


----------



## ThatOneDude (May 10, 2008)

I dont have a cool tube and I grow in a cabinet. You can touch the end of the bulb but the center is to hot. It depends on your set up as to what you need to cool it. I have a 4 inch axial fan blowing on the bulb and a 4 inch inline fan exchanging air in the cabinet, it runs in the high 70's to low 80's depending on the room temp. I just returned from a 5 day trip and the cab was left to run on it's own. Plants were 6" from the bulb, main buds are the size of a coke can. Mandala Safari Mix, as cheap as the seeds are, the are the best bargin out there!


----------



## mdgcmd (May 11, 2008)

Ohhh that sounds do lovely man... can we get some pics of your current grow? I got my ballast and bulb in the mail, but the bulb was blown, so I am again waiting on the new arrival.


----------



## Psilocobe (May 12, 2008)

Sounds very interesting! Any1 knows the difference between a horizontal and a vertical bulb? 
I can't really imagine what that should be. What happens if i use a vertical bulb horizontal?


----------



## ThatOneDude (May 13, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> Ohhh that sounds do lovely man... can we get some pics of your current grow? I got my ballast and bulb in the mail, but the bulb was blown, so I am again waiting on the new arrival.


There's a pic in my gallery of the grow area of the cab.


----------



## ceestyle (May 13, 2008)

Psilocobe said:


> Sounds very interesting! Any1 knows the difference between a horizontal and a vertical bulb?
> I can't really imagine what that should be. What happens if i use a vertical bulb horizontal?


one is designed to be operated vertically, the other horizontally. I can't remember exactly, but if you operate them outside of like 15 degrees of their designed angle, they will either give you poor performance, burn out more quickly, or both.


----------



## SnoFleezy (May 13, 2008)

what strand is that last pic?


----------



## ThatOneDude (May 13, 2008)

SnoFleezy said:


> what strand is that last pic?


If you mean in my gallery it's DJ Short's Grape Krush Just chopped and dried, went into jars yesterday to start the cure.


----------



## Psilocobe (May 15, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> one is designed to be operated vertically, the other horizontally. I can't remember exactly, but if you operate them outside of like 15 degrees of their designed angle, they will either give you poor performance, burn out more quickly, or both.


Ok.  Im wondering about 2 CMH 400w bulbs, my closet measures is 21 x 19

Do you think that could work?


----------



## ceestyle (May 15, 2008)

Psilocobe said:


> Ok.  Im wondering about 2 CMH 400w bulbs, my closet measures is 21 x 19
> 
> Do you think that could work?



if that's in inches, that's overkill. One 400 would be sufficient.


----------



## NLXSK1 (May 15, 2008)

Tagged to last...

I appologize for not reading the entire 200+ page thread but I did read part of the white paper associated with these bulbs...

Starting at 40% of their life they lose a significant amount of lumens.

It would seem you would have to use 2 or more bulbs over the stated lifetime to keep it at full strength. That is more cost + maintenance right there...

Also, since it seems like HPS is the largest used system out there, as a newbie I am going to use proven technology before I start to try my own experiments personally.


----------



## Psilocobe (May 15, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> if that's in inches, that's overkill. One 400 would be sufficient.


Yes inches. Okay, so that wouldn't work out? I know its overkill but, will it work or not? 

Use 1 400w in the veg & put another one in there when bloom starts.


----------



## ceestyle (May 15, 2008)

Psilocobe said:


> Yes inches. Okay, so that wouldn't work out? I know its overkill but, will it work or not?
> 
> Use 1 400w in the veg & put another one in there when bloom starts.


I have 18 x 36 w/ 150W HPS and 250W CFL, and that's plenty. Venting heat from 2 x 400W would be an issue ... actually, even fitting them in there would be a pinch. 

I'm not sure what you mean by "would it work" . It's just more light than you need.


----------



## Psilocobe (May 16, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> I have 18 x 36 w/ 150W HPS and 250W CFL, and that's plenty. Venting heat from 2 x 400W would be an issue ... actually, even fitting them in there would be a pinch.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean by "would it work" . It's just more light than you need.


I'm sorry, my english aren't that good u know. 

But ok, then i buy 1 bulb. My closet is kinda small, you saw the measures a few posts up, and the height of my closet is 43 inches.

Do you think i'll need a cooltube or do you think i can skip that?


/Psilocobe


----------



## DecentGreen (May 16, 2008)

So im having some decently large heat issues in my grow box, ten of fifteen degrees lower would be nice. If i used the phillips ceramic 400 w in my 400 w hps ballast would that work just as well and be way cooler? cause that would be nice.


----------



## Psilocobe (Jun 4, 2008)

Eey, somebody knows a onlineshop that send these bulbs to europe??


----------



## yamahaman91 (Jun 13, 2008)

how does one of these compare to a Son Agro bulb. i don't really care about temp, i just want to know what one gives off the better spectrum


----------



## object16 (Jun 14, 2008)

Welcome To Advanced Technology Solutions ~ Lighting Divison

Is the place to buy them. They show a picture of the spectrum - it is exactly like the sun Huge amounts of blue and violet to promote nice bushy plants with loads of chlorophyll, and tons of red that chlorophyll really loves.
The in between wavelengths are captured by the carotenoid system, and those pigments pass the electrons over to chlorophyll. When your bush is really well into the flowering stage, I would use a Gavita type "reflectorized"
HPS lamp from HTG supply. This pure HPS lamp puts ALL of the light DOWN
and will maximize your yield. I use the reflectorized HPS for the last 3 weeks because it has the maximum photon flux. By that point the plant already has made all the chlorophyll it needs, and has changed its metabolism to storing food/making nice flowers. Both the CMH lamp, and the reflectorized HPS both run off the same ballast. Sativa.


----------



## Witchking (Jun 14, 2008)

yamahaman91 said:


> how does one of these compare to a Son Agro bulb. i don't really care about temp, i just want to know what one gives off the better spectrum



seconded I would like to know the answer to that too


----------



## CaliStylez (Jun 14, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Not for digital ballasts, they require a hard strike to fire up.
> 
> There's endless advantages to these bulbs.
> 
> Got Questions? Comments? Sarcasm? Hit me with it.


This question may have been answered already, but i dont have time to search at the moment. WHAT is a hard strike? What type of outlet do these bulbs require.?


----------



## CaliStylez (Jun 14, 2008)

nevermind. not interested.


----------



## yamahaman91 (Jun 14, 2008)

i just goggled this bulb and according to allot of charts and forum posts the cmh has a better spectrum for flowering and vegging than any other bulb ( including the Son Agro) when i want to do and indoor grow i'm defenitely gonna use one of these.


----------



## skunk8522 (Jun 14, 2008)

san agro bulbs are hps bulbls with a touch of blue spectrum say a thousand watt hps bulb is a red spectrum while the san agro bulb is 1030 or 1130. which is 1000 watt red and think a 130 watts of the blue spec in the bulb i just read this today


----------



## skunk8522 (Jun 14, 2008)

is the dutch passion oasis a good plant still undecided on strain thinking of getting a white rhino and a bubble gum seeds and if i get a extra female of rhino and a male of bubble gum ill cross them or has this already been done and i think a bubble gum is for outside


----------



## mdgcmd (Jun 15, 2008)

The only disadvantage I see over your traditional HPS or the Sun Agro is the lumen's per watt. That being said spectrum is more important to me than lumens, considering I have a 400 watt CMH in a 30x24x60 inches. Even though there is like 15,000 less lumens the color temperature more than makes up for the lumen loss.


----------



## Hawk (Jun 15, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> The only disadvantage I see over your traditional HPS or the Sun Agro is the lumen's per watt. That being said spectrum is more important to me than lumens, considering I have a 400 watt CMH in a 30x24x60 inches. Even though there is like 15,000 less lumens the color temperature more than makes up for the lumen loss.


This is a point I haven't seen enough discussion about to satisfy me.

At what point does the superior spectrum of the CMH outweigh its inferior "brightness" vs. an HPS? I'd like more information on that.


----------



## mdgcmd (Jun 16, 2008)

Well like I said in regards to my grow. I wouldn't see any advantages from the HPS as I am over doing it on lumens as it is. Also I get more use from the CMH as it is one bulb from start to finish. Temps are right on target, spectrum is great, and lumens are plenty. I couldn't have gone wrong
with this and I doubt that I could have picked a better bulb.


----------



## mrbuzzsaw (Jun 16, 2008)

this is the one i want to see

*The lightbulb of the future? *

*Luxim's plasma lightbulb*

Silicon Valley's Luxim has developed a lightbulb the size of a Tic Tac that gives off as much light as a streetlight. News.com's Michael Kanellos talks to the company about its technology and its plans to expand into various markets.



the question is will it work for growing?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jun 16, 2008)

Hawk said:


> This is a point I haven't seen enough discussion about to satisfy me.
> 
> At what point does the superior spectrum of the CMH outweigh its inferior "brightness" vs. an HPS? I'd like more information on that.


There is a loss of lumens but.....lumans are the brightness of light that we see with our eyes. Plants don't have eyes, they don't "see" Lumens, they "see" and use SPD. 

Another point on the loss of Lumens is the distance of the bulb from the canopy. Just like any light, the closer you are, the brighter it is. In my pics, I showed you I keep the bare bulb 5-6 inches off of the canopy. With an HPS bulb, in my set up, I would have burnt the canopy at that distance. HPS bulbs "throw heat" all the way around, while 80% of the heat from a CMH bulb comes off of the top of the bulb. I guess the question is how many lumens are you losing based on the difference in distance? I can't answer that part for you.


----------



## Hawk (Jun 16, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> There is a loss of lumens but.....lumans are the brightness of light that we see with our eyes. Plants don't have eyes, they don't "see" Lumens, they "see" and use SPD.
> 
> Another point on the loss of Lumens is the distance of the bulb from the canopy. Just like any light, the closer you are, the brighter it is. In my pics, I showed you I keep the bare bulb 5-6 inches off of the canopy. With an HPS bulb, in my set up, I would have burnt the canopy at that distance. HPS bulbs "throw heat" all the way around, while 80% of the heat from a CMH bulb comes off of the top of the bulb. I guess the question is how many lumens are you losing based on the difference in distance? I can't answer that part for you.


Thanks. I understand lumens correlate with what our eyes are most sensitive to and the limitations of that measurement for plants. That's why I said "brightness" (trying to be vague) and not specifically lumens. On SPD charts, my hang-up is they are relative, not absolute measures. They don't say anything about how _much_ light the lamp outputs--only the spectral distribution of whatever amount they actually do output. Using an extreme example, the SPD of some 250w lamp could be much better than the one from some 400w lamp. That doesn't mean the 250w lamp will produce better results, even though it has a better SPD.

I'd like to see the SPD for equal wattage CMH, HPS, MH all normalized at some wavelength. Such a comparison might use whatever wave length is _most important_ for flowering (in an HPS comparison) and for vegging (in a MH comparison). That's not to say that other wavelengths should be discounted, but the comparison would be for the wavelength that is _most_ critical for a particular stage of growth.

For all I know, a CMH bulb produces about as many photons in the important (for flowering) red spectrum as an HPS. But if the HPS produces a bit more, my question is: at what point does the superior SPD of a CMH overwelm the HPS's advantage in absolute output of red spectrum light.

I'm not too concerned about bulb-to-canopy distance in my particular situation since I already keep my bulb quite close.



I'm not trying to show that CMH isn't a great bulb. In fact, I'm strongly considering adding one to my current lighting for the increased spectrum. I just want to understand these lamps more. I currently veg with MH and flower with HPS (250w lumatek ballast runs either). I'm thinking of adding a second 250w light. I figure if I go with an HPS mag ballast, I'd be able to run MH + HPS, or MH + CMH, or HPS + CMH, or HPS + HPS. That'd be a lot of choices.

FWIW, even the folks I see pushing CMH bulbs the hardest (and selling them) say: _"...we currently are promoting CMH over HPS as the Single Light Source, we do believe supplementing CMH with HPS is worth the effort..."_ To me, that says that CMH is a great all purpose lamp that can do everything well--but, HPS still packs an important wallop of light that our plants can take advantage of (presumably for packing on weight when flowering).

Peace.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 22, 2008)

Hawk said:


> Thanks. I understand lumens correlate with what our eyes are most sensitive to and the limitations of that measurement for plants. That's why I said "brightness" (trying to be vague) and not specifically lumens. On SPD charts, my hang-up is they are relative, not absolute measures. They don't say anything about how _much_ light the lamp outputs--only the spectral distribution of whatever amount they actually do output. Using an extreme example, the SPD of some 250w lamp could be much better than the one from some 400w lamp. That doesn't mean the 250w lamp will produce better results, even though it has a better SPD.
> 
> I'd like to see the SPD for equal wattage CMH, HPS, MH all normalized at some wavelength. Such a comparison might use whatever wave length is _most important_ for flowering (in an HPS comparison) and for vegging (in a MH comparison). That's not to say that other wavelengths should be discounted, but the comparison would be for the wavelength that is _most_ critical for a particular stage of growth.
> 
> ...


