# Vertical kinda sucks



## tibberous (Mar 31, 2012)

No one ever seems to mention the bad points of vertical. Here's a few things to keep in mind before you go vert:

- Most vertical systems are a set size, and made to take a set number of plants exactly the correct size. So when you loose some clones, or your clones grow an extra foot, you just kind of have to make it work.
- Vertical SUCKS for cooling. Sure, you can use A/C's and chillers, but that extra juice could just be powering more lights.
- Apart from Heath, who says he got like 2 gram a watt (which could just be bullshit), I haven't seen anyone with a vert system post yields much better than buckets / E&F tables.
- It's hard to get at the plants

Unless your average temp is below 50 degrees, or you just want to piss around, I'd stay away from vert. It can work. It can even work pretty good - but overall it seems inferior to E&F tables, which are cheaper, and more tolerant of heat and varying plant sizes.


----------



## laughingduck (Mar 31, 2012)

I have got a pound for 800 watts. The key to the size problems is to have a consistent cloneing procedure to insure identical plant sizes. After you get the sizing correct You don't mess with them and let them grow. Harvest time is the only time you should touch them.


----------



## tibberous (Mar 31, 2012)

laughingduck said:


> I have got a pound for 800 watts. The key to the size problems is to have a consistent cloneing procedure to insure identical plant sizes. After you get the sizing correct You don't mess with them and let them grow. Harvest time is the only time you should touch them.


I think the best way to do it would be to have 2 identical flowering systems - that way you could take clones from the first system, and in four weeks, be flowering them in the second. Heath said he didn't have moms and took clones from his system, then vegged them until it was time for the next cycle - ime, the clones get WAY too big in 7 weeks.

Still, none of this is an issue if you aren't doing vertical - just put 9-12, or however many plants seem to fit in your E&F and you're good to go.


----------



## ZAQ (Mar 31, 2012)

The set up I use you can move turn,lean the rack Do what ever you want I run a few extra plants My air cooling take a 26 Watt motor


----------



## onlybuilt4 (Mar 31, 2012)

The yields I get with a vertical setup when compared to a horizontal setup of the same wattage and size speak for themselves, to my mind anyways. At least 1.5x, often close to double what I used to yield in the equivalent space. I can get 1/4lb per plant in 3 gallon buckets with 4-5 week veg and pull a pound with a 400w -- that's not just a pipe dream, I've done it. (see my thread...only ended up being about 3/4lb since there were only 3 plants, but I think that's a fair estimate...) I'd love to see anybody pull anywhere near that with a horizontal setup.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Apr 3, 2012)

The biggest downside as far as I can see is the potential eye damage working in your garden. Get high quality eye protection. Or simply work when the lights are off.


----------



## jcommerce (Apr 3, 2012)

onlybuilt4 said:


> The yields I get with a vertical setup when compared to a horizontal setup of the same wattage and size speak for themselves, to my mind anyways. At least 1.5x, often close to double what I used to yield in the equivalent space. I can get 1/4lb per plant in 3 gallon buckets with 4-5 week veg and pull a pound with a 400w -- that's not just a pipe dream, I've done it. (see my thread...only ended up being about 3/4lb since there were only 3 plants, but I think that's a fair estimate...) I'd love to see anybody pull anywhere near that with a horizontal setup.


I got 6 oz off of one plant under a 250 watt in a 10 gallon tote...3 weeks veg...on my first horizontal grow. I'm very intrigued by vertical, but if you do horizontal right, you can pull big #s. I'm not hating or questioning, it's just all about technique. All I'm saying is that you can't rule out horizontal based on one or two grows...it's still a very effective method.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Apr 3, 2012)

If you're looking for big yields, vertical is the way to achieve them. You increase your lit square footage significantly if done efficiently and well. It does present challenges, but that's half the fun.


----------



## cary schellie (Apr 3, 2012)

jcommerce said:


> I got 6 oz of one plant under a 250 watt in a 10 gallon tote...3 weeks veg...on my first horizontal grow. I'm very intrigued by vertical, but if you do horizontal right, you can pull big #s. I'm not hating or questioning, it's just all about technique. All I'm saying is that you can't rule out horizontal based on one or two grows...it's still a very effective method.


3 weeks veg and 6 oz's, id sure like to know what strains and see proof


----------



## tibberous (Apr 3, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> If you're looking for big yields, vertical is the way to achieve them. You increase your lit square footage significantly if done efficiently and well. It does present challenges, but that's half the fun.


I wouldn't say 'big yields' so much as efficient yields. 6000 watts over E&F tables will out yield a 2000 watt vertical system that took as long and cost as much as to make (and uses as many plants). The whole theory with vertical is that a bigger canopy is better than a reflector - you still loose some light to the top and bottom though.

Thing is, %20 better light usage doesn't matter if your needing to run a 1/2 hp chiller, or a bunch of AC's, or your plants get pests that you can't deal with because you can't get to them.

Guess my point is that, before anyone goes vertical, they need to realize it isn't 'better', it's just different. It's pretty disappointing to put together a super-elaborate system, just to realize that (except in the winter), it's no better than normal ebb and flow tables.


----------



## Joedank (Apr 3, 2012)

If you can cool the room with air cooled hoods logic says that same amount of cooling without the hoods works too...
It's just getting your system dialed... My yeilds were down until I started Puttin indica dom plants in the middle and sativas around the sides...


----------



## tibberous (Apr 3, 2012)

cary schellie said:


> 3 weeks veg and 6 oz's, id sure like to know what strains and see proof


Well, it's 168 grams on 250 watts, which is .67g/w, which is certainly possible.


----------



## tibberous (Apr 3, 2012)

Joedank said:


> If you can cool the room with air cooled hoods logic says that same amount of cooling without the hoods works too...
> It's just getting your system dialed... My yeilds were down until I started Puttin indica dom plants in the middle and sativas around the sides...


Hoping Dinafem's industrial plant isn't just a bunch of marketing bullshit. They seem to make good seeds though, so we'll see.


----------



## jcommerce (Apr 3, 2012)

cary schellie said:


> 3 weeks veg and 6 oz's, id sure like to know what strains and see proof


Here you go. It was my first grow a long time ago in a 4 ft. tall box. As you'll see, there were 4 plants, but one was male. The other two got drawfed out by the plant that yielded 6 oz. Mandala Satori.

https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journals/35671-dwc-bubbler-grow-4-plants.html


----------



## vein5 (Apr 3, 2012)

So whats the best way when going vertical? Would having many small plants or a couple large plants be best when going verticle? I keep getting mixed veiws on this method.


