# Which bar lights emit the least heat?



## Apostatize (Dec 29, 2021)

I'm thinking lights that run the coolest are the most conducive to vertical growing on two shelves, one on top of the other. Shorter distance from light to canopy, less space. AC and fans help, but ... start cool, less effort to remain cool. That's been my experience.

Thread goal: a short list of recommendations. I can compare them (size, stats, price, diodes). I'm anticipating bar light suggestions, but am open to surprises. Seeking suggestions for lights you'd use in bloom, not shit Amazon lights or lights designed for veg/seedlings. Currently run 66" Fluence bar lights, they run pretty cool.


----------



## Roger A. Shrubber (Dec 29, 2021)

the one that uses less wattage.
one watt of power = 3.4 btu
One btu will raise temperature 1 degree per 55 cubic feet, so one watt will raise temps by 3.4 degrees per 55 cubic feet
these are immutable, unchanging laws of physics, there is no escaping it. all lights, of every type, emit the same amount of heat per watt...so do toasters, tvs, computers, water heaters....every electrical appliance anyone owns, anywhere emits 3.4 btu per watt used.
the advantage leds have is that they don't produce a lot of waste heat, like h.i.d. lighting does, metal halide and hps lights produce a lot of unusable spectrum, which is wasted as radiant heat, which is harder to get rid of, as it heats up all the surfaces it hits without really doing much of anything towards growing your plants.
so the balancing act is to run the minimal amount of watts that will give you the results you want.
with leds, i find that 35 watts per sq foot gives me good results, and that going up above that doesn't seem to make much difference, but others may have had varying experiences.


----------



## hotrodharley (Dec 29, 2021)

Apostatize said:


> I'm thinking lights that run the coolest are the most conducive to vertical growing on two shelves, one on top of the other. Shorter distance from light to canopy, less space. AC and fans help, but ... start cool, less effort to remain cool. That's been my experience.
> 
> Thread goal: a short list of recommendations. I can compare them (size, stats, price, diodes). I'm anticipating bar light suggestions, but am open to surprises. Seeking suggestions for lights you'd use in bloom, not shit Amazon lights or lights designed for veg/seedlings. Currently run 66" Fluence bar lights, they run pretty cool.


Check HLG for light specifically designed for racks.


----------



## 1212ham (Jan 6, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> I'm thinking lights that run the coolest are the most conducive to vertical growing on two shelves, one on top of the other. Shorter distance from light to canopy, less space. AC and fans help, but ... start cool, less effort to remain cool. That's been my experience.
> 
> Thread goal: a short list of recommendations. I can compare them (size, stats, price, diodes). I'm anticipating bar light suggestions, but am open to surprises. Seeking suggestions for lights you'd use in bloom, not shit Amazon lights or lights designed for veg/seedlings. Currently run 66" Fluence bar lights, they run pretty cool.


What Roger said, watts = heat. Look for lights with higher efficacy, more light per watt. Many lie about efficacy and other specs so beware. I believe Grow Lights Australia is 3.0 or better and HLG is also, or soon will be.


----------



## Astral22 (Jan 6, 2022)

I think Migro Aray should run cool. The driver is placed outside as well. He also recommends a pretty low positioning, 7'' or 18cm

From Migro website:

*Driver and Lamp operating temperature*

Both the led bar heatsink and led driver both operate at about 25 deg. C or 45 F above ambient temperature. So at 25 degrees C or 77 F room temp the driver and heatsink will be about 50 deg. C or 122 F. This is perfectly normal and safe.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 6, 2022)

Astral22 said:


> I think Migro Aray should run cool. The driver is placed outside as well. He also recommends a pretty low positioning, 7'' or 18cm
> 
> From Migro website:
> 
> ...


In my mind, I see, for example, a room where you can walk up the middle, surrounded on both sides by 2 levels of lights, separated by a divider/other light/liquid leak precautions. Probably all like 2" PVC shelving. Seems people assume they'd stack veg on veg, or bloom on bloom. To me, I'd try to stack bloom on veg because it would use less space than bloom on bloom. Veg on veg to max clone #s.

*Top level bloom*: 6 x 55" Fluence bar lights with ballast separated by a 6' cord. Six seems more manageable than 10+ bar lights together -- primarily, less heat.
*Bottom level veg*: 2 or 3 of the same bar light, but with dimmers AND, crucially, use the veg-specific ballast with 1/2 the amps. Plus fans....

You might put two of those pairings long-ways on one side, making 4 of those pairings in one room. Then, do it again in a second room. And max out any walk-in closet space with racks of seedlings/young clones.

But I'm sure there are more efficient brands.


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 6, 2022)

Build your own with led with bulbs, space them 18cm, remove caps and make some reflectors with a reflective sheet.
They will last forever, just replace the bulbs every 2 years.