The fact is that by "adding" blue, even if you remained at the same lumen rating, you would be sacrificing red. Here is a post I just threw down on another thread: https://www.rollitup.org/grow-room-design-setup/74888-1550-watts-cfl-s-17.html#post979674


----------



## Hawk (Jun 22, 2008)

I read you're post in that other thread. Seems very well reasoned. You're point about sacrificing red for other spectrums gets to the root of my reservation about CMH. As much as I like the idea of a fuller spectrum, I'm not sure at what point sacrificing red light to get that fuller spectrum is worth it.

I wouldn't mind seeing you explain your thoughts in International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums - Ceramic Metal Halide (CMH). That thread is unmanageably long so even browsing the whole thing takes some time. Because of that I think it's fair game to jump in at any point even if you haven't read it. But the guy from Advanced Lighting (the only place I know of that's selling them) and a few others are defending these lamps strongly. Yet somehow I'm left feeling unsure what's best for me.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 22, 2008)

Hawk said:


> I read you're post in that other thread. Seems very well reasoned. You're point about sacrificing red for other spectrums gets to the root of my reservation about CMH. As much as I like the idea of a fuller spectrum, I'm not sure at what point sacrificing red light to get that fuller spectrum is worth it.
> 
> I wouldn't mind seeing you explain your thoughts in International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums - Ceramic Metal Halide (CMH). That thread is unmanageably long so even browsing the whole thing takes some time. Because of that I think it's fair game to jump in at any point even if you haven't read it. But the guy from Advanced Lighting (the only place I know of that's selling them) and a few others are defending these lamps strongly. Yet somehow I'm left feeling unsure what's best for me.


Thank you.

Interesting. "Defending" those lights really depends against what. There are few things that you can categorically trash - CFLs, for example. There seems to be a price point argument that doesn't make sense for CMH, and it doesn't seem like the people who have small grobox heat issues or can't spend $50 for the right light are enough to put forth a meaningful argument for them against the masses who they don't make sense for. 

As I mentioned previously, however, I haven't done enough research to pretend to have all the facts. More of them would help me make sense of what the hype is about.


----------



## object16 (Jun 23, 2008)

Actually, since CMH runs on an HPS ballast, you have the option, if you like for the last 2-3 weeks running a pure HPS lamp, and running the CMH lamp for the first 8-9 weeks, then judge for yourself whether one lamp is better than the other. At the present time, with the availability of a 53$ 400w CMH lamp, I would not waste my time with any metal halide ballast at all. And if I wanted to supplement my flowering with blue, to achieve maximum potency, I would strictly supplement with CMH, since this lamp has superior maintained lumens, for example 2 x 400w hps with a 400wcmh in between. If I only had room for one lamp, it would be a tossup, but I would favour a reflectorized Gavita type 400w HPS in that scenario, for the absolute maximum in photon flux.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 23, 2008)

object16 said:


> Actually, since CMH runs on an HPS ballast, you have the option, if you like for the last 2-3 weeks running a pure HPS lamp, and running the CMH lamp for the first 8-9 weeks, then judge for yourself whether one lamp is better than the other.


I don't think there is any question that the HPS will be better for flowering. Why you would run the CMH until the last 2-3 weeks is beyond me. Can you please explain that?



> At the present time, with the availability of a 53$ 400w CMH lamp, I would not waste my time with any metal halide ballast at all. And if I wanted to supplement my flowering with blue, to achieve maximum potency, I would strictly supplement with CMH, since this lamp has superior maintained lumens, for example 2 x 400w hps with a 400wcmh in between. If I only had room for one lamp, it would be a tossup, but I would favour a reflectorized Gavita type 400w HPS in that scenario, for the absolute maximum in photon flux.


Fine, so use CMH for veg and HPS for flower. I don't think MH vs. CMH is really the argument as I understand it.

I don't understand the big deal here. Why would you ever have "one room, one lamp" ? Conversion bulbs have been around forever. Again, you can't throw down $50 for another bulb?


----------



## object16 (Jun 26, 2008)

Conversion bulbs have been around forever, but they're crap. MH conversion is anemic, I would run a CMH and get some real light instead of a conversion.


----------



## DR. VonDankenstine (Jun 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Greetings fellow weed growers and lovers! I'm new here but not new to other forums. I've seen a ton of noobs asking about lighting and all anyone has to say is HPS, MH, Floro or LED. Time to stir some shit up and help some of you out and get you out of the dark ages.
> 
> LEDs won't be refined for a couple of years, I've seen grows fail, I tried them myself as supplemental lighting, and for clones. To say the least, I wasn't impressed. They need work, they may be the best thing out there at some point but for now, you're better off with floros in my opinion.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the info/post, and opinions on the light---I hope it works out for you----as far as jumping on the "next best thing" a lot more testing needs to be done---a lot of factors to consider---You should do some side by side tests and really see what the facts are. Could be great--------could be a fart in the wind. Thank you again and best of luck with your research.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 26, 2008)

object16 said:


> Conversion bulbs have been around forever, but they're crap. MH conversion is anemic, I would run a CMH and get some real light instead of a conversion.


That's funny, I seem to see that MH conversions get about 36-37k , compared to 39 quoted with the CMH. Considering the amount of useless or overweighted spectrum with the CMH, you're probably getting more useful light with the MH.

In any case, is your argument really that CMH is the "revolution" because you think it's slightly better for veg and runs cooler? Come on, what we care about it harvest. Why else would people run HPS through veg and flower, rather than MH ? Flowering period is obvously the most important lightwise.


----------



## object16 (Jun 27, 2008)

ceestyle, you must be stoned, or don't know how to read, your link shows the MH lamp STARTS at 32,000 in the horizontal position, but due to lumen degradation goes downhill fast. I've tried a conversion lamp, and the plant just goes yellow and shrivels up.
there is no useless spectrum on a CMH, just compare to the photosynthesis action spectrum, and it's a perfect match.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 27, 2008)

object16 said:


> ceestyle, you must be stoned, or don't know how to read, your link shows the MH lamp STARTS at 32,000 in the horizontal position, but due to lumen degradation goes downhill fast. I've tried a conversion lamp, and the plant just goes yellow and shrivels up.
> there is no useless spectrum on a CMH, just compare to the photosynthesis action spectrum, and it's a perfect match.


First of all, it's simple enough to respond without being a dick. I clearly stated that I am not an expert on CMH.

I'm interested to see that CMH has better lifetime / degradation than a MH. From what I've seen, they have comparable lifetimes. If you have some to compare for CMH, I'd be interested to see it.

Your anecdotal evidence is just that. I'm sure there are many with good luck with conversion lamps - such as myself - that would beg to differ with your opinion of them.

Without getting back into the details of the CMH argument I've already made - which you may feel free to read - we know that the HPS spectrum is best for flowering pot. Period. Until you show me a side-by-side that shows otherwise, I'm going to go with the science and vast documentation of the efficiency of maximum red/yellow spectrum for flowering. 

If you're still debating what is best for vegetative growth, I would still ask to see proof of that, but would add that I don't really care that much. People still veg with fluoros, for chrissake, but nobody skimps on the HPS who wants the best results..


----------



## object16 (Jun 28, 2008)

Ceramic metal halide has an extremely shallow lumen degradation, has excellent maintained lumens. Also CMH has loads of red. What I am talking about is optimizing, because obviously when the plants are small, they just can't physically use all the photons from a 58,000 lumen 400w lamp, but what we are not taking into account, is that HPS is very high in lumens AS AN ARTEFACT OF HOW LUMENS ARE MEASURED, which is green and yellow photons are weighted very high, whereas blue and red photons, to which THE EYE is less sensitive to, BUT CHLOROPHYLL IS MORE SENSITIVE TO, means that TOTAL PHOTONS, is probably very similar. Remember, how a CMH lamp is made: they just take an HPS lamp, and SPIKE IT WITH RARE METALS, to make it give off lots more blue and red, which IS PERFECT FOR WHAT WE WANT AS POTGROWERS!!! Peace, and sorry to be a dick on my last comment, but you posted the completely wrong lumens.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 28, 2008)

object16 said:


> Ceramic metal halide has an extremely shallow lumen degradation, has excellent maintained lumens. Also CMH has loads of red. What I am talking about is optimizing, because obviously when the plants are small, they just can't physically use all the photons from a 58,000 lumen 400w lamp, but what we are not taking into account, is that HPS is very high in lumens AS AN ARTEFACT OF HOW LUMENS ARE MEASURED, which is green and yellow photons are weighted very high, whereas blue and red photons, to which THE EYE is less sensitive to, BUT CHLOROPHYLL IS MORE SENSITIVE TO, means that TOTAL PHOTONS, is probably very similar. Remember, how a CMH lamp is made: they just take an HPS lamp, and SPIKE IT WITH RARE METALS, to make it give off lots more blue and red, which IS PERFECT FOR WHAT WE WANT AS POTGROWERS!!! Peace, and sorry to be a dick on my last comment, but you posted the completely wrong lumens.


It seems to me from this spectrum that CMH is much heavier on green and the colors that lumens are weighted to more heavily than HPS is. Compare those to the luminosity function, and you'll see that the maximum of the black curve is centered in a region (~550nm) where the CMH spectrum is heavy and flat. I think you'd have to work the math out on that to say anything, which means it's not a trivial point.

You still have not provided any data that shows this slower degradation, or higher lumen count. I understand that lumens are based on human sensitivity, but until you convert to PAR, you have to deal with the argument above.Considering again that red and yellow have proven to do what we want in flowering, and that HPS still has more red and yellow, it is still a better flowering bulb. 

Perhaps it would help if you clarified your argument: are you saying you think that CMH are better than HPS for flowering? Are you saying their better than MH for vegetative growth? Or both?


----------



## mdgcmd (Jun 29, 2008)

So how would one go about proving this without going broke buying special equipment?


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 29, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> So how would one go about proving this without going broke buying special equipment?


proving what?


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jun 29, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> So how would one go about proving this without going broke buying special equipment?


 Rent it. (damn 10 char lower limit)


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 29, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> Rent it. (damn 10 char lower limit)


you can convert all the spectra using software i have ... but it would be a huge PIA for little end benefit. If I had any interest in CMH, I might consider it.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 29, 2008)

object16 said:


> ceestyle, you must be stoned, or don't know how to read, your link shows the MH lamp STARTS at 32,000 in the horizontal position, but due to lumen degradation goes downhill fast. I've tried a conversion lamp, and the plant just goes yellow and shrivels up.
> there is no useless spectrum on a CMH, just compare to the photosynthesis action spectrum, and it's a perfect match.


BTW - for the record, the Retro-white stats are given for the vertical, base-up position, so the stats _are_ comparable. You must be stoned too. Apparently if you're reading this ... well, you can read.


----------



## object16 (Jun 29, 2008)

Really google is your friend.
Where you need to go is google on converting spectrum to lumens.
There is one curve for plant lumens, and another curve for human lumens. The lumens given by the manufacturer of the lamp is for humans. But there is a HUGE difference between plant and human lumens, so the only way to find out the number, is to take the measured spectrum, and then do the mathematical thing called multiply the curve by the normalized chart. This is given on the following site. As you can see, Towards a Plant Growth Lumen
shows the following chart:
Spectral Factors

nm lumen plant
350 .000 .041
360 .000 .047
370 .000 .056
380 .000 .071
390 .000 .098
400 .000 .134
410 .001 .165
420 .004 .198
430 .011 .222
440 .023 .232
450 .038 .212
460 .060 .198
470 .091 .201
480 .139 .212
490 .210 .224
500 .326 .237
510 .504 .241
520 .706 .242
530 .859 .248
540 .951 .263
550 .993 .289
560 .993 .313
570 .950 .340
580 .868 .369
590 .756 .397
600 .630 .420
610 .503 .443
620 .380 .461
630 .266 .476
640 .175 .493
650 .108 .509
660 .061 .523
670 .032 .535
680 .017 .525
690 .008 .421
700 .004 .273
710 .002 .122
720 .001 .081
730 .000 .062
740 .000 .046

Wavelengths between 420 and 500 are worth about 0.2, then the "plant value" rises rapidly to close to almost .500 at about 640, and then at 690 starts to really drop. Notice that CMH has a lot of its spectrum in the short wavelength, which doesn't count for much, but also has quite a bit in the far red, more than HPS does, which counts as more. However, the spectrum is for a PHILLIPS lamp with a color temperature of 4000K, but GE also makes a better CMH than PHILLIPS, it costs close to $100, but lasts longer and has a lower color temperature of 3000K. I would like to compare the GE lamp to the Phillips lamp for spectrum, but GE doesn't publish it; since the GE CMH is 3000K, it will even be more rich in the far reds and may even start to be as good as an HPS for plant-lumens/watt. Basically, the bottom line is that it is not possible to beat HPS, HPS has them all beat, but for the early growing periods, like the first half of the grow, I would use a GE CMH because of the beneficial effect on PLANT MORPHOLOGY, setting up the basic structure and skeleton of the plant, is better with CMH. Or you could use a pulse start metal halide for the first half of the grow, which would be just as good, since the blue component is important in the formative stages of plant growth. Towards the end we are just "fattening up" the plant, with piles of THC, just like a farmer fattens up the cattle, after they have had their mother's milk during the first part of their lives. The CMH is like mother's milk, and the HPS is like the grain feedlot. Peace, Sativa.
750 .000 .032


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 29, 2008)

object16 said:


> Really google is your friend.
> Where you need to go is google on converting spectrum to lumens.
> There is one curve for plant lumens, and another curve for human lumens. The lumens given by the manufacturer of the lamp is for humans. But there is a HUGE difference between plant and human lumens, so the only way to find out the number, is to take the measured spectrum, and then do the mathematical thing called multiply the curve by the normalized chart. This is given on the following site. As you can see, Towards a Plant Growth Lumen
> shows the following chart:


The way this actually should work is this - all the spectra given for bulbs, e.g. here, are given in relative units. And no, it's not adjusted for lumens - it's the raw spectrum, but normalized to 100% intensity at the maximum. You therefore must multiple by the normalized photopic spectrum to find the spectrum that they used to calculate lumens, integrate the area under the curve, and find a scaling factor. Using that, you can scale the raw spectrum, multiply times the normalized PAR spectrum, and integrate to find PAR watts. That is, of course, after you have digitized all of the spectra. Go for it.

