# Making a bud look delicious



## Mr.I (Jan 14, 2009)

alright, i'm new to growing but have a few babies that are 4 weeks into flowering. please view the pics. this strain is white russian.

i am trying to achieve a bud that would look like on the picture "whiterussianobjective".
this picture is like it is advertised by the seed bank.

it looks so full and soooo damn delicious. will my babies turn like that by the 8th week(64days?)


what should i do to make them produce buds like that? i gave them everything they need, 7500-10000lumens, nutes, co2... etc.


----------



## Kingb420 (Jan 14, 2009)

molasses asap, 1-2 tbs to gal, will fatten them out, looks like 2-3 more weeks left, hows the trics now?


----------



## macdadyabc (Jan 14, 2009)

what lights are you using? No, your plant probobly wont be as fat as advertized, but you did better than me on my first grow. I think you will be estatic with whater you harvest. They look really good though, and crystally.


----------



## whoreable (Jan 14, 2009)

Decent nugs. The pistil and calyx formation are much different from the Strain's photo and your actual Grow.

Which isnt a bad thing, I prefer your type of buds to those Foxtails anyday.

Keep it up! nice n Frosty!


----------



## the357ink (Jan 14, 2009)

looks really good and delicious...

any co2 being used ??


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 14, 2009)

macdadyabc said:


> what lights are you using? No, your plant probobly wont be as fat as advertized, but you did better than me on my first grow. I think you will be estatic with whater you harvest. They look really good though, and crystally.


molasses tell me more about it... 1-2 table spoons with the same dose of the nutes? i don't want to risk overfertilizing them. where can i get it?

what would molasses do to the chemistry of the buds? how does it actually benefit? how does it help?

light are cfls. i have a very tight place, i can't put anything else in there.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 15, 2009)

Kingb420 said:


> molasses asap, 1-2 tbs to gal, will fatten them out, looks like 2-3 more weeks left, hows the trics now?


ok.. already bought that today. its pretty cheap to buy. i'll just experiment with the nutes and molasses with low doses at first gradually increasing to the recommended dose.

what's trics?


----------



## GSTATUS (Jan 15, 2009)

Trichomes the crystals on the plant


----------



## SenorSanteria (Jan 15, 2009)

The $20 150 watt HPS lamp: https://www.rollitup.org/indoor-growing/113223-skip-cfls-20-150w-complete.html?highlight=skip+cfl's

I bought two of these. They put out VERY LITTLE heat when compared to any number of CFL's. I can get my plants up to 4 inches away from the bulb.


----------



## holmes (Jan 15, 2009)

i would like someone to please explain how molasses is going to fatten up your buds
it is my understanding that it is ment only to feed the microbes, that is if you have a colony of beneficial microbes. That will in turn break down certain chemical salts to a more readily available form for the plant


----------



## RANDUMpurple (Jan 15, 2009)

Carbohydrate? I believe that is the idea. 

But it really feeds the good bacteria in your res. with hydro or when watering soil.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 15, 2009)

SenorSanteria said:


> The $20 150 watt HPS lamp: https://www.rollitup.org/indoor-growing/113223-skip-cfls-20-150w-complete.html?highlight=skip+cfl's
> 
> I bought two of these. They put out VERY LITTLE heat when compared to any number of CFL's. I can get my plants up to 4 inches away from the bulb.


well, the lowest price is $49.99 i saw there, which $20 you talking about? 

besides how would i cover the area and spread the light around with just one bulb. one plant grows and shades everything else. only the tops bloom. this way i got the whole plant covered in buds. hps has lots of red spectrum, so it would strech out the plants in a tight space like i have and i wouldn't get as many bud sites as with blue fluoros. though its true that hps bulb has more usable light spectrum than anything else on the market yet....

in any case my next step is LED, less heat than anything else, and more useful spectrums for the energy used. umm.. let me correct myself, ALL the spcetrums used by the plant for the energy provided. 

i fed them molasses, we'll see how this changes them. and yeah trics.. i'm new to the forum. need to get used to the words.


----------



## missaslady420 (Jan 15, 2009)

looks delicious to mee..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 15, 2009)

missaslady420 said:


> looks delicious to mee..


thanks! i put alot of hard work into them.


----------



## macdadyabc (Jan 15, 2009)

thats one of the better cfl setups that ive seen. I like how all the tubes are orientated.