----------



## VincenzioVonHook (Jan 6, 2022)

Roger A. Shrubber said:


> the one that uses less wattage.
> one watt of power = 3.4 btu
> One btu will raise temperature 1 degree per 55 cubic feet, so one watt will raise temps by 3.4 degrees per 55 cubic feet
> these are immutable, unchanging laws of physics, there is no escaping it. all lights, of every type, emit the same amount of heat per watt...so do toasters, tvs, computers, water heaters....every electrical appliance anyone owns, anywhere emits 3.4 btu per watt used.
> ...


Thank god someone else understands elementary physics. I was trying to explain this to a mate the other day. He had a 100w quantum board in a 2x2.

The genius decided to switch to a 130w CFL "because they run cooler and you can have them closer to plants"

So he ended up with a hotter tent, far less light intensity, plus worse spectrum and less coverage.

It shouldn't be that hard to figure out that 130 is bigger than 100.


----------



## PJ Diaz (Jan 6, 2022)

VincenzioVonHook said:


> Thank god someone else understands elementary physics. I was trying to explain this too a mate the other day.


Some people understand elementary physics, others understand proper word usage; a few understand both.


----------



## VincenzioVonHook (Jan 6, 2022)

PJ Diaz said:


> Some people understand elementary physics, others understand proper word usage; a few understand both.


It's a give and take scenario lol. Can't have both can we.....well I certainly don't haha.


----------



## Astral22 (Jan 7, 2022)

I searched for some keywords such as ''led grow light vertical farming racks'' and i found hundreds of pages, but they are all unknown lights to me at least. And most of them seem industrial/commercial, with no price for a single product, only asking for a quota for wholesale business i guess.

Are you looking for something like this maybe?





MechaTronix - LED Grow Light Products


MechaTronix has developed a comprehensive range of advanced LED grow lights for top lighting in indoor cultivation and greenhouses, interlighting for high wire crops, supplemental lighting for vertical greenhouse farming and top-notch vertical farming grow lights.




www.horti-growlight.com









Full Spectrum LED Grow Lights: Types of Grow Light Panel, Tube for Sale | EnliteHorti


EnliteHorti provides a full line of energy-efficient custom led grow lights for indoor plant growing solutions. Our professional led grow lights help saving more electricity cost and getting high-quality yields with high intensity, high output, high power, and high-quality features. Get a free...




www.enlitehorti.com









Vertical Farming — PRONORO


Greenhouse, indoor, vertical farm horticulture light. HarveLite LED grow light. Horticulture lights indoor greenhouse grow lights. Vertical farm cultivation lights. CC RACK leafy green, medical cannabis, lettuce. LED GROW LIGHTS. High light efficiency. Hight PPF output. PPFD for grow stages from clo




www.harvelite.com












Our Company - SpecGrade LED


Our Company Robust Construction Because every part of our grow light must stand up to chemicals, fertilizers, methane emissions, nitrous oxide, heat, humidity, water, dust, and dirt, our engineers specify the highest quality components on the market for each grow light we manufacture. We...




specgradeled.com


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 7, 2022)

Astral22 said:


> I searched for some keywords such as ''led grow light vertical farming racks'' and i found hundreds of pages, but they are all unknown lights to me at least. And most of them seem industrial/commercial, with no price for a single product, only asking for a quota for wholesale business i guess.
> 
> Are you looking for something like this maybe?
> 
> ...


Sort of. I'm kind of reading a few threads together where growers have discussed adding far red at various stages v. just an indoor-specific spectrum v. supplementing with a light that enhances anthocyanin/pigment production. Basically, I really like the specific spectrums Fluence offers. Growers talk about combining far red and other lights. They often discuss lights in terms of efficiency, heat, and the marketing term "full spectrum." But if I phrase it as "beat or compare X lights to Fluence," thread commenters get distracted and I don't get helpful responses. Perhaps I was lazy about how I phrased my question.

I might end up paying more for Fluence, but I'd like to be able to combine their *indoor*, *anthospec*, and *far red spectrums *in a vert setup. So far, I've only used their *indoor spectrum*.

I guess I really just want to know if there's a company that basically offers similar spectrums as Fluence (including their 66" bar light dimensions) but perhaps more efficiently and at a lower price. To me, Fluence is the standard; but I know other brands beat them in particular aspects (e.g., efficiency/raw power).

Another way I could filter out some products is by having a better understanding of the difference between greenhouse and indoor spectrums. Some products with high efficacy #s are actually designed for growing in greenhouses. So, not apples to apples.


----------



## OSBuds (Jan 7, 2022)

Account Suspended


----------



## ComfortCreator (Jan 8, 2022)

This site helped steer me about lighting and heat.

As clearly stated above, a watt is a watt and produces a specific amount of heat.

So then the correct answer to your question is the coolest light temp-wise will be the one with the highest efficiency.

HLG scorpions are rated 3.0 max efficiency as are a few others. So the lighting you would ideally want max efficency.

Drivers can be 90% efficient to almost max operating power, and can be mounted outside the area to minimize heat.