The web link you provided is a crude approximation even as presented, and still requires digitizing curves at integer values of the spectrum. Because there exist large spikes and the curves are not smooth, it is a weak technique and, again, a PIA.



> Basically, the bottom line is that it is not possible to beat HPS, HPS has them all beat, but for the early growing periods, like the first half of the grow, I would use a GE CMH because of the beneficial effect on PLANT MORPHOLOGY, setting up the basic structure and skeleton of the plant, is better with CMH. Or you could use a pulse start metal halide for the first half of the grow, which would be just as good, since the blue component is important in the formative stages of plant growth. Towards the end we are just "fattening up" the plant, with piles of THC, just like a farmer fattens up the cattle, after they have had their mother's milk during the first part of their lives. The CMH is like mother's milk, and the HPS is like the grain feedlot. Peace, Sativa.
> 750 .000 .032


Okay, well now we're speaking the same language. I just didn't really know what point exactly you were getting at ...


----------



## object16 (Jun 30, 2008)

The point I was getting at was:
1. You made me do some research and I came up with a useful article not yet quoted, but demonstrates for sure what a PAR curve looks like, from an academic source, and not a commercial lamp salesman source, and real numbers that show how to convert a spectrum into plant lumens.
2. That you made me do the research for myself, that would suggest that for the formative stages of plant growth (vegetative and early flowering), that CMH would be suitable, probably more than an HPS, and likely is superior to an MH conversion, and probably even superior to a pulse start metal halide. The difference between CMH and a pulse start metal halide is not much, except the spectrum shows the CMH output extending way out into the far red, so I suspect it has better plant lumens than a PSMH.
3. This article basically settles the debate, because the article shows actual numbers for plant lumens per watt, and HPS has 'em all beat, so for fattening up the plant, like livestock in a feedlot, use HPS.
4. There is however, an opinion that blue and violet light simulates high altitudes, and may increase potency. If you are of that opinion, consider supplementing your HPS with CMH towards the end of flowering, like the last 6 weeks. Example: for a 3x5 foot closet or grow area, two 400w HPS and a central 400w CMH might be appropriate. Someone from earlier on said that more light is always better. Even though the GE lamp costs almost twice as much, it lasts longer, has a lower color temperature so is richer in reds, and has a higher output, so that is the one I would use. If you subscribe to this belief, for example you could veg with one 400w CMH for four weeks. Flower for two weeks with 2 400w HPS. Complete four more weeks of flowering with 2 x hps and 1 x cmh. 
4. I must have had too much coffee when I said you were stoned, my apologies.


Peace and out. Sativa.


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jun 30, 2008)

Hey Cee,

I keep hearing that plants don't use/can't see green. But every one of the PAR curves I look at (they all seem to look the same) do not drop off for green. In fact, its higher in the green then the blue.

Just wondering on your thoughts about it.


----------



## Mitsuomi (Jun 30, 2008)

Lol...do your buds get any bigger with CMH? No...does your electric bill go down if you use a CMH with comparable wattage to the normal MH or HPS bulb? No...does it cost 2 and even 3x the cost to replace the CMH bulb than the MH or HPS? Yes...that about does it for me.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 30, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> Hey Cee,
> 
> I keep hearing that plants don't use/can't see green. But every one of the PAR curves I look at (they all seem to look the same) do not drop off for green. In fact, its higher in the green then the blue.
> 
> Just wondering on your thoughts about it.


You know, that's a good question. I have found a number of PAR curves that look like this and this , but I have also seen a few that look like this, which would be consistent with green being much less useful for plants. I have yet to unearth a concrete source besides the book cited in the last article (which of course I do not own) which cites one of these with proper units. I assume that the two first references and all like it are in energy, while the second type is in photon flux, but converting using the wavelength does not result in the PAR spectrum heavy in green that we normally see. 

If someone has a citation, I would be eager to see it. I suppose I could dig out a bio book or two, but I'm loathe to do that.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 30, 2008)

object16 said:


> The point I was getting at was:
> 1. You made me do some research and I came up with a useful article not yet quoted, but demonstrates for sure what a PAR curve looks like, from an academic source, and not a commercial lamp salesman source, and real numbers that show how to convert a spectrum into plant lumens.
> 2. That you made me do the research for myself, that would suggest that for the formative stages of plant growth (vegetative and early flowering), that CMH would be suitable, probably more than an HPS, and likely is superior to an MH conversion, and probably even superior to a pulse start metal halide. The difference between CMH and a pulse start metal halide is not much, except the spectrum shows the CMH output extending way out into the far red, so I suspect it has better plant lumens than a PSMH.
> 3. This article basically settles the debate, because the article shows actual numbers for plant lumens per watt, and HPS has 'em all beat, so for fattening up the plant, like livestock in a feedlot, use HPS.
> ...


Well put. Thanks for the discussion. The article you posted has a couple useful refs that I requested above. I'll take a look at those.

Cheers.
cc


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jun 30, 2008)

ceestyle, eariler you asked why someone would switch back to a cmh blub at the end of flower. I've read about a few people doing this and it's a split discusion at this point. The thinking behind it is that becasue the CMH bulb puts out UVB light that it will force the plant into protecting itself againt it by producing more thrics. Again, that's something that is split at this point and honestly I haven't been following it much anymore.

At this point there are plenty of grows that have gone through using CMH and from what I've seen it's coming out even as far as yeild, people say they end up with a more leafy bud and more thrics. I'm talking about grows where people have run the same strain over and over again, then switched to CMH, some go back to HPS some say the never will. To each their own. 

Nobody I've seen yet has said they were going back to an MH bulb for veg. I'm using 1000 watts for flower and the 400 watt cmh for veg in a cab.


----------



## ceestyle (Jun 30, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> ceestyle, eariler you asked why someone would switch back to a cmh blub at the end of flower. I've read about a few people doing this and it's a split discusion at this point. The thinking behind it is that becasue the CMH bulb puts out UVB light that it will force the plant into protecting itself againt it by producing more thrics. Again, that's something that is split at this point and honestly I haven't been following it much anymore.
> 
> At this point there are plenty of grows that have gone through using CMH and from what I've seen it's coming out even as far as yeild, people say they end up with a more leafy bud and more thrics. I'm talking about grows where people have run the same strain over and over again, then switched to CMH, some go back to HPS some say the never will. To each their own.
> 
> Nobody I've seen yet has said they were going back to an MH bulb for veg. I'm using 1000 watts for flower and the 400 watt cmh for veg in a cab.


Thanks for the info. Ya know, I really wish these people would run these comparisons side-by-side, because I have a hard time believing anything else. There are so many variables and all the measurables are subjective, when using memory recall to determine how frosty one *is* to compare to how frosty one *was* under different conditions.

It would be very very simple to supplement half your plants with UVB, while all were still under one HPS. This would be meaningful. 

On the other hand, if someone grows the same number of plants and the same strain enough times to have a consistent yield - regular enough to establish some standard deviation - then growing CMH and finding that the yield is greater by an amount that is statistically significant would also be meaningful.

Otherwise, to me it is all anecdotal. I have heard so many swear that "xyz makes my bud so much better" .. when xyz is anything ranging from doing a rain dance to taking a crap the morning before harvest and not wiping that I don't believe much but straight up evidence that noone has to interpret for me. Call me a skeptic.

Where are these people that you speak of who use CMH and report the results? I have seen nothing here yet except speculation.


----------



## Hawk (Jun 30, 2008)

This is not my own personal info. It's just info available out there on the Internet. However, it's the closest thing to a side-by-side comparo I've run across. There's no complete division of light, but it reads honest to me [shrug]. International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums - C99xHaze Scrog

Picture and quote from the grower:








> ...I can't say that my final verdict was that clear. I couldn't tell the difference visually or in the quality of the bud between the CMH and the EYE HPS. For some reason the plants under the CMH stretched more during flower (though all plants grew tight nodes during veg under the CMH). All in all both lights gave me equal results in the end. If i had to choose between one of the two i would choose the CMH, if only because the plants look much more natural to me under the CMH than the HPS...


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 1, 2008)

Hawk said:


> This is not my own personal info. It's just info available out there on the Internet. However, it's the closest thing to a side-by-side comparo I've run across. There's no complete division of light, but it reads honest to me [shrug]. International Cannagraphic Magazine Forums - C99xHaze Scrog
> 
> Picture and quote from the grower:


Thanks for the post. That's really surprising.

Another quote from the grower: 



> I try to be a scientific observer when it comes things such as the CMH vs. HPS debate. Saying that, i did not really design my grow in a way that accurately compared the CMH vs. the HPS. I used the CMH for veg, then moved plants around 5 days into flower when i put in the SCROG Screen. Also I had different reflectors on each light. Basically what i'm trying to say is that while my observations were made carefully, my lack of forethought in these matters means that my findings need to be taken with a large grain of salt.
> Anyway enough of that....i say buy the CMH if you already have a magnetic ballast, and see how it works for you. Definitely worth the $50.
> I digress...


It's surprising enough to me that they're comparable, considering how much lighter in red the CMH is.


----------



## GardensGrow (Jul 2, 2008)

So the general consensus so far is that CMH is better than MH for veg but it's "undecided" vs. HPS in the flowering stages?


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 2, 2008)

No. CMH is better than MH conversion. I don't think it was decided that it was better than MH. 

We have one grower who stated that in an imperfect experiment, his judgment - not a measurable - was incapable of detecting a difference in bud quality. It was not quantified in any way.


----------



## GardensGrow (Jul 3, 2008)

Thanks ceestyle. I trust your judgment so I think I'll pick up a CMH to replace my MH conversion once it craps out.


----------



## mdgcmd (Jul 3, 2008)

Guys you need to understand that these bulbs should be used by a closet grower. One bulb from start to finish no need to buy a conversion bulb, or multiple ballasts/light systems. That is one of the main focuses for growers IMO, that and spectrum are primary reasons for purchase.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 3, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> Guys you need to understand that these bulbs should be used by a closet grower. One bulb from start to finish no need to buy a conversion bulb, or multiple ballasts/light systems. That is one of the main focuses for growers IMO, that and spectrum are primary reasons for purchase.


If I have an HPS ballast, I would not use a CMH bulb instead of HPS for flowering. I would consider one instead of a conversion bulb, although there are some good ones out there. I think most people would fit in this category.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 4, 2008)

For $50, is'nt it worth giving it a try to see for yourself?


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 4, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> For $50, is'nt it worth giving it a try to see for yourself?


For veg, yes. If you're totally happy with what HPS does flowering and there is nothing to suggest that CMH would be better - including the numbers - I would only consider it for a side-by-side on a small scale.


----------



## Psilocobe (Jul 17, 2008)

Does these work with digital ballasts?


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jul 17, 2008)

Psilocobe said:


> Does these work with digital ballasts?


I *heard* no. But the bulbs are kinda pricey. For the money (especially for a digi ballast) better off buying 2 bulbs, a true MH and true HPS. (if using the same fixture to veg and flower)

My main interest in the ceramic MH is the heat. If I can really grab it, its worth looking into.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 17, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> I *heard* no. But the bulbs are kinda pricey. For the money (especially for a digi ballast) better off buying 2 bulbs, a true MH and true HPS. (if using the same fixture to veg and flower)
> 
> My main interest in the ceramic MH is the heat. If I can really grab it, its worth looking into.


you are correct.


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jul 17, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> you are correct.


Great minds think alike? (even us, too!  )


----------



## object16 (Jul 20, 2008)

CMH is a much better growing lamp than a Metal Halide because it produces
much more PLANT LUMENS per watt, and is still very rich in blue and violet that will keep the plants stocky and bushy. The spectrum is just like the sun and you will get results just like you're growing in an open field WITH THE SUN SHINING FULL 24/7!!! HPS have even more plant lumens per watt, and even though it is deficient in blue, by that time the plant has switched its metabolism over to putting on the weight, so HPS works better with flowering.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 20, 2008)

object16 said:


> CMH is a much better growing lamp than a Metal Halide because it produces
> much more PLANT LUMENS per watt, and is still very rich in blue and violet that will keep the plants stocky and bushy. The spectrum is just like the sun and you will get results just like you're growing in an open field WITH THE SUN SHINING FULL 24/7!!! HPS have even more plant lumens per watt, and even though it is deficient in blue, by that time the plant has switched its metabolism over to putting on the weight, so HPS works better with flowering.