----------



## SenorSanteria (Jan 16, 2009)

Theres one thing you should know about LED grow lights:

They suck. Dont waste your time. Buy a halide for veg and an HPS for flower.

The $20 HPS deal just ended, but I'm sure there are other cheap ones around.


----------



## kittykronic (Jan 16, 2009)

SenorSanteria said:


> Theres one thing you should know about LED grow lights:
> 
> They suck. Dont waste your time. Buy a halide for veg and an HPS for flower.
> 
> The $20 HPS deal just ended, but I'm sure there are other cheap ones around.


 go buy some floranectar and drop your flower room temps at night for massive resin production and ultimate sweetness...flush well...peace


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 16, 2009)

kittykronic said:


> go buy some floranectar and drop your flower room temps at night for massive resin production and ultimate sweetness...flush well...peace


sounds good, seems like thats what i'm doing i gave them molasses.. which is essentially same as floranectar.. just read about it.. molasses got same ingridients the only difference is that molasses is organic. the temps go down to 66-69F during the night time.. so yeah, they are very very sticky already..
its a good point though, thanks, i didn't know about it, and i'm already doing it

umm.. LED.. they work. one day i'll bring this question back its just i need to test the light i designed myself. actually i designed it quite a long time ago, i really needed to learn all tricks of plant's behavior before i go any further. 


but my question stiil stays, how to make the bud explode from the inside ... it looks on the picture like each of these hairs or pistils got full pocket behind it..
my buds are covered in trichomes but look a bit more leafy. or maybe its too early to say, i have to wait and see what comes out by day 64. so far its been only 32 days ))


----------



## buffalosoulja (Jan 16, 2009)

From what I understand about molasses is that is feeds the microorganisms in the soil that in turn release valuable o2 and other nutrients to our lovely ladies. All in all in would not hurt to add. I add it with my tea, and just water and molasses. Hope this helps.

By the way nice buds.


----------



## SayWord (Jan 16, 2009)

ok, so besides molasses my advice for you would be:

GRAVITY by humboldt's own. i just bought a bottle today, havent used it yet but have read over and over about how it makes ur buds rock hard and fattens them up. 

UVB bulb. i just bought one of these today too. lol. theres a thread in the advanced cultivation thread. check it out. its less than 20 bucks at your local pet store. get the 10.0 and like 20 or 26 watts. tell them u have a bearded dragon if they ask.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 17, 2009)

SayWord said:


> ok, so besides molasses my advice for you would be:
> 
> GRAVITY by humboldt's own. i just bought a bottle today, havent used it yet but have read over and over about how it makes ur buds rock hard and fattens them up.
> 
> UVB bulb. i just bought one of these today too. lol. theres a thread in the advanced cultivation thread. check it out. its less than 20 bucks at your local pet store. get the 10.0 and like 20 or 26 watts. tell them u have a bearded dragon if they ask.


uvb sounds good, i'm afraid to use it without a timer, because uvb is still harmful to plants, and say the budsite will get a burn that might slow down the plant. thats ultimately is something i'm going to add, when i decide how i will manage the timer on the lights i will have to get separate ballast for uvb.

or do you think leaving 20w uvb would be ok for 12 hours about four inches away from tops? how do you do it?


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 17, 2009)

if i got some yellowing of leaves starting form the bottom in the middle up.. all are fan leaves.. thats nitrogen deficiency? there's not much of it.. actually it even helps.. the light penetrates much better now, i had lots of vegetative growth during veg phase. doesn't the plant use nitrogen to build buds?


----------



## SayWord (Jan 17, 2009)

Mr.I said:


> uvb sounds good, i'm afraid to use it without a timer, because uvb is still harmful to plants, and say the budsite will get a burn that might slow down the plant. thats ultimately is something i'm going to add, when i decide how i will manage the timer on the lights i will have to get separate ballast for uvb.
> 
> or do you think leaving 20w uvb would be ok for 12 hours about four inches away from tops? how do you do it?









that cfl in the middle is a 26w uvb.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 17, 2009)

continuous light cycle on? what strain is this?


----------



## SayWord (Jan 17, 2009)

its bagseed. i have it plugged into the 12/12 timer with the hps.


----------



## sfcc892007 (Jan 17, 2009)

What size hps you using?