----------



## bboybojo (Apr 3, 2012)

I like vertical because you don't have to worry about differing plant heights and training to create a flat horizontal canopy. My temperatures are also lower using a fan blowing up at the light than they were with a cooltube. My problem with it at the moment is the plants growing into the light, I thought I could get away without using a screen but no, gotta hook one up very soon.


----------



## Geezy101 (Apr 3, 2012)

Yes! that is the best way. going vertical with a cool tube and blowing the air upwards IMO. just make sure u have no leaks and ur fine. i tested sucking the air and blowing the air. my light was way cool when it was blowing the air up and sucking cold air from outside my tent thru the lighting system (400w). ive had my plants litterlly touching my cool tube (fan leaves) no symtoms yet for a good 2 3 weeks.
with my tent in the basement my temps are 72-80 in which i couldnt ask for better temps..

i have tied down some fan leaves and branches with fly fishing line and tied it to my pots.. it can be effective in vertical gro for a couple of reasons. 

allows branches facing the light to get exposed more from the tip to the beggining of the branch. and also allows the light to effectvily shine thru to to the other side of the plant. 

vertical is a great way to go as long as you have it at plant level. if its up and above the plants quite a bit. its not that effective.

lollipoping sativas and or tall plants are essential.

keep ur vertical lightiing maye an inch higher or even level with ur highest canopy and u will be blasting ur girls with mad lumans.


----------



## Geezy101 (Apr 3, 2012)

here is my setup. i put one plant on each side of the light to allow for max lumans per plant. 4 would be perfect. clearly more is fine. but IMO 4 is prefect

that plant on the left is veging. its an indica free seed the other 3 are afhgan kush autos.. just vegging that free seed for now and gonna clone the shit out of it and plant them outdoors soon. then prolly plant the mother outside and see how it goes.. shes not gonna have much left of here when im done cloning.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Apr 3, 2012)

Joedank said:


> If you can cool the room with air cooled hoods logic says that same amount of cooling without the hoods works too...


No, it doesn't work like that. I can use the exact same exhaust fan to pull out of my room either through and cooling the reflector or just pulling hot air out of the room, and my 4x4 tent with a 600w hps is 6 degrees F cooler when I pull through the hood.


----------



## laughingduck (Apr 4, 2012)

bboybojo said:


> I like vertical because you don't have to worry about differing plant heights and training to create a flat horizontal canopy. My temperatures are also lower using a fan blowing up at the light than they were with a cooltube. My problem with it at the moment is the plants growing into the light, I thought I could get away without using a screen but no, gotta hook one up very soon.


Yes, use a screen. Rabbit wire work wonderfully, the plants will pile up on it like a bunch of school kids.


----------



## noris559 (Apr 4, 2012)

805 grams from 15 plants on a 14 day veg without blocking the 1kwatt which stressed them for the first week.


----------



## noris559 (Apr 4, 2012)

next time im gonna double stack(30 sites) with a 10-12 day veg.





salmon creek


----------



## DIRTHAWKER (Apr 4, 2012)

noris559 said:


> 805 grams from 15 plants on a 14 day veg without blocking the 1kwatt which stressed them for the first week.



you running c02? If not, try running without the cool tube. Exhaust out the top of the tent at 2x a minute and place a fan on low setting under the bulb facing up.

Youd be suprised at how easy it is to keep cool. Those cool tubes (fool tubes) generate more heat then without.


----------



## Stonetech (Apr 4, 2012)

I've run horizontal with a hood, vertical with a cooltube, and vertical bare bulb. The horizontal hood, even when air cooled, was by far warmer at the canopy than the vertical setups, the hood seems to trap and/or conduct too much heat. The vertically oriented bulb allows the heat to naturally rise towards the exhaust. 

The vert cooltube vs. bare bulb temps were pretty much the same at the canopy, so it was an easy decision to go bare bulb. No cool tube to rob lumens from the plants, no ducting to have to work around, no fan to cool it, just a low powered fan to gently blow up at the bulb and circulate air.


----------



## DIRTHAWKER (Apr 4, 2012)

Yea its a no brainer, im running 2 bare 1ks vertical and my room never gets above 80.

Forgot to mention..this thread is lame. "Vertical kinda sucks' LMAO... If you think vertical sucks then why take the time to start a thread on it? I mean really? Vert isn't for everyone and it takes some time to learn the do's and dont's but the potential is there.


----------



## Stonetech (Apr 4, 2012)

Yeah it was hard for me to fathom at first but after doing my own comparison I'll never use one again, fool tube I like that lol.


----------



## vein5 (Apr 4, 2012)

Geeze I was going to go bare bulb but after reading other threads, I ordered 2 cool tubes. The nice thing about cool tubes is it keeps my plant branches from touching the bulb


----------



## Stonetech (Apr 4, 2012)

vein5 said:


> Geeze I was going to go bare bulb but after reading other threads, I ordered 2 cool tubes. The nice thing about cool tubes is it keeps my plant branches from touching the bulb


Yeah but you need to keep those things as clean as possible to keep them from blocking even more lumens which means your plants can't touch the tubes either.


----------



## Bob Smith (Apr 4, 2012)

Why would you want your plants to touch the tubes? Or even come close? That means your canopy management sucks, IMO...............I use "fooltubes" and for my application, they're perfect.

Nothing against bare bulbs, but running four stacked 600s, I LOVE my cooltube.

YMMV.


----------



## bboybojo (Apr 5, 2012)

I submit that if your plants are touching the tube/bulb, then they are too close, and you're not getting the benefits of the large canopy area you can achieve by having a greater number of plants further back. And large canopy area is the main reason people use vert isn't it?

I do have one question, my light is shining primarily on the middle 2/3 of my plants, but the top tips of the tallest 2 plants are not getting a huge amount of light. Do the leaves really work like solar panels generating growth in the whole plant, or will only the side branches that are getting the most light become the fat buds?

I am off to get some wire today and rearrange my tent so that i can move the plants as far back as possible, i didn't realise how much of a jungle this vert grow would become.


----------



## noris559 (Apr 6, 2012)

DIRTHAWKER said:


> you running c02? If not, try running without the cool tube. Exhaust out the top of the tent at 2x a minute and place a fan on low setting under the bulb facing up.
> 
> Youd be suprised at how easy it is to keep cool. Those cool tubes (fool tubes) generate more heat then without.


i am 71% sure that without a cooltube and a 1k temps will get way too crazy!!, but i am gonna run a 600w bare bulb for the summer.