Show me the data. I'd like to see it.


----------



## VirginHarvester (Jul 20, 2008)

Trying to learn all I can about lighting and been through 15 pages of this thread and am stumped. A few questions:

1) Was there any agreement eventually that a CMH is a good or better alternative to MH alone or combined with an HPS as opposed to MH/HPS combined? I take it there's no agreement at this point which is why the thread is still going.

2) I was aware one of the issues with MH is heat. But I know there are ways to vent the lamp and thought that's what people do and that it works fine. I was thinking you could get an MH around 12" from the canopy if it's vented/cooled which seems close enough. Is that about right? Can/does a CMH produce as much full spectrum and enery with much less heat than the Hortilux "blue"? EYE Hortilux BLUE

3) Does the Hortilux Super HPS have more than enough "blue" for vegging yet still run a lot cooler than MH or CMH? At 80,000 lumens if so, it would seem simpler for me at this point and only one bulb to think about. EYE Hortilux Super HPS

4) It sounded like some people are not sold on digital ballasts over magnetic for MH and or HPS. Which type of ballast would you get with MH or HPS?


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 20, 2008)

VirginHarvester said:


> Trying to learn all I can about lighting and been through 15 pages of this thread and am stumped. A few questions:
> 
> 1) Was there any agreement eventually that a CMH is a good or better alternative to MH alone or combined with an HPS as opposed to MH/HPS combined? I take it there's no agreement at this point which is why the thread is still going.


No, there's no agreement. I'm not saying it's not the case; I just haven't seen any data that shows it's so. All I hear are hand-waving or intuitive arguments. I just want to see data ... 

That said, I'm pretty sure that if you get an HPS ballast, you are better off with a CMH for veg than with a MH conversion bulb.



> 2) I was aware one of the issues with MH is heat. But I know there are ways to vent the lamp and thought that's what people do and that it works fine. I was thinking you could get an MH around 12" from the canopy if it's vented/cooled which seems close enough. Is that about right? Can/does a CMH produce as much full spectrum and enery with much less heat than the Hortilux "blue"? EYE Hortilux BLUE


The Blue runs on a MH ballast, whereas the CMH runs on a HPS ballast. Unless you're going to get two ballasts straight away - which from your other thread I gather you are not - you are going to get an HPS ballast. Then just decide whether you have the cash for a CMH instead of a MH conversion.

Heat is an issue, but: 

1. I have yet to see anything detailed about the heat that a CMH puts out. I will probably pick one up and check it out, and post some results.

2. You are still going to have to deal with heat with an HPS bulb anyway, so I wouldn't base your decision based on that. You haven't said anything about your grow area situation, but it's really not that hard to work around. Fan+duct+cooled fixture=manageable heat.

The distance from the canopy will depend on the size of bulb you are using, but 12" is probably a bit close unless you're using something a bit smaller like a 250W. You also reduce coverage area when you have your light that close.



> 3) Does the Hortilux Super HPS have more than enough "blue" for vegging yet still run a lot cooler than MH or CMH? At 80,000 lumens if so, it would seem simpler for me at this point and only one bulb to think about. EYE Hortilux Super HPS


That's a good single bulb, but the heat issues will be roughly the same as a MH or HPS. You can get away with just an HPS and no MH if you want - many people do - but the extra blue sure couldn't hurt.



> 4) It sounded like some people are not sold on digital ballasts over magnetic for MH and or HPS. Which type of ballast would you get with MH or HPS?


 
For HPS, I would go with the magnetic, as you need it should you decide to get a CMH. I have heard there are safety and reliability issues with the digis, but I don't have any personal experience with them, so that's all secondhand anecdotal evidence. Apparently they're not UL listed either. Magnetics have always been fine for me. 

Don't worry if you're overwhelmed. There's a lot of info ...


----------



## VirginHarvester (Jul 21, 2008)

Not meaning to hijack this thread but a few more questions.



ceestyle said:


> That said, I'm pretty sure that if you get an HPS ballast, you are better off with a CMH for veg than with a MH conversion bulb.
> 
> The Blue runs on a MH ballast, whereas the CMH runs on a HPS ballast. Unless you're going to get two ballasts straight away - which from your other thread I gather you are not - you are going to get an HPS ballast. Then just decide whether you have the cash for a CMH instead of a MH conversion.


So a straight MH definitely needs it's own ballast and dedicated socket and a dual MH/HPS lamp would need both kinds of ballasts. I was under the impression I would only need two ballasts if I wanted to run them both at the same time but I see now each requires its own gear. 

1)But does a conversion MH screw into an HPS socket and run on an HPS ballast? 

The "conversion" part means it's been converted somehow to work with HPS socket and ballast I guess. The problem with the Hortilux MH conversion then is it's spectrum is not much different than the Hortilux Super HPS. The advantage of the Hortilux Blue was that beautiful full, balanced spectrum but I see it requires its own equipment to run. I was looking at dual digital ballast thinking it would rus 400w bulb produces about the same spectrum energy and lumens as the Hortilux 400w blue so would at least be great for vegging. If I just vegged with and used the HPS ballast it would be a lot less complicated. Would be real nice if a 600w HPS ballast would run a 400w CMH or MH though. I think 30,000 lumens would be more than enough to veg and keep the plants bushy and compact.



> Don't worry if you're overwhelmed.


Funny, this thread popped up just when I thought I had a handle on it.

What is a cool tube? I looked it up and couldn't find a specific brand but a bunch of "build your own cool tube threads and videos. Is it a generic name for any type bulb that's fitted inside a tube and cooled by airflow or something?

Thanks again.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 21, 2008)

VirginHarvester said:


> Not meaning to hijack this thread but a few more questions.
> 
> So a straight MH definitely needs it's own ballast and dedicated socket and a dual MH/HPS lamp would need both kinds of ballasts. I was under the impression I would only need two ballasts if I wanted to run them both at the same time but I see now each requires its own gear.
> 
> 1)But does a conversion MH screw into an HPS socket and run on an HPS ballast?


Yes.



> The "conversion" part means it's been converted somehow to work with HPS socket and ballast I guess. The problem with the Hortilux MH conversion then is it's spectrum is not much different than the Hortilux Super HPS. The advantage of the Hortilux Blue was that beautiful full, balanced spectrum but I see it requires its own equipment to run. I was looking at dual digital ballast thinking it would run both and it will not. But, the 400w CMH has a similar spectrum and lumen output to the 400w Hortilux MH blue and uses same ballast and light fixture as an HPS.


The MH conversion has much more blue than the HPS, and is much weaker in the yellows and reds. Compare the Metal Ace to the Super HPS here.



> 2) Would a 600w HPS ballast run a 400w MH conversion and/or the Phillips 400w CMH? If not, it seems to limit me to a 400W Super HPS or buy an extra ballast to use both since the CMH is only available up to 400w.
> at's fitted inside a tube and cooled by airflow or something?
> 
> Thanks again.


No, the ballasts are specific for the wattage bulb.

A cooltube is this: You can just attach ducting to it with your inline fan. It is a great way to control heat. I've got a 400W that works awesome. It functions like any other air-cooled fixture, but takes up very little space, and if you remove the reflector from the inside, it's ideal for a vertical grow setup.

What size is your grow area going to be?


----------



## VirginHarvester (Jul 21, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> What size is your grow area going to be?


4x4.

Thanks for the link. So with a cooltube you just attach ducting to each end and run air through it? The reflector looks really small. Is it big enough and direct enough to straight down to the canopy? 

Thanks again.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 21, 2008)

VirginHarvester said:


> 4x4.
> 
> Thanks for the link. So with a cooltube you just attach ducting to each end and run air through it? The reflector looks really small. Is it big enough and direct enough to straight down to the canopy?
> 
> Thanks again.


Yeah; it's pretty money. 

If you only have one light, tubing only needs to attach to one end and pull air from the grow area. 

4x4 is a perfect size for a vertical grow with a cool tube. Hang a 600 in the center vertically with no refector and run the ducting straight up. I f you've got the vertical room, throw in a shelf of two. Do a search for vertical grow and do some browsing.


----------



## object16 (Jul 21, 2008)

Hi, the way to tell how many plant lumens you lamp is giving you, is to read the literature on the internet: This article shows the difference between HUMAN EYE lumens, and PLANT lumens, two totally and completely different things. Notice how blue light is important source of plant lumens, but the added "weight" that yellow and red light in PLANT LUMENS, means that if you look at a CMH lamp spectrum, and compare to a 4000K Metal Halide spectrum, that the CMH has a lot more of the extremely effective yellow and red. That is why I consider CMH to be perfect for vegetative growth, and early flowering phase of the first 10 - 14 days. After that, the "heavy weight" HPS loaded with yellow and red lumens that count very high when calculating PLANT LUMENS, is the best to put on heavy buds.

*Towards a Plant Growth Lumen*

Almost all consumer lamps are now labelled with watts consumption and lumens output. For humans, lumens per watt is a good measure of the efficiency of a lamp in meeting human ability to see, because it is based on the relative sensitivity of our eyes (the red curve at right). Plants respond very differently to light than humans do. The green curve shows the relative effectiveness of light in producing plant growth. The black curve shows a common definition of plant growth effectiveness used by the lighting industry - it matches the needs of plants only a little better than lumens do (cf. Bugbee) 
Plants respond to wavelengths other than the green curve for non-growth functions such as flowering initiation, just as humans respond to wavelengths other than the red curve for non-visual needs, such as the production of Vitamin D. However, fresh-water aquarists mostly aim for plant growth. 
What we aquatic plant growers need is a true plant-growth lumen (PGL). Here is how to calculate one. 
First, obtain the spectrum of the lamp output (you'll have to get it from lighting engineers at the manufacturer; you won't find it on the package or in stores), and its lumen rating. If the spectrum is supplied in energy units such as watts (most are), you must convert it to a photon scale by multiplying each intensity by its wavelength. 
Then, using the table below, multiply each spectral value of the lamp by the matching spectral factor for plants. For example, multiply the lamp intensity at 450 nm by 0.213 The result will be the spectrum of the lamp as a plant sees it. Add up all the numbers and call the result P (for Plant). 
Next, multiply the lamp spectrum by the matching spectral factors for lumens. The result will be the spectrum of the lamp as a human sees it. Again, add up all the numbers, call it L (for Lumens). 
Finally, multiply the lamp lumens by P and divide by L to get the PGL. 
Here is an example: a 60 W incandescent lamp, whose output is shown in the black curve of graph 2 at right. The lamp output is 855 lm. Following the above procedure, the red curve is the way a human sees the light, the green, the way a plant sees it. The ratio of P to L is 1.26, so it produces 855 x 1.26 = 1077 PGL. 
If the spectral data is not in 10 nm bands, or covers less range than 350-750 nm, this method will still work as long as the data is uniformly spaced over its range. Simply use the nearest values in the table below, the same ones for both P and L. Since the method only calculates a ratio between human and plant lumens, the units of lamp spectral intensity don't matter, as long as they are in photons, not energy. 
The result of such analyses is clear: *very few 'plant growth' or 'aquarium' lamps outperform cheap standard-spectrum fluorescent tubes or compact fluorescent lamps for growing aquarium plants.* 
Graph 3 at right shows why. Three lamps are shown, with their output in relative photons per second in 10 nm bands. The black curve is a standard warm-white tube, the others two different plant-growth lamps. The extended spectrum of most plant-growth lamps is obtained at the expense of total output. And, the tiny production volume of the specialist lamps compared to standard warm-white makes them much more expensive. 





human, plant and 'quantum' sensitivity 





incandescent lamp performance 





plant-growth vs. warm-white 
typemodelwattsinitial lumensPGLPGL/watt straight filament incandescent15T101512017211 coiled filament incandescent60A1960855107718 halogen incandescentPAR601050128021 warm-white fluorescent18"1583447832 warm-white fluorescent24"20125371836 cool-white fluorescent24"20120075038 warm-white fluorescent36"302123121641 2700 K compact fluorescent
20120084142 warm-white fluorescent48"403117178545 Hagen fluorescentAquaGlo2040095047 Hagen fluorescentSunGlo20123098849 Hagen fluorescentPowerGlo201100104552 special purpose lamps aquarium fluorescent#12075070735 aquarium fluorescent#22095074037 aquarium fluorescent#32087569034 plant-grow fluorescent#42048074037 plant-grow fluorescent#52075056028 plant-grow fluorescent#62067064032 metal-halide discharge
503000189038 high-pressure sodium
352240153444 
Now that you have a Plant Growth Lumen, how do you use it to grow aquarium plants? 
A commonly quoted measure of aquarium lighting in North America is 'watts per gallon': tube-fluorescent watts per US gallon for 10 hours per day. 1 watt per gallon is considered low light, 2 medium, 3 high. Although easy to criticise on the surface, it has proven to be an acceptably reliable measure in practise. So, how can it be converted to units that can be understood by the majority of the world that has access neither to US gallons nor to US lamps? 
The efficiency of fluorescent lamps varies with length, as shown above. Most aquarium lamps here are 24", so 1253 lm for 20 W, 63 lm/W is a reasonable efficiency to use as a baseline for conversion. For a warm-white lamp, this is equivalent to 36 PGL/W. Since there are 3.785 liters in a US gallon, *1 'watt per gallon' converts to about 100 PGL-hr/l*. For example, a 10 watt compact fluorescent lamp (420 PGL) operated for 12 hours per day over a 50 litre tank gives 420*12/50 = 100 PGL-hr/l, low light. 
Now, you are ready to choose your plants based on their light requirements. Here is a listing of the best aquarium plants with their light requirements. Of course, plants respond to factors other than light - pH, fertilisers, trace elements, temperature, just to name a few. But, this note should help you get their light requirements in order. 
John Sankey 
other notes on physics 
*Notes* 

All light intensities on this page are in photons per second (Einsteins), not watts, as the activity of chlorophyll depends on the number of photons absorbed, not their energy. 