----------



## SayWord (Jan 17, 2009)

600 watt..


----------



## doctorchaos555 (Jan 18, 2009)

buffalosoulja said:


> From what I understand about molasses is that is feeds the microorganisms in the soil that in turn release valuable o2 and other nutrients to our lovely ladies. All in all in would not hurt to add. I add it with my tea, and just water and molasses. Hope this helps.
> 
> By the way nice buds.



Does the plant really want more O2?



As a chem major in college, I'd like to know how molasses helps as well. What kind of nutes does it release? What kind of microorganisms does it feed? Do these microorganisms already live in the soil?


----------



## weedyoo (Jan 18, 2009)

doctorchaos555 said:


> Does the plant really want more O2?
> 
> 
> 
> As a chem major in college, I'd like to know how molasses helps as well. What kind of nutes does it release? What kind of microorganisms does it feed? Do these microorganisms already live in the soil?


you have all good questions i dont like molassis 

what about this http://homeharvest.com/beneficialmicroorganisms.htm


----------



## Hash Lover (Jan 18, 2009)

Do Not Use Molasses In Hydro!!!!!! It will kill your plants roots. I know, I tried. I was able to save it though.
https://www.rollitup.org/general-marijuana-growing/132792-fucking-mollasess.html
Have you heard of Sucanat? Check this one out.http://www.marijuanagrowing.eu/sucanat-soo-ka-nat-t21699.html


----------



## fdd2blk (Jan 18, 2009)

Mr.I said:


> sounds good, seems like thats what i'm doing i gave them molasses.. which is essentially same as floranectar.. just read about it.. molasses got same ingridients the only difference is that molasses is organic. the temps go down to 66-69F during the night time.. so yeah, they are very very sticky already..
> its a good point though, thanks, i didn't know about it, and i'm already doing it
> 
> umm.. LED.. they work. one day i'll bring this question back its just i need to test the light i designed myself. actually i designed it quite a long time ago, i really needed to learn all tricks of plant's behavior before i go any further.
> ...


the pictures you see are of plants grown under HPS. to get buds like that you need to grow under HPS. plain and simple.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 19, 2009)

fdd2blk said:


> the pictures you see are of plants grown under HPS. to get buds like that you need to grow under HPS. plain and simple.


the intensity of light then, but i got around 10000 lumens in there per sq foot and thats evenly sperad out around the plant too. no light escapes from there everything gets eaten up by the plants.
i understand what you are saying, and agree with you on that. i wish i could put each plant into an HPS bulb on its own lol

but tell me, the HPS, doesn't it make the plant strech out? if i could do veg with blue and then HPS wouldn't that increase the bud size and density overall? considering the internode space is closer together.


----------



## fdd2blk (Jan 19, 2009)

Mr.I said:


> the intensity of light then, but i got around 10000 lumens in there per sq foot and thats evenly sperad out around the plant too. no light escapes from there everything gets eaten up by the plants.
> i understand what you are saying, and agree with you on that. i wish i could put each plant into an HPS bulb on its own lol
> 
> but tell me, the HPS, doesn't it make the plant strech out? if i could do veg with blue and then HPS wouldn't that increase the bud size and density overall? considering the internode space is closer together.


no, HPS does not cause stretch, unless you have them too high. but this will happen with any light.

metal halide for vegging. HPS for flowering.


----------



## SenorSanteria (Jan 19, 2009)

fdd2blk said:


> no, HPS does not cause stretch, unless you have them too high. but this will happen with any light.
> 
> metal halide for vegging. HPS for flowering.


If HPS does not cause stretching during veg, why is Metal Halide that much better? What differences would be noticed in an HPS grow from veg to flower, versus a grow with MH for veg and HPS for flower?