----------



## DIRTHAWKER (Apr 6, 2012)

noris559 said:


> i am 71% sure that without a cooltube and a 1k temps will get way too crazy!!, but i am gonna run a 600w bare bulb for the summer.


With summer comin fast will leave it at that. It all depends on what part of the country yas in and ambient temps your exchangin in the room to keep things in check. I know my 2 1k bare bulbs will have to be dealt with soon. Exactly why i built a hybrid room, to run sealed with AC during summer time and open 2x a minute air exchange in winter.

If yas get a chance at some point ( maybe after summer) try it without the cool tube and see whats yas discover.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Apr 6, 2012)

Bob Smith said:


> Why would you want your plants to touch the tubes? Or even come close? That means your canopy management sucks, IMO...............I use "fooltubes" and for my application, they're perfect.
> 
> Nothing against bare bulbs, but running four stacked 600s, I LOVE my cooltube.
> 
> YMMV.


Or it means you're growing stretchy ass sativas and want to be able to leave for a few days at a time 

I agree though that cooltubes aren't necessary and in fact hurt your end product.


----------



## vein5 (Apr 7, 2012)

Can you take the glass tube off the light socket without damaging it


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Apr 7, 2012)

vein5 said:


> Can you take the glass tube off the light socket without damaging it


Probably, different models are built differently. Have a look at yours and figure it out. A new socket is pretty damn cheap though for the record if you are lacking another.


----------



## noris559 (Apr 8, 2012)

Yeah a socket set Is about 35-40$... Well worth it!


----------



## vein5 (Apr 9, 2012)

Well im growing in a 4x4x8 room with 2 600's so maybe it will keep the heat down. Dont want to spend more money when i just got my cool tubes a week ago


----------



## kanx (Jun 20, 2012)

Personally if only one choice of lighting is allowed I would say vert has always been better for me, not to say a nice scrog horizontal wont kick ass. Just very always seamed to have more "luck" with vert.

However i've recently started running both vert and horizontal lighting , and i'm personally likeing what i'm seeing .

Gotta remember end of the day all we are trying to do is provide optimal light levels all over the room for our ladies,the plant dosnt care how you go about that , just so long as it has them.

All roads lead to rome.


----------



## ru4r34l (Jun 20, 2012)

cary schellie said:


> 3 weeks veg and 6 oz's, id sure like to know what strains and see proof


Those results are quite achievable, just finished a Blueberry Gum test run that yielded just under 9oz dried to 55% from 3 weeks veg and 8 weeks flower under 400W.



jcommerce said:


> Here you go. It was my first grow a long time ago in a 4 ft. tall box. As you'll see, there were 4 plants, but one was male. The other two got drawfed out by the plant that yielded 6 oz. Mandala Satori.
> 
> https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journals/35671-dwc-bubbler-grow-4-plants.html


Very nice grow indeed, time to get a 600W and harvest the lb.

regards,


----------



## Badmf (Jun 25, 2012)

Wrong my friend, it is better in that you get more yield from the same lights . I have run verts and other than close quarters for maintainence no issues. More light closer to more plants =more yield.


----------



## BearDown! (Jun 25, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> The biggest downside as far as I can see is the potential eye damage working in your garden. Get high quality eye protection. Or simply work when the lights are off.


no joke,,,TRUTH, i have to throw a towel over the cooltube after i dim it because you can't avoid it, it burns...


----------



## BearDown! (Jun 25, 2012)

Badmf said:


> Wrong my friend, it is better in that you get more yield from the same lights . I have run verts and other than close quarters for maintainence no issues. More light closer to more plants =more yield.


I concur, My cooltubes are the shit, the plants get right up next to the light like they cannot get enough, have had to scoot em back once allready in 3 weeks..


----------



## polyarcturus (Jun 26, 2012)

BearDown! said:


> no joke,,,TRUTH, i have to throw a towel over the cooltube after i dim it because you can't avoid it, it burns...


eye damage? did we miss a class or 2 no, jk. there is no eye damage to worry about reall so long as you dont stare at an HPS with bare eyes, all the other HID are nothing to worry about other than the fact they are bright. HPs puts off IR which can burn your eyes but it runs in a pretty straight patch so as long as you aren't looking at the source or have something between your eyes and the light you should be just fine without any thing more than a dollar tree pair of sunglasses.no commercial HID bulbs out off UV whcih could burn your eyes but this would be something more o worry about with MH rather than HPS and that would take the glass of the bulb to be damaged in someway in which case you should replace it anyways.


----------



## Badmf (Jun 26, 2012)

I have had lots odf neck burns when I thought I had the lites up high enough and was wrong, lol. Insane is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a differnt outcome. Next build this is the priority! Had 128 plants in 2's and watered by hand daily, painful but huge yeild. BTW nothing works right if you don't know what yer doin!


----------



## Weeds phobic (Jun 26, 2012)

I only grow vertical now but have grown horizontal for years so I have experienced both and can say IMHO vertical is the larger yielding method. With horizontal I never got over one and a half pounds per 1000 watt bulb, but now with vertical I get usually around the two pound per bulb mark. I don't think the difference is double like some state, but reasonably up to 25 percent increase. That being said I do believe some people do just fine with horizontal, it really comes down to what you feel most comfortable with and your grow methods.

I grow with four bulbs in an 12 by 18 room and have it cooled by just the homes central air unit and never have temperatures above 85 degrees. This is possible because I use a fan under each light pointed straight up to the ceiling. This seems to work exceptionally well.

Just my input on the subject. I will be taking photos in the next week or so of my room and will post them here. I think it's time I post something, have not been here too long.

WP


----------



## dvs1038 (Jun 26, 2012)

Well since I don't have a vert grow I can't really comment if vert sucks, but I am interested in setting it up and just by reading around and lookin at other posts I found this here and well its kinda hard to argue with geometry isn't it? I got this pic from someone elses vert thread but it give u an idea how much more area a vert light will give u.
View attachment 2229827


----------



## Weeds phobic (Jun 26, 2012)

Nice pic! I should add that if you grow large plants then vertical is the way to grow, but if you do very small plants it is possible to get great results with horizontal. The reason I wanted to add this is so that people don't get the wrong idea. There is a place for both vertical and horizontal, and I think that is dictated by grow style. 