Graph 1: The red curve is the CIE definition of the lumen (1924). The green is the average for 26 species of herbaceous plants from Inada, Plant Cell Physiol. 17(2):355-365 (1976). McCree has published similar results in Agric. Meteorol. 9:191-216 (1972), as have Sager et al. Trans. ASAE 31(6):1882-1889 (198. Black shows the most common definition of Photosynthetically Active Radiation (PAR) approximated by "quantum light meters". PAR is also known as PPF, Photosynthetic Photon Flux. All are normalised for equal areas under the curves. 

Graph 2: The black curve was calculated from the Planck radiation equation for 2856 K (CIE Standard Illuminant A). The lumens output for a typical 60 W lamp is from the US FTC Facts for Consumers. Note that economy 60 Wbulbs, such as those sold by Rona, produce only 520 lumens. 

The filament temperatures of the 15T10 (2470 K) and halogen (3000 K) lamps were calculated from their published lumens output and the Stefan-Boltzmann equation. The outputs of warm white lamps are averages from a survey by Joseph Sellinger. All other data was obtained from manufacturers' web sites, and refers to specific lamps. Brands are shown only when they perform significantly better than standard fluorescent lamps. Most manufacturers list only "initial lumens", so the above tables are based on them. (Fluorescent lamps typically produce only 87% of their initial lumens averaged over their lifetime.) 

The table of spectral factors below shows the values of graph 1. 
Spectral Factors

nm lumen plant
350 .000 .041
360 .000 .047
370 .000 .056
380 .000 .071
390 .000 .098
400 .000 .134
410 .001 .165
420 .004 .198
430 .011 .222
440 .023 .232
450 .038 .212
460 .060 .198
470 .091 .201
480 .139 .212
490 .210 .224
500 .326 .237
510 .504 .241
520 .706 .242
530 .859 .248
540 .951 .263
550 .993 .289
560 .993 .313
570 .950 .340
580 .868 .369
590 .756 .397
600 .630 .420
610 .503 .443
620 .380 .461
630 .266 .476
640 .175 .493
650 .108 .509
660 .061 .523
670 .032 .535
680 .017 .525
690 .008 .421
700 .004 .273
710 .002 .122
720 .001 .081
730 .000 .062
740 .000 .046
750 .000 .032
Towards a Plant Growth Lumen


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 21, 2008)

Dude, you already posted this. This is not data showing anything about the CMH compared to MH. This is a crappy approximation of the right way to make the conversion.


----------



## object16 (Jul 21, 2008)

The chart in the article didn't come out with my cut and paste:
warm white fluorescent, 48" 40 watts 45 pgl/watt
metal halide discharge 50 watts 3000 initial lumens 1890 PGL = 38 PGL/watt
HPS 35 watts 2240 initial lumens 1534 PGL = 44 PGL/watt

When you look at the PGL chart, 

380-450 = violet is 0.165 PGL weight
450-495 = blue is 0.201 PGL weight
495-570 = green is 0.248 PGL weight
570-590 = yellow is 0.369 PGL weight
590-620 = orange is 0.443 PGL weight
620-750 = red is 0.523 PGL weight
See how green light is actually more efficient for photosynthesis, than blue light!!!
how orange light is more than double the efficiency for photosynthesis compared to blue, and how red light, of which CMH has good and plenty, is a monster for photosynthesis - red is over 2 and a half times more efficient for photosynthesis than blue light. Using these numbers, you can very quickly, by using a spectrum chart, make pretty accurate calculations how to compare the plant growing capabilities of the various lamps. Remember though, that blue light also functions in a plant to keep it short and squat, and that blue is necessary for the production of chlorophyll, so that is why if we start out vegetative with a regular HPS lamp, the plants will get lanky and stretched out and not have as much chlorophyll, compared to CMH which will be squat, dense bushy and very green and healthy, which is exactly what you want.


----------



## object16 (Jul 21, 2008)

seestyle, just look up the manufacturer's spectrum for CMH. Notice how it is just like the sun, almost straight across. A regular metal halide has a blue peak, a green peak, a yellow peak, an orange peak, and a very little red peak. It is obvious that CMH has a monsterously bigger output in the red part of the spectrum, compared to a puny output in a MH regular. Red light is 0.523 PGL weight, which is twice the PGL weight of green light, which is only 0.248 It should be immediately obvious if you've checked the spectral output that CMH is a killer of a lamp. The fact that it runs on a regular HPS ballast is a bonus - big time!!!


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 21, 2008)

object16 said:


> seestyle, just look up the manufacturer's spectrum for CMH. Notice how it is just like the sun, almost straight across. A regular metal halide has a blue peak, a green peak, a yellow peak, an orange peak, and a very little red peak. It is obvious that CMH has a monsterously bigger output in the red part of the spectrum, compared to a puny output in a MH regular. Red light is 0.523 PGL weight, which is twice the PGL weight of green light, which is only 0.248 It should be immediately obvious if you've checked the spectral output that CMH is a killer of a lamp. The fact that it runs on a regular HPS ballast is a bonus - big time!!!


Unless you do the calculations, you cannot conclude just by looking at the spectra that one is better than the other. Period.

The information you posted is valuable, but it has all been gone over before ad nauseum. Look at the spectra here. The background curve is the same as you've provided. We know what PAR is.

You've provided a (crude) way of calculating the radiation relevant for plants, but you haven't actually done the calculation. You can't just look at the spectra for the bulbs and say one is better than the other, as they are all normalized - they are not absolute. Notice how each spectrum has exactly one point where it reaches the top of the plot? That's artificially imposed on the data so that you can see detail. You can't judge total output by the area under the graph as you see it. You have to do the math. Period.

Unless you can do the math in your head, you're just hand-waving by talking about the spectrum. CMH is weaker in some areas of the spectrum than MH, and stronger in others. Again, I'm not saying CMH isn't comparable to MH; I'm just saying that I don't know until I see the data.


----------



## HydroChron (Jul 21, 2008)

I am wondering which would be better. Should i get a eb that can power both MH and HPS so that for veg I can use the Mh. And for flower I can use the HPS. Or should i stick with the metalic coil HPS ballast that i already have an just get a CMH. Im leaning towards the EB just due to the fact that it will produce less heat then the coil ballast. Ive heard mixed reviews or the CMH and i can see that it is alot of marketing. but at the same time could be great. Thanks for your time


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 21, 2008)

i'd probably go with the HPS ballast and save the cash. you can always put the ballast outside your grow area. 

switchable ballasts are really only useful if you only have one grow chamber and one ballast. once you have separate veg and flower rooms, you can just buy a MH or CMH.


----------



## HydroChron (Jul 22, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> i'd probably go with the HPS ballast and save the cash. you can always put the ballast outside your grow area.
> 
> switchable ballasts are really only useful if you only have one grow chamber and one ballast. once you have separate veg and flower rooms, you can just buy a MH or CMH.


 
thats the situation exactly. your prob right though. i have heard mixed reveiws of the digital ballasts. that they dont power the MH as well as they do the hps.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 22, 2008)

HydroChron said:


> thats the situation exactly. your prob right though. i have heard mixed reveiws of the digital ballasts. that they dont power the MH as well as they do the hps.


The way I look at the CMH is this: it is not going to be better than an HPS for budding (opinion, evidence is inconclusive). Therefore, in the best case you have a bulb that is best for veg. Unfortunately the largest size you can get is 400W. There may or may not be a heat advantage. 

So if you:

1. Have one space that is the right size for a 400W and anothing more.

or 

2. Have two spaces the right size for 400W - one for HPS and one for CMH.

Maybe CMH is right for you. As for me, I already have a 400W MH, so I'm not in that boat.


----------



## HydroChron (Jul 22, 2008)

i leaning toward just keeping it simple and getting the lumatek digital ballast and switching MH to HPS for flower. cause i would love to have the mh for veg. I am getting alot of excess heat from my coil ballast and would love to see that thing go out with the times. thanks again man


----------



## mdgcmd (Jul 23, 2008)

I like that I can spend half as much on a bulbs and ballasts and get nearly the same and maybe more yield from one ballast and one bulb. It may not be better than an HPS but the CMH beats the HPS in vegging hands down. I can get nearly the same yield as a HPS as I can with a CMH. I will admit that the HPS has a slightly higher yield and is also slightly higher heat. 

I think it is stupid to have a debate about which is better because they are all good bulbs, and do the job very well. For me there is not enough difference to make it an issue. For me it was an easy decision... one bulb, one ballast, all grow long, and a slight amount of less heat (not much trust me).


----------



## OnSolomonsGrave (Jul 23, 2008)

I use a mix of CMH MH during veg and during flowering i swap the MH for HPS, rock hard dense nugs. I can also attest for the heat issues, CMH is almost touchable at full burn.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 23, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> I like that I can spend half as much on a bulbs and ballasts and get nearly the same and maybe more yield from one ballast and one bulb. It may not be better than an HPS but the CMH beats the HPS in vegging hands down. I can get nearly the same yield as a HPS as I can with a CMH. I will admit that the HPS has a slightly higher yield and is also slightly higher heat.
> 
> I think it is stupid to have a debate about which is better because they are all good bulbs, and do the job very well. For me there is not enough difference to make it an issue. For me it was an easy decision... one bulb, one ballast, all grow long, and a slight amount of less heat (not much trust me).


Was it really a rice savings? How much was your CMH?

Do you two have thermometers? Is there any way you can place the thermometer in a few places, let the bulbs warm up, and compare them? MH, CMH, and HPS if you have them?


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 23, 2008)

VirginHarvester said:


> 4x4.
> 
> Thanks for the link. So with a cooltube you just attach ducting to each end and run air through it? The reflector looks really small. Is it big enough and direct enough to straight down to the canopy?
> 
> Thanks again.


If you use a cool tube you loose the UVB output from the bulb. With proper ventilation, you shouln't need an air cooled hood. I can be in a space less then 8 cubic feet with a bare bulb and I keep temps in the cab in the mid 80's.

A cool tube also won't give you a very focused footprint. People use 'em, some love 'em, to each his own I guess. Just my opinion, other will have different ones.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 23, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> If you use a cool tube you loose the UVB output from the bulb. With proper ventilation, you shouln't need an air cooled hood. I can be in a space less then 8 cubic feet with a bare bulb and I keep temps in the cab in the mid 80's.


Hmmm. I find it helps my heat issues lot, plus gives ventilation.

Can you explain why you lose te UVB radiation? I don't quite understand tha.



> A cool tube also won't give you a very focused footprint.


Really? I did some work on reflector design, and I find that the reflector is actually too focused.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 23, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> The way I look at the CMH is this: it is not going to be better than an HPS for budding (opinion, evidence is inconclusive). Therefore, in the best case you have a bulb that is best for veg. Unfortunately the largest size you can get is 400W. There may or may not be a heat advantage.
> 
> So if you:
> 
> ...


There is a BIG difference in heat and the way the bulb throws it. In my cab, I can stay steady in the mid 80's, with everything exactly the same, jand switching to the HPS bulb and temps shoot up to mid 90's in the first 1/2 hour. 80's are an acceptable temp for growing, 90's without CO2 are not......yes, the heat differance is a very big advantage to this bulb. Shoot up whatever arguments you want but, at 5-6 inches from the canopy with a bare bulb inside of a cab. 

I dropped the challange eariler in this thread, show me someone with an exposed 400 watt HPS bulb 5-6 inches off of the canopy growing in a cab, until then, I wouldn't shoot off to much about the heat of the bulb, it's an advantage to every cabinet grower or anyone battling summer temps and there are a lot of us out there!