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 19, 2009)

thats what i'm talking about.....  its true though you get many more lumens from an HPS for the energy consumed.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 19, 2009)

HPS is better for 2 reasons.. First of all, a typical HPS provides the vast majoritity of its light at ~650nm which is right about at the peak wavelength for overall photosynthetic efficiency..
The second reason is due to the physics of light.. Plants don't care about lumens or Watts as we talk about them, they care about active photon counts.. Photon counts are typically measured in a unit called microEinsteins.. (An Einstein is a mole of photons btw)..
Anyways, one of Einsteins accomplishment was in quantizing the amount of energy in a photon.. E=h/wavelength.. As can be seen from that, as the wavelength increases, the energy decreases..
Watts are Joules/second (and Joules are a unit of energy).. So following that logic, 600W of light from an HPS which has an average wavelength of maybe 1.5x the average MH wavelength will provide 1.5x the number of photons than equal wattage of MH light.. Lower energy photons will not convert as much unused energy to heat within the leaf as well..
Beyond that there are hormonal complexities etc where certain plant responses trigger best with light that mimicks the seasonal natural spectrum, heck even the angle of irradience can apparently alter response, but as long as basic needs are met, aspects like that obviously aren't critical.. Personally I'm a big fan of having MH running in the flower room with HPS though.. I swear the quality is improved overall..


----------



## fdd2blk (Jan 19, 2009)

SenorSanteria said:


> If HPS does not cause stretching during veg, why is Metal Halide that much better? What differences would be noticed in an HPS grow from veg to flower, versus a grow with MH for veg and HPS for flower?



metal halide for vegging.  or an enhanced HPS bulb. i used "eye hortilux" HPS for vegging. they have some blue in them.


----------



## SenorSanteria (Jan 19, 2009)

fdd2blk said:


> metal halide for vegging.  or an enhanced HPS bulb. i used "eye hortilux" HPS for vegging. they have some blue in them.


Right, but you didnt answer my question. I know MH IS better for veg. Im asking: why? I know the plant can use the blue light better for veg and it mimics springtime, blah blah blah. But why is MH chosen over HPS if the HPS doesnt cause stretching? What other reason would there be that would make enough of a difference to run a MH?

Lets say you have a veg chamber and a flower room. Why would it be more effective to run MH in one room and HPS in another INSTEAD OF HPS in both rooms, one on 24hr light and one on 12 hours?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 19, 2009)

Don't forget there are multiple pigments/chlorophyls, and light reactive hormones, and they don't all respond equally to various wavelengths..


----------



## fdd2blk (Jan 19, 2009)

SenorSanteria said:


> Right, but you didnt answer my question. I know MH IS better for veg. Im asking: why? I know the plant can use the blue light better for veg and it mimics springtime, blah blah blah. But why is MH chosen over HPS if the HPS doesnt cause stretching? What other reason would there be that would make enough of a difference to run a MH?
> 
> Lets say you have a veg chamber and a flower room. Why would it be more effective to run MH in one room and HPS in another INSTEAD OF HPS in both rooms, one on 24hr light and one on 12 hours?



MH put out blue which is needed during vegging. HPS put out reds which are needed for flowering. if you are only vegging for a week or two then i think enhanced HPS are ok. a lot of people start from clones and only have one room. people i know buy 50 clones, they put them under 1000 watts of enhanced HPS for a week or two of 18/6 then they add a second 1000 watts and flip them to 12/12. 

if you are going to run two rooms i would use MH in veg and HPS in the flower.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 20, 2009)

blue will give more compact and vigurous growth, even if HPS gives more lumens. you can control the plant better with blue. i come to think that blue is good during flowering too, somewhere around 3:1 ratio. this will produce fatter buds rather than streched out on the stem. am i right?


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 20, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> HPS is better for 2 reasons.. First of all, a typical HPS provides the vast majoritity of its light at ~650nm which is right about at the peak wavelength for overall photosynthetic efficiency..
> The second reason is due to the physics of light.. Plants don't care about lumens or Watts as we talk about them, they care about active photon counts.. Photon counts are typically measured in a unit called microEinsteins.. (An Einstein is a mole of photons btw)..
> Anyways, one of Einsteins accomplishment was in quantizing the amount of energy in a photon.. E=h/wavelength.. As can be seen from that, as the wavelength increases, the energy decreases..
> Watts are Joules/second (and Joules are a unit of energy).. So following that logic, 600W of light from an HPS which has an average wavelength of maybe 1.5x the average MH wavelength will provide 1.5x the number of photons than equal wattage of MH light.. Lower energy photons will not convert as much unused energy to heat within the leaf as well..
> Beyond that there are hormonal complexities etc where certain plant responses trigger best with light that mimicks the seasonal natural spectrum, heck even the angle of irradience can apparently alter response, but as long as basic needs are met, aspects like that obviously aren't critical.. Personally I'm a big fan of having MH running in the flower room with HPS though.. I swear the quality is improved overall..