Dvs1038, thanks for the cool pic. Never seen that one. Had to save it.

WP


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jun 27, 2012)

tibberous said:


> I wouldn't say 'big yields' so much as efficient yields. 6000 watts over E&F tables will out yield a 2000 watt vertical system that took as long and cost as much as to make (and uses as many plants). The whole theory with vertical is that a bigger canopy is better than a reflector - you still loose some light to the top and bottom though.
> 
> Thing is, %20 better light usage doesn't matter if your needing to run a 1/2 hp chiller, or a bunch of AC's, or your plants get pests that you can't deal with because you can't get to them.
> 
> Guess my point is that, before anyone goes vertical, they need to realize it isn't 'better', it's just different. It's pretty disappointing to put together a super-elaborate system, just to realize that (except in the winter), it's no better than normal ebb and flow tables.


Heat is much less an issue with vertical grows if done properly. You do not need an elaborate system to get large yields growing vertically. Just grow some large plants in large pots an hang bulbs around them. No CO2. Assuming you know your plants and they are not super low yielding varieties you should hit 1gpw your first go at it, if not more.

1gpw = standard for vertical. 0.6 or so gpw = standard for horizontal. 2.5ish GPW = dialed in productive hydro colloseum vertical. 1.2ish in a dialed in horizontal with all the bells and whistles with appropriate genetics etc(I have heard of the 1.5 range but those guys would probably be hitting 3gpw vertically and I am quite sure that Heath got damn close to that marker in one of his aeroponic colloseum grows but it was lost with overgrow).

At least from what I have seen. I realize a lot of guys are closer to the 1gpw mark horizontally, but they would do much better vertically with equally dialed in plants in an appropriate setup. You can of course do things wrong or poorly. Although IMO this particular technique is hard to screw up if you are simply judging the outcome based on what most people end up yielding.

You also do not need to buy reflectors. 

One way is clearly superior to the other, however I totally understand that some people do not have space to do a vertical. Vertical grows require a bit more space to maximize if you are using HPS lights. You can get away with wasting more light in a smaller area growing horizontally if your space is really limited. I cannot see any other logical reason to do a classic horizontal style grow however. 

But, to each their own. If you are happy with what you are doing, more power to you.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jun 27, 2012)

Weeds phobic said:


> Nice pic! I should add that if you grow large plants then vertical is the way to grow, but if you do very small plants it is possible to get great results with horizontal. The reason I wanted to add this is so that people don't get the wrong idea. There is a place for both vertical and horizontal, and I think that is dictated by grow style.
> 
> Dvs1038, thanks for the cool pic. Never seen that one. Had to save it.
> 
> WP


If you go small plants vertically you can get insane numbers. Even large plants the numbers can be quite surprising. Of course a lot of it boils down to genetics and your own individual setup. But Heath pulled incredible numbers in vert SOG grows. These setups take a fair bit more work and or cost to get going if you go prefab. I have seen some decent homemade setups that could be done somewhat cheaply.


----------



## HeartlandHank (Jun 27, 2012)

Badmf said:


> Wrong my friend, it is better in that you get more yield from the same lights . I have run verts and other than close quarters for maintainence no issues. More light closer to more plants =more yield.


Depends on how you do it. My best yields have come from a horizontal w/hood, stadium hybrid, SOG.

It's too much work though. These days, am more worried about man hours efficiency than gram/watt or even kwh/watt.

I understand getting into the fun of efficiency. Just more interested don't have the time these days,


----------



## Badmf (Jun 28, 2012)

So you didn't get a great yeild with verts majority here do/did. I have a 40 tube aeroflo system horizontal, it can't touch vert stadiums or cages. If growing is too much work than maybe you shouldn't do it?


----------



## DST (Jun 28, 2012)

I think it's like most things in growing, it depends on your personal situation, what space you have to work with, and what you want to achieve. It's funny in growing that everyone thinks their way is the best.


----------



## Badmf (Jun 28, 2012)

DST I would disagree as vert is "a" way not "my" way lol, I understand what you mean but it isn't personal but factual as to which method doesn't suck as was posted Any set-up can and do fail with various growers for various reasons. true each grow has its own parameters of size, amperage , budget etc and last but not least grower experience.


----------



## neb22 (Jul 25, 2012)

first off, if cooling is your problem; your vent and fan placement is TERRIBLE. all you need to do is put a box fan on the floor under your light, then have your ventilation directly above your light, no cooling tubes(super inefficient lighting) no ac or chillers necessary(unless for your hydro system but thats another problem not having anything to do with vertical growing. the point of a scrog is so your plants can grow a little wild if your plants are getting too tall for your system train them to the sides if they are filling the screens too quickly then you are in veg too long. the difficulty to get to your plants just means you set up your system poorly and YOU made it difficult to get to your plants. I do not think you researched this type of growing well enough before trying it and you should say it "sucks" before you know how to do it. this type of growing is for advanced growers only, if it isn't working out for you it is most likely because you are doing it wrong. Don't hate on a system because you failed at it, rather you should learn the correct way to do it


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 25, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> If you're looking for big yields, vertical is the way to achieve them. You increase your lit square footage significantly if done efficiently and well. It does present challenges, but that's half the fun.


lol i wouldn't go that far as to saying that it if your looking for huge yields thats the way to go there are other techniques in growing that makes you achieve HUGE yields 

5 plant 6 pound harvest 2 k 100's of buds looking like the one on 5 gallon pail cheers day 29 few more days and half done


----------



## blaze1camp (Jul 25, 2012)

damn dr those a sexy...


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 25, 2012)

DrGreener said:


> lol i wouldn't go that far as to saying that it if your looking for huge yields thats the way to go there are other techniques in growing that makes you achieve HUGE yields
> 
> 5 plant 6 pound harvest 2 k 100's of buds looking like the one on 5 gallon pail cheers day 29 few more days and half done


That would be a fairly average yield for a vertical setup with that much light. Obviously you can do really well horizontally too. You can do better vertically though, there is no debate. Objectively it's simply a fact.

Heath robinson pulled 47oz from 1 600w vertically without CO2. 1200w = 6lbs. You're at 2000w. Both of you obviously have your shit dialed in for your respective setups. I would suggest to you that if you changed it up you would pull down even more than what you're pulling down now. I realize once you have a room setup though, it's a PITA to change it up. Still, next time around, give it a go IMO. 

Nice horizontal grow though for sure.