As for the mentions about the cost of the bulb, I tried to look at a few setups from people mentioning it...... I guess the one thing I want to throw out there is, what about the additional cost of the air cooled hood they are running? Don't compare just the price of the bulb, compare the cost of the set up. I think my air cooled hood was about $100 more then my umbrella reflector. Just something to give some thought too.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 23, 2008)

UVB can't penetrate glass, therefore it's lost....
I've seen both independant opinions as well as real tests on footprint and focused light from different reflectors, I've never seen a Cool Tube come out on top or close to it. I understand that there are set ups that people build that they may need one because of size, ventilation, ease of use, lack of engineering ability, or something, but, I've never seen any commericial growers using them in a large set up. I'm just guessing, I don't grow at that level, but, Im pretty sure it's because a large hood has always been shown to be better. Cool Tubes are cheaper then large reflectors, so why don't the pro's use them? I know the reasons I've read but, I'm certainly open to hearing how they maybe wrong.

For those of you that don't remember, I'm the one that started this thread. I've been through veg and flower with a 400 watt CMH bulb. I don't flower under the CMH anymore, for no other reason than I have a flowering room running 1000 watt bulbs. I do still use it for veging in the cabinet. MH doesn't compare for vegging, I saw it for myself. As for flowering, I can't give a true opinion, I have not flowered under 400 watts HPS at any point to be able to compare the differance.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 23, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> There is a BIG difference in heat and the way the bulb throws it. In my cab, I can stay steady in the mid 80's, with everything exactly the same, jand switching to the HPS bulb and temps shoot up to mid 90's in the first 1/2 hour. 80's are an acceptable temp for growing, 90's without CO2 are not......yes, the heat differance is a very big advantage to this bulb. Shoot up whatever arguments you want but, at 5-6 inches from the canopy with a bare bulb inside of a cab.
> 
> I dropped the challange eariler in this thread, show me someone with an exposed 400 watt HPS bulb 5-6 inches off of the canopy growing in a cab, until then, I wouldn't shoot off to much about the heat of the bulb, it's an advantage to every cabinet grower or anyone battling summer temps and there are a lot of us out there!
> 
> As for the mentions about the cost of the bulb, I tried to look at a few setups from people mentioning it...... I guess the one thing I want to throw out there is, what about the additional cost of the air cooled hood they are running? Don't compare just the price of the bulb, compare the cost of the set up. I think my air cooled hood was about $100 more then my umbrella reflector. Just something to give some thought too.


 I don't have any reason to disbelieve the heat argument, I just didn't see any data to show it. That's why I'm trying to get people to compare their HPS, MH, and CMH bulbs at certain distances from the bulb. If it is that much cooler, it is absolutely a benefit for cab growers. You can't argue that.

The cooltube is somewhat more expensive, but I don't have to add as much other circulation ventilation, as the blower does that for me. The can-fan and ducting I got were dirt cheap - thrown in with my light - so i'm unsure they cost new. I don't think they're expensive at all at HD, but again I don't know. Maybe 30-40 bucks

Still don't undersand the UVB thing.

So do you have a MH to compare the CMH with in terms of heat? I imagine that a lot of the heat from the HPS comes from the fact that it is so heavy in the red/IR.


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jul 23, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> UVB can't penetrate glass, therefore it's lost....


But it makes through the glass of the bulb? Help me understand that.



> I've seen both independant opinions as well as real tests on footprint and focused light from different reflectors, I've never seen a Cool Tube come out on top or close to it. I understand that there are set ups that people build that they may need one because of size, ventilation, ease of use, lack of engineering ability, or something, but, I've never seen any commericial growers using them in a large set up. I'm just guessing, I don't grow at that level, but, Im pretty sure it's because a large hood has always been shown to be better. Cool Tubes are cheaper then large reflectors, so why don't the pro's use them? I know the reasons I've read but, I'm certainly open to hearing how they maybe wrong.
> 
> For those of you that don't remember, I'm the one that started this thread. I've been through veg and flower with a 400 watt CMH bulb. I don't flower under the CMH anymore, for no other reason than I have a flowering room running 1000 watt bulbs. I do still use it for veging in the cabinet. MH doesn't compare for vegging, I saw it for myself. As for flowering, I can't give a true opinion, I have not flowered under 400 watts HPS at any point to be able to compare the differance.


A cool tube is curved glass, so the optic index is skewed. You have the natural index (usually about 1.52) then adding in the curve.
With a flat glass (air cooled hood) all you have is the 1.52 index and any coating that might (probably not) are on the glass.


----------



## rezo (Jul 23, 2008)

these bulbs only work vertically take that into consideration


----------



## HydroChron (Jul 23, 2008)

what only works vertically? the CMH? cause they have both an horizontal and virtical bulb.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 23, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> But it makes through the glass of the bulb? Help me understand that.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah, I don't believe the UVB argument unless the bulb material is quartz. Otherwise, it's filtered to begin with by the bulb glass.

A cool tube would actually do better than the flat piece of glass, as the light is always going through it perpendicular, whereas with a flat plate, it goes through more glass at the wider angles. It's not the index of refraction, but the absorption, which is proportional to path length. This is of course assuming that the glass is of similar quality and thickness.


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jul 23, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> Yeah, I don't believe the UVB argument unless the bulb material is quartz. Otherwise, it's filtered to begin with by the bulb glass.



Actually it is quartz, one of the main reasons you aren't supposed to touch them.

Footnote we did coatings for sub periscopes. they were like 2 inches thick. Had to warm it up and cool it down overnight; prior/post coating. Big piece of quartz.


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 23, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> Actually it is quartz, one of the main reasons you aren't supposed to touch them.
> 
> Footnote we did coatings for sub periscopes. they were like 2 inches thick. Had to warm it up and cool it down overnight; prior/post coating. Big piece of quartz.


If it's quartz and the pane is tempered glass, the UVB argument def makes sense. Normal glass absorbs below 300nm or so.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 23, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> A cool tube is curved glass, so the optic index is skewed. You have the natural index (usually about 1.52) then adding in the curve.
> With a flat glass (air cooled hood) all you have is the 1.52 index and any coating that might (probably not) are on the glass.


Yeah....you're talking way over my head with that brother. I thought about the bent glass and that has to bend and distort light spectrums but I'm not that knowledgable about the specifics to speak on what it effects. The testing that I have seen all said the same thing about cool tubes, unless it's what best suited for your application, go with a larger hood and skip the cool tube. I guess the real question would be, what difference would it make to yeild, I'm guessing, unless you're a real pro with everything else dialed in with pin point accuracy, you might see some small difference in weight but nothing to write about. For 90% of the growers out there, I bet they wouldn't see any difference at all. I say do whatever you have to do to get the bulb as close to the canopy as you can, after that, worry more about neuts, ph and keeping everything else in check and you'll be better off.

As for the UVB part, let me give you my personal experience, take from it what you will. Ever put you hand under a HPS or MH bulb and have your skin start itching? You will when you put any exposed skin under a CMH bulb. Within a few minutes your exposed skin will start with the same feeling as sunburn or the itch after a bee sting. I didn't realize it at first and no one had mentioned it at the time, when I posted it on another forum, people started chiming in, everything from a sun burn feeling to OPEN LESIONS. Some itched so badly, they scratched until they bled. How does the UVB penetrate the glass bulb.....I don't know but, I am 100% sure that it does. This also ties into the famous comment I see on lighting thread where someone throws up a comment about outside and clouds blocking light, clouds don't block uv light. Ever seen someone wearing glasses that tint in uv light, clouds don't cut UV light but they do cut lumens....but that gets us back to the "cmh doesn't have the lumen output that HPS does".....right but lumens are the measurment of brightness to the EYE....plants don't have eyes, but there's no denying that they use UV light! Late into flower the plant produce trichs to protect itself from the UV burn. 

As for the CMH bulb, it's a discussion that remains split on other forums as well as here. Some people say this, and what about that and hey, look at all this tech jargon 95% of the people don't understand anyway......whatever. The bulb is a great all around bulb. If you have heat issues within reason, it will lower temps. It's agreed to be better then MH in veg and flower. From what I've seen most people like it that use it, I have seen a few, that said they were going back to HPS but they are far and few inbetween.


----------



## mdgcmd (Jul 24, 2008)

ceestyle said:


> I don't have any reason to disbelieve the heat argument, I just didn't see any data to show it. That's why I'm trying to get people to compare their HPS, MH, and CMH bulbs at certain distances from the bulb. If it is that much cooler, it is absolutely a benefit for cab growers. You can't argue that.
> 
> The cooltube is somewhat more expensive, but I don't have to add as much other circulation ventilation, as the blower does that for me. The can-fan and ducting I got were dirt cheap - thrown in with my light - so i'm unsure they cost new. I don't think they're expensive at all at HD, but again I don't know. Maybe 30-40 bucks
> 
> ...


Hey man why are you always spouting about data this and poof that... But where is your proof that an HPS is better than a CMH for flowering. Have you done a side by side run with scientific equipment, keeping records, and accounting for all variables? I think you are one of those guy that I always see on one of my PC forums I am a member of. You know one of those trolls that likes to ster thing up, and doubt EVERYTHING. I bet I could come to your house with hard evidence and proof and you would still be like yo where the proof I can only see incunclusive data and crap. As far as heat goes... well I know what heat feels like, I don't need any equipment to prove that the CMH is a bit cooler, and does not throw it's heat all around. It like this do you need a thermometer to tell the your freezer is colder than your fridge? Probably not the ice and just the plain feel of the freezer should let you know it cooler right? Well apply that to the CMH, when I open my small little cabinet and it FEELS cooler and the temps are lower on the digi termometer. I would have to say that yes it is definately cooler. I really can't say if it is a better bulb, but I can say that I like it a hell of a lot more than my Horti bulb. It's cooler a better color IMO, and I never have to change out my bulb lol. Nobody here is trying to sell you anything so just move along to another thread, and go look for proof on your own... report back when you find something interesting. Those of us that already have these bulbs going love them and those that don't may or may not be interested. In any event If you don't care then just happily move along.

For the record my tone is NOT angry or offensive. It is very subtle so please DO NOT COME BACK AND BASH ME.


----------



## chronic123 (Jul 24, 2008)

mdgcmd said:


> I like that I can spend half as much on a bulbs and ballasts and get nearly the same and maybe more yield from one ballast and one bulb. It may not be better than an HPS but the CMH beats the HPS in vegging hands down. I can get nearly the same yield as a HPS as I can with a CMH. I will admit that the HPS has a slightly higher yield and is also slightly higher heat.
> 
> I think it is stupid to have a debate about which is better because they are all good bulbs, and do the job very well. For me there is not enough difference to make it an issue. For me it was an easy decision... one bulb, one ballast, all grow long, and a slight amount of less heat (not much trust me).


 
can u buy the ballasts with the CMH on the site?


----------



## HydroChron (Jul 24, 2008)

just go with any S51 400w Mettalic coil ballast. Make sure you have the ignightor and the cap. They should come with a wiring diagram or you could find one on-line


----------



## OnSolomonsGrave (Jul 24, 2008)

any standard 400w HPS ballast will work, BUT digital ballasts will not work.


----------



## mdgcmd (Jul 25, 2008)

chronic123 said:


> can u buy the ballasts with the CMH on the site?


Yeah I did so I can say YES for certain


----------



## lukaszqaz (Jul 25, 2008)

Do you really think that HPS Retro-White 400W bulb is better *for flowering* than normal HPS like GIB Flower Spectre DELUXE hps? Better spectrum is very well for VEG time, but don&#8217;t forget that 600-700nm spectrum is more used to produce bigger, tasty buds and too much veg spectrum and other, is waste power for FLOW. 

34800lm score is much worst than simply 56000 lumens for normal, good bulb, and better spectrum could be not enough to recompense waste lumens.
Anyway, we have also Hortilux Super Blue Dual Arc Lamp!

Edit: Horizontal option is available for Phillips bulb Retro White so this isn't problem already.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Yeah....you're talking way over my head with that brother. I thought about the bent glass and that has to bend and distort light spectrums but I'm not that knowledgable about the specifics to speak on what it effects. The testing that I have seen all said the same thing about cool tubes, unless it's what best suited for your application, go with a larger hood and skip the cool tube. I guess the real question would be, what difference would it make to yeild, I'm guessing, unless you're a real pro with everything else dialed in with pin point accuracy, you might see some small difference in weight but nothing to write about. For 90% of the growers out there, I bet they wouldn't see any difference at all. I say do whatever you have to do to get the bulb as close to the canopy as you can, after that, worry more about neuts, ph and keeping everything else in check and you'll be better off.
> 
> As for the UVB part, let me give you my personal experience, take from it what you will. Ever put you hand under a HPS or MH bulb and have your skin start itching? You will when you put any exposed skin under a CMH bulb. Within a few minutes your exposed skin will start with the same feeling as sunburn or the itch after a bee sting. I didn't realize it at first and no one had mentioned it at the time, when I posted it on another forum, people started chiming in, everything from a sun burn feeling to OPEN LESIONS. Some itched so badly, they scratched until they bled. How does the UVB penetrate the glass bulb.....I don't know but, I am 100% sure that it does. This also ties into the famous comment I see on lighting thread where someone throws up a comment about outside and clouds blocking light, clouds don't block uv light. Ever seen someone wearing glasses that tint in uv light, clouds don't cut UV light but they do cut lumens....but that gets us back to the "cmh doesn't have the lumen output that HPS does".....right but lumens are the measurment of brightness to the EYE....plants don't have eyes, but there's no denying that they use UV light! Late into flower the plant produce trichs to protect itself from the UV burn.
> 
> As for the CMH bulb, it's a discussion that remains split on other forums as well as here. Some people say this, and what about that and hey, look at all this tech jargon 95% of the people don't understand anyway......whatever. The bulb is a great all around bulb. If you have heat issues within reason, it will lower temps. It's agreed to be better then MH in veg and flower. From what I've seen most people like it that use it, I have seen a few, that said they were going back to HPS but they are far and few inbetween.