alright here's another question, how much photons is maximum for the specific spectrums of light? 10000 lumens is so called "maximum" in HID, cfls fluorecsent terms. 
LEDs work differently, in order to measure effectiveness of LEDs you have to measure the photons given to the plant. now, there are few chlorophylls known that utilize different spectrums and produce carbohydrates for photosynthesis: chlorophyll a, b, c, d... carrotenoids.. etc. "a" and "b" are the two major ones, and there are 3:1 ratio of chlorophyll "a" to "b".

from knowing this information, how the hell would i measure the maximum absorption rate for a specific spectrum without wasting more energy?

if in general lighting we would think that its 10000 lumens, and lots of light is wasted, then how much % is used and in what spectrums?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 20, 2009)

As far as pure photosynthetic productivity goes, no you're wrong.. An HPS will provide more photons, and the average photon will also have a higher absorption efficiency.. So more photosynthetic reactions will happen under an HPS, thus more energy to build plant material is converted..
When photons with higher than required energy to reduce chlorophylls strikes a leaf, the chorophyll will absorb only the needed energy to undergo its reaction, and the rest will be re-emmited from the molecule as a lower energy photon (a process called fluorescence).. Chlorophyll is designed to reabsorb anything it can, but these new photons will often be too low in energy to be useful to chlorophyll, and will be absorbed as heat etc..
So production wise its definately best to spend your energy creating more photons that have just enough energy to get the job done..
That being said, there are definately further complexities regarding 'how' a plant grows under different lights, and I'm a huge proponent of MH in the flowering chamber.. I started with a single HPS, then came across a really good deal on some MH's, so I tossed them in and expanded my area.. That crop was great.. My next crop I had enough HPS, so the MH came out, and I was using all Hortilux Enhanced bulbs.. 
The yield was definately better, but I had also learned quite a bit about training.. But the quality was lower.. Flavors didn't pop as much and the crystals weren't as dense..
Both crops were the same genetics, the same hydro system/nutes, and both went very smoothly and healthily..
Pegging the light as the only variable, the next crop I went back to the MH with the $17 GE bulb with the HPS like before, and was treated to the same quality as the first.. Buds closer to MH than HPS tend to be slightly less dense, but more enjoyable..


----------



## tckfui (Jan 20, 2009)

looks fine, the will definetly look sick when its done!!! they will probably need longer than the 8 weeks they say, seeds... lie... alot...
but yea 4-6 weeks they will be (Borat voice) very nice


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 20, 2009)

Regarding your other question, I don't know exactly where maximums lie.. The sources I found the information were broadly scoped and said that limits would vary largely species to species, location to location..
With cannabis, not much benefit is seen beyond 50-60W of HPS per sqft.. If you assume an average wavelength of say 630nm (and ideal efficiency) for an HPS then 50W works out to ~4.7*10^28 photons.. Actually that exponent will generally be the same regardless of the light color, but efficiency is far from 100% so I'd guestimate 3*10^28 photons/sqft/s to be the usable maximum for cannabis.. 
All light is the same though.. Watts are just as effective for LED.. With LED though you need to remember that they are monochromatic so its crucial that their wavelength be in a high absorbance band otherwise you'll need to multiply the watts by a puny absorbtion factor..
Also remember that the various pigments are all available to accept photons, and that most have absorbtion peaks in both red band and blue band (but its more efficient to excite them with red band photons).. The one big odd man out is B-carotene.. It pretty much absorbs nothing redder than 550nm..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 21, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Regarding your other question, I don't know exactly where maximums lie.. The sources I found the information were broadly scoped and said that limits would vary largely species to species, location to location..
> With cannabis, not much benefit is seen beyond 50-60W of HPS per sqft.. If you assume an average wavelength of say 630nm (and ideal efficiency) for an HPS then 50W works out to ~4.7*10^28 photons.. Actually that exponent will generally be the same regardless of the light color, but efficiency is far from 100% so I'd guestimate 3*10^28 photons/sqft/s to be the usable maximum for cannabis..
> All light is the same though.. Watts are just as effective for LED.. With LED though you need to remember that they are monochromatic so its crucial that their wavelength be in a high absorbance band otherwise you'll need to multiply the watts by a puny absorbtion factor..
> Also remember that the various pigments are all available to accept photons, and that most have absorbtion peaks in both red band and blue band (but its more efficient to excite them with red band photons).. The one big odd man out is B-carotene.. It pretty much absorbs nothing redder than 550nm..