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> That would be a fairly average yield for a vertical setup with that much light. Obviously you can do really well horizontally too. You can do better vertically though, there is no debate. Objectively it's simply a fact.
> 
> Heath robinson pulled 47oz from 1 600w vertically without CO2. 1200w = 6lbs. You're at 2000w. Both of you obviously have your shit dialed in for your respective setups. I would suggest to you that if you changed it up you would pull down even more than what you're pulling down now. I realize once you have a room setup though, it's a PITA to change it up. Still, next time around, give it a go IMO.
> 
> Nice horizontal grow though for sure.


47 oz off 600 watt i call BS without pics dude it was probably wet 47 x 28 grams per oz = 1316 grams divide by 4 gave him 329 dry grams so gave him not even 3/4 of a pound 
here i can go this way 454 x 6 pound = 2724 dry grams x 4 = 10,896 wet grams = divide by 28 = 389 0z i made off 2 k lighting WET
there is no changing my set up only plant count and wattage as temps permit


----------



## vortexsniper (Jul 26, 2012)

its not about light, its about light applied right? well with vertical plants more light is applied on the plants, not having to penetrate a dense canopy more of the plant is in full light exposure. a long with having more room for more plants with the same light. theres good reason to do both vert and horizontal, mostly depends on space at hand. but if your plants are gonna be taller then 2-3ft why light them from the top? and if multiple lights are hung between the plants being grow vert wouldnt it be far superior because its being lit from both sides with more plant surface area exposed? all in all its about how YOU like to do it. someones going to do it differently no matter what you tell them, what kind of data or graphs theyre presented with theyre going think theyre way is the best way. In the end we're all trying to grow the most possible for the least cash possible, in which case vert can be a way to get more plant around the same light while getting the same if not more lumens. 

my two cents.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 26, 2012)

DrGreener said:


> 47 oz off 600 watt i call BS without pics dude it was probably wet 47 x 28 grams per oz = 1316 grams divide by 4 gave him 329 dry grams so gave him not even 3/4 of a pound
> here i can go this way 454 x 6 pound = 2724 dry grams x 4 = 10,896 wet grams = divide by 28 = 389 0z i made off 2 k lighting WET
> there is no changing my set up only plant count and wattage as temps permit


He's done better than 2gpw in setups with CO2 and a bit more attention... but most of those journals were lost with overgrow.

Heath is a growing legend. He harvested that dried and trimmed.

The thread for your viewing pleasure: https://www.rollitup.org/hydroponics-aeroponics/149998-heaths-flooded-tube-vertical.html 

Vertical = more surface area per sq ft of room, less wasted light and less issues with heat because there are no reflectors. This is why it is more efficient and always will be.


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

lol ok again 5 plants = 6 pounds his what 180 plants lol from clone into flower not sure on how many scrolled thru out and not one plant in there here check out this out http://www.hg-hydroponics.co.uk/eco-system-300-plant-vertical-system-115-p.asp
you mention less wasted light here i should almost start a journal 5000 plant 1000 watt start from clones and veg one week flip i bet i get 3 grams dry per plant x 5000 plants = 33 pounds off 1k even 1 gram would give me 11 pounds ???? i have done sogs so extreme that i would make international news if i got caught )


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

*

But you direct so much more light towards your plants with a reflector that it is the way to go. Otherwise much of your light, from the upper portion of the bulb, will go up and not be reflected down towards your plant and that is wasted light. If you have good reflective material or a flat white paint that will reflect some of it back down if the ceiling has some reflective material but it will lose some of its intensity so again it is wasted light. 

It is the same with vertical lighting unless your light is in between your plants so no matter which way it goes it is directly hitting plants but then when you look at the difference in growing in more northern regions as opposed to more southern regions, or maybe better said closer to the equator or farther from the equator, the closer to the equator you are the more direct light will hit the top surfaces of leaves and that is where the sunlight is taken in and does its thing so the less direct light that hits the upper flat surfaces of leaves, because of the angle the light hits the plants from the sun or from your light, you get less efficiency from the light source and it can and will affect time periods like flowering and make vegging time longer to get the height you want. 

Horizontal is the way to go but there is nothing wrong with supplementing that with vertical if you have the bucks for more lights and can deal with the added heat. ​




*


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 26, 2012)

DrGreener said:


> *
> 
> But you direct so much more light towards your plants with a reflector that it is the way to go. Otherwise much of your light, from the upper portion of the bulb, will go up and not be reflected down towards your plant and that is wasted light. If you have good reflective material or a flat white paint that will reflect some of it back down if the ceiling has some reflective material but it will lose some of its intensity so again it is wasted light.
> 
> ...


He had 72 plants I'm pretty sure... but... Ok... here's 2 plants almost 2 gpw... since you want to move goalposts. Ever see a 5lb plant indoors? How about 5lbs using 1200w? You're about to.

https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journals/101347-critical-mass-tree-grow-x.html - didn't hit 5lb plant mark, still did well.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1fXmgHxAJw - 5lb plant... Chiesel instead of CM this grow, similar setup though.

The above about lights being required to be hung horizontally above is pure unadulterated BS with absolutely no scientific basis or support I'm afraid.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 26, 2012)

DrGreener said:


> lol ok again 5 plants = 6 pounds his what 180 plants lol from clone into flower not sure on how many scrolled thru out and not one plant in there here check out this out http://www.hg-hydroponics.co.uk/eco-system-300-plant-vertical-system-115-p.asp
> you mention less wasted light here i should almost start a journal 5000 plant 1000 watt start from clones and veg one week flip i bet i get 3 grams dry per plant x 5000 plants = 33 pounds off 1k even 1 gram would give me 11 pounds ???? i have done sogs so extreme that i would make international news if i got caught )


And you could do that sog vertically, have a lot more plants and less wasted light in the same area.


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

*

And the harvest weight from the Critical mass was 30.6 Oz from the plant on the left and 43.8 Oz from the one on the right. I will post up some pics later in the week of the dried harvest.



I will post up some pics later in the week of the dried harvest.​


So it was weight wet obviously as he mentions he will post dry weight later on lol so divide that by 4 gave him ??????18.6 oz amazing grow non less for 2 plants 1 pound 2 0z 

my last grow 4 plant 4 pound dry harvest 2 k the screen was one plant trim 36 x 72 so what 500 watts per plant vegged 33 days flowered 56 
i will be posting in next month my next grow which will be 20 x 8 scrog 20 plant 20 pound harvest 8k c02 enriched​
PS: 

I will post up some pics later in the week of the dried harvest.

then few pages later he says its dryed harvest lol ok BS he got 9 oz per plant which in todays grows are becoming pretty average​




*


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 26, 2012)

It was dry. Heath Robinson is a legend in the scene. A real innovator. If you're looking at the plants pictured and believe he only pulled 9 ounces off them, for no reason whatsoever (look at the pictures those plants are much much larger than the plants in your pictures - objectively), in complete contradiction to everything in that thread, just because you seem to take objective information personally, really only hurts you in the long run. 