 
Hey kids, back again with a simple test to back up what I said about the bulb putting out UV light......if eyeglasses tint in the sun because of the UV light, they should do the same under a CMH bulb. I got a pair of tinting glasses from a friend. Outside they tinted pretty dark, most likely their max took about a minute and a half. I left them under an 1000 watt HPS light, of course, nothing happend. I put them in my clone cab under 105 watts, mixed spectrum CFL bulbs, again, nothing. I was holding them in my hand adjusting something in the clone cab and my arm was hanging in the light from the CMH, YES, they tinted wherever lenses were not covered by my hand. When I put them under the light bulb itself, they tinted at least twice as fast as they when I had them outside and just as dark. 

I'm sure there will be someone that wants to chime in and say it's a bunk test but, it was a simple one, and it backs up what I've said about the UV output of the bulb to me.  

As for the comment on Trichs, I'll see that one for myself in about 3 months. Last time it was Grape Krush under the CMH light, this time they veg under it and go under 1000 watts HPS to flower.


----------



## BigBudBalls (Jul 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Hey kids, back again with a simple test to back up what I said about the bulb putting out UV light......if eyeglasses tint in the sun because of the UV light, they should do the same under a CMH bulb. I got a pair of tinting glasses from a friend. Outside they tinted pretty dark, most likely their max took about a minute and a half. I left them under an 1000 watt HPS light, of course, nothing happend. I put them in my clone cab under 105 watts, mixed spectrum CFL bulbs, again, nothing. I was holding them in my hand adjusting something in the clone cab and my arm was hanging in the light from the CMH, YES, they tinted wherever lenses were not covered by my hand. When I put them under the light bulb itself, they tinted at least twice as fast as they when I had them outside and just as dark.
> 
> I'm sure there will be someone that wants to chime in and say it's a bunk test but, it was a simple one, and it backs up what I've said about the UV output of the bulb to me.
> 
> As for the comment on Trichs, I'll see that one for myself in about 3 months. Last time it was Grape Krush under the CMH light, this time they veg under it and go under 1000 watts HPS to flower.


Actually that ain't a bad test! Not sure if the lenses respond to UVA or UVB, bit a great test nonetheless! (I guess I should since I was in the eyeglass biz for a short spell, cheap ass optics!!!! Single vision polycarb lenses cost the doctor $8 a pair!, the auto-tint or progressive a different story) 

Fast forward, I never ran UV on quartz glass. That place really only hung in the visible range, and 'hot mirrors' to reflect the IR back at the source and just let the visible through. (that was a cool coating; 8 hours and 30+ layers)


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 26, 2008)

BigBudBalls said:


> Actually that ain't a bad test! Not sure if the lenses respond to UVA or UVB, bit a great test nonetheless! (I guess I should since I was in the eyeglass biz for a short spell, cheap ass optics!!!! Single vision polycarb lenses cost the doctor $8 a pair!, the auto-tint or progressive a different story)
> 
> Fast forward, I never ran UV on quartz glass. That place really only hung in the visible range, and 'hot mirrors' to reflect the IR back at the source and just let the visible through. (that was a cool coating; 8 hours and 30+ layers)


I actually didn't even think of the idea until after I read what I had posted. It's not much of a test but it showed that the CMH does put out UV light, and it's alteast it's a starting point for you tech guys that talk over most of our heads. If you have any ideas, or simple tests that you want to see, just ask and I'll try to get it done and results posted.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 26, 2008)

lukaszqaz said:


> Do you really think that HPS Retro-White 400W bulb is better *for flowering* than normal HPS like GIB Flower Spectre DELUXE hps? Better spectrum is very well for VEG time, but dont forget that 600-700nm spectrum is more used to produce bigger, tasty buds and too much veg spectrum and other, is waste power for FLOW.
> 
> 34800lm score is much worst than simply 56000 lumens for normal, good bulb, and better spectrum could be not enough to recompense waste lumens.
> Anyway, we have also Hortilux Super Blue Dual Arc Lamp!
> ...


 ....huh? So you have a Hortilux Super Blue Arc Blub, cool dude. I didn't really get much else, can you define/clarify FLOW?


----------



## ceestyle (Jul 26, 2008)

ThatOneDude said:


> Hey kids, back again with a simple test to back up what I said about the bulb putting out UV light......if eyeglasses tint in the sun because of the UV light, they should do the same under a CMH bulb. I got a pair of tinting glasses from a friend. Outside they tinted pretty dark, most likely their max took about a minute and a half. I left them under an 1000 watt HPS light, of course, nothing happend. I put them in my clone cab under 105 watts, mixed spectrum CFL bulbs, again, nothing. I was holding them in my hand adjusting something in the clone cab and my arm was hanging in the light from the CMH, YES, they tinted wherever lenses were not covered by my hand. When I put them under the light bulb itself, they tinted at least twice as fast as they when I had them outside and just as dark.
> 
> I'm sure there will be someone that wants to chime in and say it's a bunk test but, it was a simple one, and it backs up what I've said about the UV output of the bulb to me.
> 
> As for the comment on Trichs, I'll see that one for myself in about 3 months. Last time it was Grape Krush under the CMH light, this time they veg under it and go under 1000 watts HPS to flower.


I'd totally buy this anyway, but I use an instrument (a UV-Vis spectrometer) that really couldn't be better designed to test this. Samples run on glass vs. quartz support your results. I'd have to dig into my old spectra to see exactly where the quartz starts to absorb vs. glass as you reduce wavelength toward UV, but this is precisely why quartz is used to test the absorbance of solid-state and solution samples.


----------



## bbqchip (Jul 26, 2008)

so i can use a 150w ceramic metal halide bulb on my 150w hps ballast?


----------



## Hawk (Jul 26, 2008)

No. The 150w and smaller CMH lamps run off a pulse start metal halide ballast.



Here is what I understand about the needed ballasts for CMH:

250w and 400w Philips Mastercolor CMH (HPS-Retro White) ------> regular magnetic HPS ballast (ANSI code S50 for 250w, S51 for 400w). Or a digital ballast _specifically_ made for CMH, not the standard digital ballasts we see used in horticulture. 

150w and smaller Philips Mastercolor CMH ------> _pulse start_ metal halide magnetic ballast (must be pulse start). Or a digital MH ballast should work but who's got one of those.


----------



## ThatOneDude (Jul 26, 2008)

Hawk said:


> No. The 150w and smaller CMH lamps run off a pulse start metal halide ballast.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


This is the same way I understand it also. I only used a 400 watt bulb and ballast so I'm going off of memory but I think Hawk has it dead on.


----------



## sleeper05 (Aug 1, 2008)

I'm currently using a Philips Mastercolor HPS Retro-White in an HPS ballast (not digital). In 3rd week of flower and going to be using this light for the whole grow... I'll let you know how they turn out.


----------



## iloveit (Aug 5, 2008)

Heres a question that Im stuck with:

Where in the U.K. can I find a HPS bulb which I can use for the veg stage (blue spectrum)?

Ive been told the Philips son t agro is good but are these suitable specifically for the vegetative stage if not can anyone make any recommendations.

By the way if your think I should just use a fluorescent or metal halide bulb/s, that is out of the question as I have a different setup which cannot be adjusted


----------



## camaro630hp (Aug 14, 2008)

wow thatss crazy shit great post


----------



## northerntights (Aug 14, 2008)

hey guys, I don't run a CMH YET, but I was talking with the owner of Maryland Hydroponics yesterday and he guarantees that their digital ballasts WILL run 400w CMH bulbs!

It is their own brand so they have it made to THEIR specifications. I also trust the owner, always makes good on their store warranty on everything they sell and everything they say. Hope that helps someone, check out the website.


----------



## Hawk (Aug 15, 2008)

How about a link to the 400w digital ballast that will run a CMH?


----------



## HydroChron (Aug 15, 2008)

thats funny because ive gone to md hydro and they acted like they had never heard or had any expeirence with the cmh's. both of the guys


----------



## HydroChron (Aug 15, 2008)

sleeper05 said:


> I'm currently using a Philips Mastercolor HPS Retro-White in an HPS ballast (not digital). In 3rd week of flower and going to be using this light for the whole grow... I'll let you know how they turn out.


 

does the CMH really cut down on heat output like it is said to or is it just about the same as any MH?


----------



## -=4:20=-Guy (Aug 15, 2008)

Good shit right here +rep


----------



## sleeper05 (Aug 16, 2008)

HydroChron said:


> does the CMH really cut down on heat output like it is said to or is it just about the same as any MH?


It was running a little cooler than my regular HPS bulb. The only reason I say this is because room temps seemed to be cooler with that bulb running rather than the regs. Only like 1 or 2 degrees celcius. I don't know how that person touches the bulb.


----------



## ceestyle (Aug 17, 2008)

sleeper05 said:


> It was running a little cooler than my regular HPS bulb. The only reason I say this is because room temps seemed to be cooler with that bulb running rather than the regs. Only like 1 or 2 degrees celcius. I don't know how that person touches the bulb.


Thanks for this information. This confirms my suspicions - that CMH has no appreciable temperature advantage.


----------



## Hawk (Aug 17, 2008)

I think _I_ would appreciate a 1 or 2 degree Celsius drop in temps. 

I'm in a smallish cabinet. Almost any measurable decrease in cab temps is good for me. But mainly, I'm thinking of adding a second bulb to my current 250w HPS (it's a 250w MH for veg). With my current cooling arrangement (SuperSun 2 hood with 6" air cooling) I might be able to add a 250w CMH and still be ok temp-wise. Or, I do have additional cooling capacity partially installed in my cab. I could possibly add a 400w CMH to go along with my 250w HPS if I finished the cooling upgrades. 

With the current cooling, I'd be afraid to try doubling my 250w HPS and still keep the spread between the temp outside the cabinet and the canopy within 2-4 degrees F. If the spread gets more than that I have to start running my central A/C more than I normally would. If sleeper's CMH lamps are cooler enough to create about 3 deg F difference in his room temps, it would not surprise me if the difference could really matter in my 6 square foot, 30 cubic foot cab [shrug].

I try and mostly succeed at keeping my lights-on canopy temps at or below 80F. Granted, 80F is a somewhat arbitrary goal. Nonetheless, I care about the last few degrees. If only I could borrow a few different ballasts/lamps for a few days and try out different arrangements in my space. I'd test the hell out of everything until figured out what the difference would really be for my particular setup. I find it difficult to apply others' experience and impressions about temperature to MY setup. There are so many variables.


----------



## DeDe Stelljes (Aug 17, 2008)

Hi There,
My name is DeDe.
My Mother and Sister, within 2 months of each other, were diagniosed
with Breast Cancer. The medications have made them sick!!!
I have an Areo Garden. Yet it is small!!!
Do you happen to know of a manufacter that has a Larger Model?
Please let me know.
Sincerely,
DeDe


----------



## ThatOneDude (Aug 18, 2008)

400 watts is the highest the bulb goes right now. Phillips holds the paten for 600 and 1000 watt but has not released a product yet.


----------



## dknob (Aug 19, 2008)

Ive seen a car run on solar. also check out Tesla Motors.

I knew someone that had an ev1. 

Also, heard one of the first cars ran on peanut oil. The rest of the car was made out of hemp plastic.



HashPlant said:


> I doubt henry ford was trying to make a disambiguation between diesel and gasoline when he made that statement, i think what the statement is meant to convey is petroleum products.
> 
> Hybrids still run on gas, or do you know otherwise?
> 
> ...


----------



## ceestyle (Aug 19, 2008)

don't laugh about solar. it's the future -- not that i know why this is in the CMH thread ...


----------



## monster12 (Aug 24, 2008)

do you have a link where i get get the bulb for 50$ ? i can only find it at random websites for like 100


----------



## Greendude (Sep 20, 2008)

thanx for the info , was just wandering which blub next mine a couple years old and need replacing.


----------



## OneHit (Sep 24, 2008)

Just wondering, so whats the definitive answer. CMH is better for vegging, but not better than HPS is for flowering? But it runs colder?

So if you have proper ventilation, it looks like with those facts, HPS is still the way to go?


----------



## ben350n (Oct 9, 2008)

kindprincess said:


> sure will
> 
> i'm just looking for some pre-emptive feedback... i don't want to go into this blind, as the bulbs cost 100$ each...


400 Watt ED18 Philips Metal Halide HPS-Retro White

50 bucks


----------



## JohnnyAppleS33d (Dec 16, 2008)

So whats the verdict? Is this new bulb better for use throughout the grow? Only in vegging? Only in flowering?


----------



## mdgcmd (Dec 17, 2008)

I can touch my bulb I can even take a picture of it. I can touch the end just like the guy in the picture. I would not even think to touch the center of the bulb oh hell no!!!