550 is green color my friend. b-carotene would absorb maximum of 2-5%, but green light still gets absorbed.
and 630 has chlorophyll absorption rate of around 20-30%, 662nm 80% and believe or not in blue spectrums it sky rockets more than 90%. so you see its not only about the wavelengths, and chlorophyll peaks of spectrums, its also about the specific absorption rate i'm talking about. so, it does not mean necessarily that having all red will give you better faster growth, though you are right that red photons travel further per unit of energy, but the blue carry more energy with them. so if i have same amount of photons in blue and red, which one you think will do better?

so having all red, does not necessarily mean the highest rate of photosynthesis.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 21, 2009)

I meant the cutoff for B-carotene is about 550nm.. It absorbs well at shorter wavelengths than that..
Also, many transitions resulting from blue band photons will push electrons up more than one level.. This second level is useless to chlorophylls, its incredibly unstable, and the energy released when it drops will be wasted as heat.. Every now and then one of those high energy electrons will participate in a rather undesirable reaction.. 
The absorption spectrum plots 'energy' on the Y-axis, not number of photons, so each blue photon will depict more energy on the graph than each red photon, but to the process of photosynthesis, there is NO difference between a red and a blue as long as both have 'enough' energy.. Any excess energy in a photon is fluoresced, and likely wasted as internal heat..
Remember I'm talking about pure photosynthetic power though, and ignoring the complexities, because like I said, I'm a huge fan of MH..
Imagine you need to hire ppl to carry small boxes one at a time.. Its not beneficial to pay more for stronger workers if weaker ones can do the same job..
About the red travelling further, light does not work like that exactly.. Red light is more penetrating to atmosphere.. Blue is easily scattered (why the sky is blue).. When the sun is low in the sky, rays need to travel through more atmosphere, and the blue gets scattered long before the red, so the sky looks red..
In summary, photon absorbtion rate will be higher in the red band, while the energy absorbtion rate (as depicted in the spectra) may peak in the blue range, but the re-emmitted/wasted energy in the blue band will be higher than in red..
Its kind of like when somebody opts to buy a large soft-drink when they're just going to take a few sips and throw it away.. Same job could be done with a small..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 22, 2009)

alright which 175W metal halide would be the best, i need it for clones. i've got these fluorecents in there right now and i don't like it. i want the clones to grow more compact than they are right now. is there 20000K 175W metal halide and how many lumens would itemit? small cabinet 2 feet by 2 feet and 1 1/2 feet height. will install it in a cooltube to protect the babies.
searched the net, i find many with different readings from 4000K to 14000K and doesn't say lumens. but which one in your opinion would be the best?


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 22, 2009)

found two websites 
ballast: http://www.bulbs.com/Metal_Halide-High_Intensity_Discharge_(HID)_Ballasts-Ballasts-Category/results.aspx
bulb: http://www.lightbulbsdirect.com/page/001/PROD/MetalHalide/MH175U-USA

would these two work together?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 22, 2009)

The higher the K, the less red will be in there.. 20000K is really high..
Lumens mean dick to plants.. Lumens are measured in terms of the absorbtion spectrum of the human, not plants, and our peak lies right at 550nm where plants don't absorb well.. Lumens are only relevent to photosynthesis is you're comparing two lights with the same K rating.. 
The lower the K rating the lower then energy of the average photon, so you will get more photosynthetic power from 175W of lower K..
A 175W is 'sufficient' for that area, but the height will be a problem.. MH bulbs are big unless you hunt out special ones.. A 175W bulb has a 4" diameter, and it has to stay atleast 8" maybe from the plants..
Aquarium shops may have tubular bulbs, but honestly I don't even think you could pull it off in that area with one of these stadium style..
http://www.drsfostersmith.com/product/prod_display.cfm?pcatid=13949


----------



## Lowkster (Jan 22, 2009)

Nice plants man!!!!