I'm probably being too nice to you given you just dissed a well known legend who has been featured in magazines and whose genetics many folks on this site have been pretty desperate to get a hold of. 

Good luck with your grows, you have them well dialed horizontally.


----------



## Clown Baby (Jul 26, 2012)

DrGreen, your grow is looking good.


But I think hes getting more than 9oz/plant. Heath's an old school legend, man
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B1fXmgHxAJw
edit: oh.. someone already posted this...


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

i am not dishing know one i read between the fine lines thats all like that post of his amazing grow and his post that he would mention dry weight later on in the week ?????
then mentions it was dry weight ?????? contradicting himself doesn't stand up in my books you mention size of plant actually really look close on one of his pics and you will notice in one of his pics that one of his plants are not very large pictures tho can be deceiving anyways
you keep mentioning wasted light look at it this way horizontal like street lights are designed that way for better overall sight if the bulb was vertical it be dark on the street a vertical bulb loses lumens and penetration power right off the start being light is being shot out in all directions thus not really having any strong penetration in any given area more or less it loses it fast woould love to see par readings at 2 feet on a vertical bulb compared to par 2 feet on horizontal with reflector 
Here is another way of saying it your working under your car what would work better a a light that is wide open and shining or a automotive light with reflector ???? obviously the reflector cause your getting both sides of the bulb and directing it onto any given area make sense to me


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

[video=youtube;snPw1oLwzKM]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=snPw1oLwzKM[/video]


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 26, 2012)

Actually, you completely read what he wrote wrong. He didn't contradict himself. Yes, street lamps are designed like that to light up a specific area. They could be on the ground without reflectors but they would probably blind people who walked by them. Things are not always designed for efficiency. In fact many things are not designed with efficiency in mind at all.

You would have more light from the horizontal bulb with a reflector taking a reading, but that wouldn't be telling the whole story. A single bulb without a reflector - you could take readings all the way around it 2ft away and it would measure the same. Horizontally? It will be intense in a much smaller area.

The plants can get closer to a bulb vertically than they can conventionally.


*added*
In an 8x8x8 room you'd have 64 sq ft to grow if you went conventional and likely would want to run 2400 watts minimum and probably 4k if you really wanted to maximize things. If you had a 6ft diameter vertical garden that was 8 ft high in the same room your surface area - if a perfect circle your square footage improves dramatically and you are not wasting light in the refraction process which is not 100% efficient and never will be. But more importantly, you greatly increase the amount of room you have to grow.


----------



## DrGreener (Jul 26, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> Actually, you completely read what he wrote wrong. He didn't contradict himself. Yes, street lamps are designed like that to light up a specific area. They could be on the ground without reflectors but they would probably blind people who walked by them.
> 
> You would have more light from the horizontal bulb with a reflector taking a reading, but that wouldn't be telling the whole story. A single bulb without a reflector - you could take readings all the way around it 2ft away and it would measure the same. Horizontally? It will only be intense in a much smaller area.


 600 would be what 3 x 3 area of high intensity horizontal but at 2 feet the vertical has lost lots of its power 
again lights either 1000 or 600 will only go so far so to think by placing 600 vertically your going to grow that plant 10 feet away good its not going to happen it will grow alright stretched like no tomorrow
i saw the vid from heath again from reading lots of messages there is controversy and why cause its the internet and there is allot of blowing out of proportion here anyone can say anything 
can i ask you this being your a follower of heath how is your 76 0z 1 plant vert doing ???? have you even come close to that 
i don't see to many vert journals pulling what 76 0z of a plant and 53 off another ??? where is this heath is he still around ???
to the novice grower they would be in awe but to a grower thats bin around the block and done lots of indoor with lots of different power from 2 k to 16k it doesn't jive so well 
I think in the vid he vegged 3 weeks ???? dude from growing 16,000 watts 208,000 million lumens your not going to get a plant like that in 3 weeks lol more in the range of 7 - 10 weeks specially with 5 / 600 watters 
something to ponder about if your lights are on the side of a plant????
plant will naturally grow to the light so obviously he needed light on top of plant possibly horizontal is my guess to get it to grow up here look i tipped my plants over flourescents are still up top look how plant started to grow this is what i do prior to LST'ng and transplanting into my training pot look plant totally side ways lol so if its vertical plant height doesn;t occur it grows to lights that are beside it


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 27, 2012)

All I see here is "I can't believe it's possible because I've never done anything like it before".

I grew 5'5ft tall plants with a single 600w packed in a little bit tightly in a 4x4 area. 5x5 would have been preferable but the hydro shop only had 4x4's in stock and I was impatient as I sometimes am. Vegged 6 weeks (from seed) then flipped, sativa leaning plants (the 5'5 in pot). All the buds would have been nice sized had I used a 5x5. Probably would have pulled down closer ot 2lbs of nice colas instead of 1.5lbs. This was all from seed without clones doing a strain far from dialed in using no CO2 hand watering in coco. Waaaay less than optimal conditions to maximize yields. Probably would do 2lbs next go in the same tent for a lot of reasons. Had I had my best plants in place of all my other plants I would have pulled down 2lbs without changing anything except using clones instead of from seed. And all done somewhat suboptimally. Next go will unfortunately not be ideal either as I have to go from seed again it seems. 

Had to leave moms with a buddy who also wanted to run something different and he got them infected with PM it would seem. And I just kill plants with PM personally. 

Believe what you want. Heath is well established in the community and is acknowledged as an incredible grower by guys like Shantibaba. He has much credibility and his DWC systems are simple yet very effective, the main difference between his being no airstones and instead a high flow water pump recirculating in large tubs. He's been around since the early days of Overgrow. Just look around for his name. 