----------



## mdgcmd (Dec 17, 2008)

Here are some pictures of week 5 flowering under a CHM. These nuggets are so incredibly hard you would think I was lying about saying they are as hard as wood.

https://www.rollitup.org/hydroponics-aeroponics/70485-true-aero-growing-tag-15.html


----------



## Grower2009 (Jan 2, 2009)

I am new to this site and would like to know where I can purchase thes CMH bulbs? Home Depot?


----------



## jonezin (Jan 19, 2009)

In case anyone is interested I found these bulbs for $39 from this place: http://www.lightingsupply.com/products/product_detail.aspx?product=1343427fa4804e41b9bd353f08196e39&category=99172fa60656481fb998bfaa0944213c


----------



## mdgcmd (Jan 20, 2009)

A 400w CMH yielded me 118g off from one plant in a 2'x2.5'x5.5' box. I am pretty happy hopefully round two will be better.


----------



## OneHit (May 17, 2009)

so how many of you guys are still using the cmh over your hps?


----------



## evilferret (May 20, 2009)

ThatOneDude said:


> Henery Ford said all cars will only ever run on gasoline.....then diesel engines came out, now electric, solar, hybrids......
> 
> The most knowledgable people in the world at one point thought the world was flat....they turned out to be wrong.
> 
> ...


This thread is great. Just finished it and had to jump in.

I will be ordering a CMH bulb due to this thread + the one on ICMAG. Just have to price out multiple 150 pulse ballasts so I can save on bulbs.

Sorry I had to quote this. If you do your research Henry Ford originally had a model that ran on alcohol (and guess what ethanol is?).

Guess what was used to make the fuel?

HEMP!

http://www.hempcar.org/ford.shtml

http://journeytoforever.org/ethanol.html

Just a quick search.

Come on people. We need to know our history! Heh cars that run on hemp. Almost as good as cars that run on water.

If you want more info or proof let me find my 6th grade report on Ford.

Well we can all guess what happened.

Wow why are we bringing them back if they're old technology?

Because some technology isn't obsolete, it just doesn't make money for people to manufacture them.

Anybody notice the lack of hybrid/solar/electric car ads now that the price of gas dropped? I bet if the price of gas goes back up the companies will "start" their research on alternative fuels.

Before I get flamed for jumping on the CMH bandwagon. 

My main reason is 
a) the slight heat reduction (I know its not much but from posts the heat travel upwards better than HPS. I personally had heat issues previously with HPS and had to route my airflow from underneath my plants and vent from the top. If CMH does disperse heat better I might be able to cut another fan from my room).
b) won't need a UV light (I have to use 2-3 UV lights to get a decent coverage and I'm looking for quality not quantity) 
c) less total equipment (won't need the extra UV lights nor an extra MH bulb) 
d) the price difference, everybody saying the CMH is more expensive but I can find them locally for 40 dollars vs my local hydro shop which is asking 40 for their generic HPS light. The ones for the Pulse MH ballasts are around 20.

And it seems the most nay-sayers are those with 400+++ wattage grow setups.

Though if I can find cheap pulse ballasts to run CMH without a conversion I would be much happier.

I have restricted space so 1 ballast/light vs 1 ballast + 2-4 uv lights + having to switch the bulbs.

Also I know this sounds weird but what are the bulbs that people use in Alaska to keep them from going crazy from sun deprivation?

And for the record HEMP should be the future of cars! Well I wish it was so.

A few people in my car club have the biodisel conversion done to their VW's. Going to McDonalds or to Chinese Takes Outs for fuel was fun the first few times but it gets smelly fast.

Wow that was a long post.


----------



## OneHit (May 20, 2009)

Im glad someones posted in this thread. Ive also been very interested, but Ive been surprised that it hasnt caught on with more growers with all of those advantages. Just curious why


----------



## growme12 (May 20, 2009)

i got a 100 watt metal halide light but i dont know what kind of lamp do i need to get the light to work


----------



## BigBudBalls (May 22, 2009)

OneHit said:


> Im glad someones posted in this thread. Ive also been very interested, but Ive been surprised that it hasnt caught on with more growers with all of those advantages. Just curious why


I'm thinking they haven't caught on mainly because most people have 2 rooms going.


----------



## OneHit (May 22, 2009)

2 rooms going? What do you mean by that? What about yourself, do you use CMH bulbs?


----------



## BigBudBalls (May 23, 2009)

OneHit said:


> 2 rooms going? What do you mean by that? What about yourself, do you use CMH bulbs?


one room for veg, another for flowering. I look at the bulb as a compromise, or a jack of all trades, but a master of none. 
Nope don't use 'em. Haven't seen enough data to say it does better on flowering.


----------



## OneHit (May 23, 2009)

Does it do the same? Id be interested if it runs cooler. THough Ive heard people mention that it produces tighter buds too


----------



## polishfalcon420 (May 24, 2009)

is anyone making a 600w?


----------



## NavySupra (Dec 20, 2009)

I recently screwed in a HPS-RetroWhite in 400w, 4000k, and my plants absolutely love it. I'm still a long ways off from flowering but I'm going to use this lamp alone through the whole cycle. The quality of the light that comes from this lamp is mesmerizing. I don't know how to put this, but when I'm at work I look at our 400w MH's that hang in the shop... I can "see" the the light is overly blueish and "incomplete," with HPS it is completely clear there is a lot of the spectrum missing. The light that comes from the CMH feels... very complete with no noticeable bias towards blue or red... to my human eyes. My transition lenses turn dark in seconds, faster than if outside in the sunlight, so I would say I won't need to supplement UV output. Looking at the spectrial graph thingy, I don't believe a HPS produces any more red than the CMH does, only that it simply produces a greater available quantity of light. If you are really that worried about the loss of lumen's just pair up a 400w and 250w CMH's to make up the lost lumins... but I really don't think it will be needed. 

Something else to think about... it's not red out all day during the winter months, or the fall, only when the sun comes up and goes down. For the rest of the day, it is normal bright full spectrum daylight... so I think that our plants will benefit from having a full spectrum to choose from. The plant is only going to take what it needs, from what is available to it. Is it not simply the length of time the plant is exposed to light that effects if the plant is flowering or not(nevermind the autoflowers )?

I'm growing in a closet, 60cm x 80cm, my temps were on the too hot side with the HPS. The CMH has noticeably lowered the temps of the closet, and I can no longer use the heat from the closet as supplemental heating in my room.

I have read that this bulbs can be hard to strike, but I have a 3m long cable from my ballast to socket and mine lit up right away. Apparently they can be fussy with cable lengths greater than 1m.

I think that if you have a closet grow and are using 250w or 400w HPS, it is worth the money to at least try this lamp. When you actually see the light that it produces and the way your plants respond to it, you likely will be pleased. Perhaps early next year I can give a "seat of my pants" comparison of the bud production verses my old HPS. I paid $62 Canadian for my lamp, but for the time being I'm being a bad boy and using a vertical, horizontally... I have a horizontal on order, but it won't be here for another month and I couldn't wait to try out this lamp...


----------



## cee (Dec 20, 2009)

blonddie07 said:


> CMH bulbs cant compete to HPS or MH.... do some research guys....
> 
> if cmh was good enough for growing it would have been used by many greenhouse growing companies. and its not a new product... its fairly old.. about 10 years or so..


Have to agree with this knowledge....and the point about people growing a nice looking plant using a shitload of cfl's. I will stick with my pricier hps's that every major producer uses.


----------



## NavySupra (Dec 20, 2009)

blonddie07 said:


> CMH bulbs cant compete to HPS or MH.... do some research guys....
> 
> if cmh was good enough for growing it would have been used by many greenhouse growing companies. and its not a new product... its fairly old.. about 10 years or so..


You are correct, but for the closet grower the cmh is an excellent choice.

Things the CMH has against it for commerical operations: 

-Only available up to 400w
-High lamp replacement cost (up to x3 the cost)
-Shorter lifespan
-Horizontal lamps are harder to source than vertical lamps
-HPS lamps are cheap, abundant and meet the plants needs
-Protective lenses to protect workers would reduce lamp effectiveness
-PPE's for workers would be cost prohibitive as well.

If you are not a commerical sized operation, the CMH has benifits:

-can eliminate any need for supplimential lighting... uv and lots of available blue.
-broad even spectrum for the plant to use
-uses hardware many of us already have
-runs cooler
-much more natural light for our comfort when working in the grow area (wear your uv protection though).
-promotes shorter plants which helps with space constraints.
-when sourced from a lighting supplier, cost is usually less than "horticultural" lamps.

People who will use CMH lamps:

-Those who are willing to experiment with their grows
-Low volume producers who already use 250 or 400w hps lighting (I'm not covering the lower watt pulse start MH)
-Those with open minds

I don't believe the CMH is in any fashion a competitive lamp in the commercial growing market.


----------



## Datakeova420 (Mar 22, 2010)

What are the negatives of using a CMH light


----------



## Datakeova420 (Mar 22, 2010)

Because I'm looking to get a CMH bulb for my 72"Hx36"Wx18"D cabinet...will this be a good choice?


----------



## maxpesh (May 5, 2010)

Well I have to say that after much research and many months of pondering over Plasma and buying LED's that I am absolutely blown away by the CMH lamps. There is nothing anywhere else that can touch them. Phillips have made these lights SPECIFICALLY for growing but can't say that now can they ????????. Get on the wagon and rejoice in the fact that we now have the next stage in the evolution of grow lights. If you don't believe me. Try them, go on, I dare ya . 

Many Thanks.

Satisfied Customer


----------



## UnKlE SaM (May 5, 2010)

for all ya disbelievers there is plenty of grows on icmag that use CMH and have fantastic results. the proof is in the pudding now go find the pudding. from my research ive concluded that...

-CMH gives a very slight less yield compared to HPS

-CMH puts out slightly less heat, but the big factor is that the way a CMH bulb is designed the heat tends to flow up through the top of the bulb more so than an HPS, therefore less heat is pushed downwards towards your plants.

-CMH gives plants full spec at high intensity allowing the plant to use light where its needed when its needed instead of being forced to work with what its got (HPS). because of this the plant looks and smokes more like outdoor weed, which i think is always a better smoke. the plant is probably more potent although i have not seen numbers for that statement. because of full SPD the plant is more floral smelling. MMMMM

-buds are leafier because of added blue light 

this is all based off observations that ive made from following CMH grows, for the past year or so. 

this is not to say HPS does not have its place in growing. the yellow-orange spike HPS has is great for flowering plants, but from what ive seen if i had to choose one bulb CMH wins hands down.

the best plants ive seen indoors were 1k HPS and 400w CMH under the same hood. WOW


----------



## cdrippper2 (May 7, 2010)

Think I'm going to have to give these a try . Regular 400W pulse start MH throw off too much heat  Good thing there are some spare HPS ballasts laying around here somewhere....


----------



## indofasho (May 7, 2010)

ok im new to this but i have a 400w ballast (not digital) runs mh hps and hg bulbs...it says luminaire fittings idk if that will help, but can i run cmh on my setup??


----------



## cdrippper2 (May 9, 2010)

indofasho said:


> ok im new to this but i have a 400w ballast (not digital) runs mh hps and hg bulbs...it says luminaire fittings idk if that will help, but can i run cmh on my setup??


If it can run a HPS, then you should be good. Also, just ordered one of these ceramic pieces of goodness to try out...


----------



## ilove2sell (May 9, 2010)

THATONEDUDE,

Awesome pix man!! Love it! Can you please help me out and give me the top 2 ways you got you girls to get the fat and round? I keep getting tall skinny plants...


----------



## indofasho (May 10, 2010)

sweet...let me kno how that bulb does for ya...and what did u pay for it??? i can get a 400w for 70 and i can only order it online...no hydroponic stores carry them around here yet


----------



## cdrippper2 (May 10, 2010)

Yeah got it ordered with shipping for 55$. Won't be here till around the 22nd? though due to a back order. I'll for sure post how it does. I've worked on a whole shit pot of HID lights, including LED, but have absolutely zero experience with CERAMIC MH. Hoping for good results..


----------



## akize (Feb 5, 2013)

Just starting on making my new micro cab and so far I thought of going 150w cmh+70w hps but the specter from 250w retro white is just awesome =O. You guys think I should forget the normal cmh+hps and go for 250w retro white?

Where do you buy these bulbs in EU?

Thanks!


----------



## object16 (Feb 6, 2013)

akize said:


> Just starting on making my new micro cab and so far I thought of going 150w cmh+70w hps but the specter from 250w retro white is just awesome =O. You guys think I should forget the normal cmh+hps and go for 250w retro white?
> 
> Where do you buy these bulbs in EU?
> 
> Thanks!


this is the lamp i use in my grow - i actually use the 575 watt, but this 250 has the same benefits
http://www.venturelighting.com/LampsDataSheets/NaturalWhite/59324m.pdf
it has a quartz shield on it so you don't harm your eyes from the u.v.
also, check the spectrum: just like the sun, but in a modern lamp -
you will have to build your own ballast because this is for industry, and you
may need a remote ignitor if you decide to go for it


----------