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 22, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> The higher the K, the less red will be in there.. 20000K is really high..
> Lumens mean dick to plants.. Lumens are measured in terms of the absorbtion spectrum of the human, not plants, and our peak lies right at 550nm where plants don't absorb well.. Lumens are only relevent to photosynthesis is you're comparing two lights with the same K rating..
> The lower the K rating the lower then energy of the average photon, so you will get more photosynthetic power from 175W of lower K..
> A 175W is 'sufficient' for that area, but the height will be a problem.. MH bulbs are big unless you hunt out special ones.. A 175W bulb has a 4" diameter, and it has to stay atleast 8" maybe from the plants..
> ...


How about this puppy
http://www.drsfostersmith.com/product/prod_display.cfm?c=3578+3733+8074+13946&pcatid=13946
seems like not that big.

which one is smaller? and the ballast for the first one, its a special ballast, or i can connect just the regular one somehow?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 22, 2009)

Cool tubed maybe, if you're a master µgrower.. I wouldn't attempt it if I had anything to lose..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 22, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Cool tubed maybe, if you're a master µgrower.. I wouldn't attempt it if I had anything to lose..


ok i'll take your advice for it.


----------



## Titan4jah (Jan 22, 2009)

dual arc bulbs.... i use them for veg. its a 400hps n 400Mh in one 1000 watt bulb..dont ask me were the other 200 watts goes. i gro in such a small area for veg it works great for me thru an adjust a wing.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 23, 2009)

Titan4jah said:


> dual arc bulbs.... i use them for veg. its a 400hps n 400Mh in one 1000 watt bulb..dont ask me were the other 200 watts goes. i gro in such a small area for veg it works great for me thru an adjust a wing.


how small is the area? and how do you cope with heat? something like cool tube or just really good ventilation?

my main idea to veg my clones so they are as compact as they can be. right before that i used flowering area that i use now for flowering as veg, with blue fluorrescents of coarse, and it worked really good. my internodes were half an inch, so i was thinking to do the same in enclosed area for my clones which are in space 2by3 by one and a half feet

why is it important to keep your plants 8 inches away from the light? is it only because of heat? because i could make the cool tube for the bulb myself and attach a vent straight to it to make sure really good ventilation. would this work for such a small space?


----------



## Titan4jah (Jan 23, 2009)

chek my GJ for an idea. i just have good venting.... the light stays cooler cuzz its really jusr like 2 4oo watters chillin side by side, if you could go cool tube i would cuzz you never know what the summer might be like.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 23, 2009)

Forget the double arc.. I'd be very impressed if you could work out a single arc in 6cuft.. And yea, if you get the tops too close, they'll shrivel up.. Its your height thats an issue.. 4sqft is appropriate for 175-250W I suppose, but 18" would be tough to work out with a cfl, let alone HID.. Figure minimum 6" for growing medium, and 12" for the plants if you flip them to 12/12 without any vegging at all, AND get really lucky.. Thats your 18" used up already..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 23, 2009)

Titan4jah said:


> chek my GJ for an idea. i just have good venting.... the light stays cooler cuzz its really jusr like 2 4oo watters chillin side by side, if you could go cool tube i would cuzz you never know what the summer might be like.


sounds good. here's just an update.. this is 5 weeks. and they look kind of ready.. but i know thats misconseption probably. 

could it be that some buds on the plant are ready and some are not?
like i got a few buds that have mostly red hairs on the same plant where the other main bud has only 20%red hairs? can i snip it? or i could still leave it on and it would get bigger?


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 23, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Forget the double arc.. I'd be very impressed if you could work out a single arc in 6cuft.. And yea, if you get the tops too close, they'll shrivel up.. Its your height thats an issue.. 4sqft is appropriate for 175-250W I suppose, but 18" would be tough to work out with a cfl, let alone HID.. Figure minimum 6" for growing medium, and 12" for the plants if you flip them to 12/12 without any vegging at all, AND get really lucky.. Thats your 18" used up already..


thats true. i got 2 and a half feet in flowering. minus the pot which is 10 inches. tight spaces. really tght. i still would like to veg them for a week or two, as its been said it will give me much more yield and i see that its true. i want to veg as compact as possible, thus concentrating tons of light in there. i veged my flowering girls for three weeks prior flowering and they already had flowers forming in veg, when i set them to 12/12 they exploded. they were about 11 internodes and only about 8 inches high. they making out great.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 23, 2009)

If you let them veg that long, you may end up with a 3-4' plant by the end.. If you want to veg them at all, your only chance is to veg until you get a second true node, then top them above the first node, and train the new shoots to grow sideways.. I still dunno though..