A 600w is good for a plant about 5ft tall in a pot, even a bit taller. 600w is good for 4x4 area, and could - less than ideally, cover 5x5 could it not? I know you can do 1000's, but it's overkill for a small area like that. That's more a 5x5. That being said, you can stack multiple lights on top of each other in vertical setups. IE: 3x600 with plants going to the ceiling and getting maximum light intensity. Remember your plants can get closer to vertical bulbs - less heat and this allows them to get the same or more lumens than a horizontal plant as well. Although it can affect your canopy and canopy management in a vert SOG or SCROG would be a serious PITA. I like growing tall plants doing a little LST and letting things happen on their own.

The plants want to grow upwards from their root naturally. The pattern is largely genetic - not that they won't reach for the light, they will. Branches tend to grow out and then back around if you're not surrounding the plant in light. If they are surrounded they tend to grow as they would anyway.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Jul 27, 2012)

It's a shit picture, out of focus etc. But that plant was grown using 1x600w non hydroponically and not well dialed in. Yielded 7oz. Wish I had had 4 of them although the other girls did pretty well, they didn't have their stems snapping from resin production like you can see happening with this one.


----------



## DrGreener (Aug 3, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> View attachment 2270662
> 
> It's a shit picture, out of focus etc. But that plant was grown using 1x600w non hydroponically and not well dialed in. Yielded 7oz. Wish I had had 4 of them although the other girls did pretty well, they didn't have their stems snapping from resin production like you can see happening with this one.


 Was that 7 0z dry ???? cause 8 0z is half of a pound and it takes allot of buds to make that


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Aug 3, 2012)

DrGreener said:


> Was that 7 0z dry ???? cause 8 0z is half of a pound and it takes allot of buds to make that


7 oz after a week in jars. That plant is about 5 1/2 ft tall from the ground.


----------



## beenthere (Aug 4, 2012)

DrGreener said:


> i saw the vid from heath again from reading lots of messages there is controversy and why cause its the internet and there is allot of blowing out of proportion here anyone can say anything
> can i ask you this being your a follower of heath how is your 76 0z 1 plant vert doing ???? have you even come close to that
> i don't see to many vert journals pulling what 76 0z of a plant and 53 off another ??? where is this heath is he still around ???
> to the novice grower they would be in awe but to a grower thats bin around the block and done lots of indoor with lots of different power from 2 k to 16k it doesn't jive so well


Hey bro, no offense but why are you in a vertical forum talking crap about vertical yields?
What's up with calling some of these vert growers in here liars, where is your proof of 6lbs out of 5 plants?

And to be honest, the pic below where you claim 4lbs off 4 plants is pretty suspect, I don't want to sound like a dick but I'm calling BS myself. Your pic clearly shows two plants on the right side screen which would make up half of your grow, so sorry, that ain't 32 zips my friend.


----------



## beenthere (Aug 5, 2012)

beenthere said:


> Hey bro, no offense but why are you in a vertical forum talking crap about vertical yields?
> What's up with calling some of these vert growers in here liars, where is your proof of 6lbs out of 5 plants?
> 
> And to be honest, the pic below where you claim 4lbs off 4 plants is pretty suspect, I don't want to sound like a dick but I'm calling BS myself. Your pic clearly shows two plants on the right side screen which would make up half of your grow, so sorry, that ain't 32 zips my friend.


Just figured out who you are, you used to post in here using the screen name "lighting" same trolling, same pics!


----------



## Dubdeuce (Aug 9, 2012)

tibberous said:


> No one ever seems to mention the bad points of vertical. Here's a few things to keep in mind before you go vert:
> 
> - Most vertical systems are a set size, and made to take a set number of plants exactly the correct size. So when you loose some clones, or your clones grow an extra foot, you just kind of have to make it work.
> - Vertical SUCKS for cooling. Sure, you can use A/C's and chillers, but that extra juice could just be powering more lights.
> ...


1) Isn't this the same regardless of which type of growing method you incorporate?
2) Cool tubes provide the same air cooling that any ported reflector can provide. If you're comparing a bare bulb vs an air cooled reflector then we're comparing apples and oranges here.
3) Vertical lighting is just what the name says. "Vertical lighting" cannot be compared to a growing systems like DWC buckets, or Ebb and Flow. I could do vertical lighting with DWC buckets, or a horizontal setup?
4) Yes, It can't be hard to get at the plants, especially if they are in a tent!


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Aug 9, 2012)

Indeed, bare bulbs are easier to cool than cooltube bulbs in vertical. Truth.

That guy was just full of misinformation. My guess is he worked for a hydroshop that's seeing it's reflector sales drop.

How hard the plants are to get at really depends on your setup. I didn't really have any big issues personally.


----------



## zor (Aug 27, 2012)

this debate has gone one for ages on multiple sites. and even after all these years, the same faulty logic and personal bias shows its head. 

There are no absolutes. so anytime someone says something like 'its a fact, you can yield more with a vertical/horizontal bulb', i shake my head. 

vertical bulbs give you a much LARGER canopy area (potentially) than a horizontal bulb would. This IS a fact that cannot be argued with. 

However, larger surface area does NOT necesarily mean MORE yield. If yield were a purely a function of increased canopy size, then the best grows would be 20x20 400watt bulb grows with 1000 plants. Obviously, this would never work because the INTENSITY of the light would be greatly diminished. this is why, many jedi growers continue to kill it with horizontal as opposed to vertical. Horizontal lights aim MORE intense light at plants than a vertical setup. This also cannot be disputed. Which yields more? It depends...

Large yields and efficiency often come down canopy management and environmental control. There is a balance between canopy AREA and light intensity that greatly effect yields. This can be messed up or done well with both with vert, horizontal, or a combo of both. Just because someone doesn't yield as well with Horizontal as they do with vertical DOES NOT make this true for everyone. 

I read people in this thread and claiming how 'if grower x turned his bulb the other way, he would increase his yield'. That to me, is a very naive assertion as there are MANY growers neck and neck with top yields from BOTH methods.

Heath robinson, the internet legend, and now seed vender (not lending much to his credibility anyway) has journaled BOTH flat and vertical grows. If there were a clear cut 'Vert is better than horizontal' fact, why would he even bother with flat grows?

Why do jedi growers continue to kill it with both methods if there is ONE superior method? Why is it that all over the internet on the major sites, many who have jumped to vert grows cannot live up to the hype despite elaborate setups that cost a ton, and require a ton of maintenance

On another site, there was a journal side by side from a good grower with a horizontal vs vert setup. The results were NOT conclusive as to which method did better but it tells me alot that his next grow he opted for horizontal.

Hopefully, we as a community can keep an open mind and try to discover NOT which method is superior. But instead, we should be fact finding to see what factors can maximize the yields for our situation.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Aug 28, 2012)

Sorry, but you're wrong. You can get identical intensity by moving plants closer than you could with a horizontal setup (too much light too much heat). 

This isn't an opinion, this is a fact. 

As far as the actual setups go, yes, some of them are complicated. So are some horizontal grows. People get personally invested in this, but I haven't seen one objective argument that's actually true from anyone suggesting horizontal is just as good (it's not).


----------



## zor (Aug 29, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> Sorry, but you're wrong. You can get identical intensity by moving plants closer than you could with a horizontal setup (too much light too much heat).


I don't quite understand why one wouldnt be able to get a horizontal light just as close to plants as a vertical bulb. Please explain this without assuming your conclusion for the benefit of everyone. Also, stating 'its a fact, vertical bulbs are cooler' would be circular reasoning, so try to stick to the physics behind your assertion.



> I haven't seen one objective argument that's actually true from anyone suggesting horizontal is just as good (it's not).


here let me try to reason in your manner:

I haven't seen one objective argument that's actually true from anyone suggesting vertical is just as good(it's not). lol. just joking with you man. 

The discussion here is 'which is more efficient.

You claim is that vertical is more efficient. Maybe you are right and thousands of jedi growers are wrong.

If so, educate us with your reasons other than 'increased canopy space'. Since increased canopy space does not always equal larger yields.

If you know something, then state it with facts and reasoning, so that the world can benefit and we can have more dank everywhere...


----------



## mellokitty (Aug 29, 2012)

before i jump in here, i just want to clarify..... are we talking about vertical systems (colusseum-style, etc.) or vertical lighting here?


----------



## ghb (Aug 29, 2012)

anybody seen a volksgarden in operation, that shit is impressive.

but seriously how can anybody say that vertical growing is not the most productive way?


----------



## mellokitty (Aug 29, 2012)

dvs1038 said:


> Well since I don't have a vert grow I can't really comment if vert sucks, but I am interested in setting it up and just by reading around and lookin at other posts I found this here and well its kinda hard to argue with geometry isn't it? I got this pic from someone elses vert thread but it give u an idea how much more area a vert light will give u.
> View attachment 2229827


that pic was made by member Gastanker using a lighting specs program called diallux. 
he turned me onto it; it's available as a free download.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Aug 29, 2012)

zor said:


> I don't quite understand why one wouldnt be able to get a horizontal light just as close to plants as a vertical bulb. Please explain this without assuming your conclusion for the benefit of everyone. Also, stating 'its a fact, vertical bulbs are cooler' would be circular reasoning, so try to stick to the physics behind your assertion.


Because the bulbs are cooler. You can almost grow plants to the point where they touch (except if you do chances are intensity will be too high and bleaching will occur). That area is further back with a horizontal setup due to bleaching. Also you have higher temperatures at the bulb with horizontal which is the other determining factor. 

I have stated my reasoning with great clarity all through the thread.

And many jedi growers do hang their bulbs vertically. The HA are well known for doing this in fact... and they produce Dank. Even if they aren't so public about it.


----------



## zor (Aug 29, 2012)

OGEvilgenius said:


> Because the bulbs are cooler. You can almost grow plants to the point where they touch (except if you do chances are intensity will be too high and bleaching will occur).


you state this numerous times in the thread as fact, yet you give no reasoning behind it. i dont doubt that you can cool a vert bare bulb to the point where they touch. however, you can do the same with a horizontal bulb.



> Also you have higher temperatures at the bulb with horizontal which is the other determining factor.


another restating of your conclusion. explain why.



> I have stated my reasoning with great clarity all through the thread


you've restated that vert runs cooler. you've also stated that the intensity varies with horizontal lighting, which is true. however, the same holds true of a vertical canopy on the ends of the bulb.

i just reread your posts and don't see how you've given reasons other than anecdotal evidence of your own experience as well as appeals to authority (ala heath).



> And many jedi growers do hang their bulbs vertically.


yes many jedi growers kick ass with vert. as they do with horizontal. we all agree on this i think. However, i'm not stating that one is better than another as 'fact'.


----------



## OGEvilgenius (Aug 29, 2012)

Bleaching occurs earlier with horizontal lighting. The photo just reposted in this thread says more than a million words possibly could. More light in a larger canopy = bigger yields. Good luck hitting 2gpw growing horizontally.


----------



## ru4r34l (Aug 29, 2012)

my SCROG should get just under 2gpw, I expect about 750g - 800g from a 400W; If I turn the lamp vertical I could get more?

regards,


----------



## ghb (Aug 30, 2012)

expecting and getting are two different things, maybe you should have learned that from your first scrog grow ru4r34l


----------



## TheOrganic (Aug 30, 2012)

ru4r34l said:


> my SCROG should get just under 2gpw, I expect about 750g - 800g from a 400W; If I turn the lamp vertical I could get more?
> 
> regards,


I'm cool with most things but your avatar sucks. You know that resin glands are on pretty much whole plant hope I'm jumping the gun and that's not your kid. Ive had that shit in my eyes first harvest on accident and wasn't fun. I wouldn't even put a beer in my kids hand cause like me would prob drink it.

I will try vertical someday but scrog is hard to get away from but then using the whole bulb vs half with a reflected hood makes me just have to try a vertical scrog.


----------



## ru4r34l (Aug 30, 2012)

TheOrganic said:


> I'm cool with most things but your avatar sucks. You know that resin glands are on pretty much whole plant hope I'm jumping the gun and that's not your kid. Ive had that shit in my eyes first harvest on accident and wasn't fun. I wouldn't even put a beer in my kids hand cause like me would prob drink it.
> 
> I will try vertical someday but scrog is hard to get away from but then using the whole bulb vs half with a reflected hood makes me just have to try a vertical scrog.


That sure is my little angel, and I am not worried about resin from fan leaves on her precious little hands; But what I am worried about is the paint she has all over from daycare, the chemicals that daycare lather on her to prevent mosquito bites, the chemicals added to our baby food, the chemicals sprayed on our fruits and vegetables we give her, etc..

You should get the point now that resin glands from fan leaves are not high on my priority list to protect her or any of my kids from, and we don't keep alcohol in the house.

She has also already had herb camfour oil for her chest colds, like I use to get at her age; old Jamaican remedy to get rid of phlegm from a chest cold.

No need to worry she will not rub her eyes, she knows the importance of collecting all the resin, waste not want not.

regards,


----------