----------



## tinyTURTLE (Jan 23, 2009)

8 week flowering time minimum.
after week six you should see an explosion of growth that wil leave you questioning reality.


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 23, 2009)

tinyTURTLE said:


> 8 week flowering time minimum.
> after week six you should see an explosion of growth that wil leave you questioning reality.


damn, i am already questioning reality and think of how badly grown some buds really areout there. did you see on my pic that i just posted, the bud is huge.. right beside it there is a one inch T8 fluorecent, compare that to the bud. if they get bigger i'm gonna piss my pants lol

i did veg them for that long, three weeks(from seed though), and got 10-11 internodes from that, and only about 8 inches height. i think the trick is to use side lighting, which made them bush out to the sides, so they grew like a balloon, not only in height stretching towards the light but also to the sides. now i have the whole space filled with buds, i had to bend and tie some of them down of coarse. but the ones which indica dominated were right up to the light. i have really good ventilation there too, so they don't get burned. 90F is the temperature. besides that i throw in some dry ice in there on regular basis. 

two weeks is a must for me.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 23, 2009)

3 weeks from seed is not a long vegging time.. Seedlings really should be allowed time to mature to adulthood.. Flowering a seedling at 3weeks is kind of like marrying off your 12yo daughter..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 23, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> 3 weeks from seed is not a long vegging time.. Seedlings really should be allowed time to mature to adulthood.. Flowering a seedling at 3weeks is kind of like marrying off your 12yo daughter..


lol.. what the hell.


but the clones are mature right away?


----------



## tinyTURTLE (Jan 23, 2009)

no no and no. if you 12 12 from seed, the plant will flower when it is sexualy mature.


----------



## Titan4jah (Jan 24, 2009)

but yeild will suck....right?

every plant i see grown like that looks legy


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 24, 2009)

In a way tinyturtle is right, but its not like the plant isn't panicking and taking shortcuts to acheive the bare minimum for flowering.. You'll also run a larger risk of getting hermed on..
Usually at around 5 weeks, the nodal branches will begin alternating rather than growing opposite, and you'll see itty bitty pre-flowers..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 24, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> In a way tinyturtle is right, but its not like the plant isn't panicking and taking shortcuts to acheive the bare minimum for flowering.. You'll also run a larger risk of getting hermed on..
> Usually at around 5 weeks, the nodal branches will begin alternating rather than growing opposite, and you'll see itty bitty pre-flowers..


I saw flowers by week 3-4 and got rid of all my males by that time. there was only one hermie like at day 10 of flowering.


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 25, 2009)

I meant that it typically takes 5 weeks or so under a vegging light cycle..
As for clones, remember they carry the age of their mother, so as soon as they are rooted, if the mother is sexually mature, then so will be the clones..
Hopefully your herm ratio stays at 1/10.. Watch them like a hawk, and spray the area down regularily with water to destroy any pollen that may be floating around if you missed a male flower..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 25, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> I meant that it typically takes 5 weeks or so under a vegging light cycle..
> As for clones, remember they carry the age of their mother, so as soon as they are rooted, if the mother is sexually mature, then so will be the clones..
> Hopefully your herm ratio stays at 1/10.. Watch them like a hawk, and spray the area down regularily with water to destroy any pollen that may be floating around if you missed a male flower..


spary with water? wouldn't i see the hermie?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 25, 2009)

Hopefully, but some plants can herm later, with subtle male flowers hidden behind females etc.. It is a risk even if the odds are low, but can be mitigated by spraying.. Worst case scenarios just suck..


----------



## Mr.I (Jan 25, 2009)

born2killspam said:


> Hopefully, but some plants can herm later, with subtle male flowers hidden behind females etc.. It is a risk even if the odds are low, but can be mitigated by spraying.. Worst case scenarios just suck..


true, it would really suck. so you say if the female plant has buds all over where the budsites should be, there still a chance that some balls could show up? or is that only in the first weeks of flower?


----------



## born2killspam (Jan 25, 2009)

They aren't always obvious.. Beyond that, I don't know how observant you are..


----------