I personally think however that I would not concern myself if I found a good deal on any lights with a 2.5 efficiency or better. Cost to get the best is rarily worth the premium vs next best.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 8, 2022)

ComfortCreator said:


> This site helped steer me about lighting and heat.
> 
> As clearly stated above, a watt is a watt and produces a specific amount of heat.
> 
> ...



Thanks. I guess I'm comparing everything to Fluence 66" bar lights.









Fluence RAY66 LED Grow Light | LED Cultivation | Greenhouse Light


Fluence RAY66 LED grow light offers a choice of six spectra and is ideal for a variety of applications. Visit to buy direct from Fluence.




shop.fluence.science







Looks like my timeline to buy a house is being pushed up to April.... Currently, my 2 dedicated bloom tents are an experiment: ten 66" lights in one tent, six 66" lights in the other. Heat, yield, all things considered, I prefer units of six 66" Fluence Rays.

Although I'm open to HLG, here's my current game plan:

I want four (4) vertical grow "units." Each unit will be comprised of two shelves. Really, a floor and a top shelf/rack separated by oversized flood table and PVC pipes running across the top. Perhaps one 2" PVC pipe per light to make it easier. Supposedly, 3' of 2" pvc supports 28lbs w/o bending. I'm basing materials/rack design from there.

*Top*: 6 x 66" bar lights.
*Bottom*: 2 x 66" bar lights. One time, Fluence accidentally sent me a replacement ballast with 1/2 the amps as what comes with their indoor spectrum Ray. I figure, starting with 1/2 the amps for close-proximity veg lights might be easier than dimming a full-powered ballast.

The 66" Fluence Ray has a higher efficacy than its 44" or 22" models. the 66" light comes in just above 2.4. However, I recall their greenhouse spectrum has a value closer to 3 (but not that close). Thing is, the indoor spectrum has, for example, more red.

So, what I think I'm really considering is 1) the efficacy _and_ 2) the specific spectrum design. Right?



Below are 4 of 6 Fluence spectra:


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 8, 2022)

Is efficacy dispositive? What about the actual spectrum? One factor outweighing all others just reminds me of one of the many topics discussed on here -- for example, growers who swear by a precise percentage of amber trichomes for timing harvest. You feel me?


----------



## OSBuds (Jan 9, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> comparing everything to Fluence 66" bar lights.








MyDLC - DesignLights







qpl.designlights.org


----------



## ComfortCreator (Jan 9, 2022)

Spectrum is important but most are similar or offer a few choices so that usually is not the deciding factor for quality products.

Fluence is as high a quality as it gets you wont go wrong with them.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 9, 2022)

OSBuds said:


> MyDLC - DesignLights
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thank you!

I don't see why stacked vert grows aren't more common ... realizing bloom on bloom is more practical than bloom on veg (i.e., doesn't require wrapping in, for example, Panda Paper to block light), but bloom on veg could probably be done in a smaller space....

Based on my current trial setups, I'm not going to even need 4' from roof to floor, per shelf.
- 2" pvc pipes. 4 vertical on corners, 1 along each side at the middle. Schedule 40 should be sufficient, but if 80's available at a decent price....
- 2 thick/treated plywood boards (nothing on floor but flood tray). Thicker board would have to be at the middle for upper deck bloom. Top board really just has to support weight of lights, ballasts.
- lots of pvc connectors 2-way, 3-way, 4-way whatever, wherever. At base, probably put a 3-way (top receiver, 90 degree 2-way base) and put whatever's trimmed off at the footies to reduce likelihood of tippping. Tie/screw into wall of course.
- have to cut precise holes in plywood to insert poles, hold up via pvc connectors. Probably 1.25" to support width sides (~5').
- flood trays on each level.
- spray boards with Killz and/or line with Panda Paper.
- drill 2 holes in plywood per each side of a light bar, loop steel/aluminum wire and hang. Possibly add plastic liner to prevent liquid leakage to bottom shelf.

I think that could work!

Start with one, build another every six 6 mos. or so until 2 are dedicated-bloom and 2 are dedicated-veg.

Sounds really easy! And that's concerning, I must be missing something.


----------



## CatHedral (Jan 9, 2022)

I must take issue.
Heat is energy, with various units: joules, kWh, btu.
The watt is a measure of power, which is *total heat divided by time. *
A watt-hour is approximately 3.3 btu and is a measure of heat energy.

So my answer to the question is, independent of the wattage of the fixture:
the ratio of waste heat emission to useful par emission. One can use either power or energy physics since the time factor cancels.

That would be the figure of merit I would use. It is nicely scalable too.


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 9, 2022)

Icarus Li2 - BIOS Lighting


Need info




bioslighting.com
















680W LED Grow Light System w/iLoc | Phantom Photobio MX


Phantom PHOTOBIO MX 680W 100-277V S4 Spectrum With iLOC



www.phantombio.com


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 9, 2022)

Comparing spectrums, below is what I see. Also, six 66" Fluence Rays = 720 W. 
That's another thing, most of these units are for a 4' x 4' space. A 5.5'-long light is just, I've grown attached to it. 

Fluence



680W LED Grow Light System w/iLoc | Phantom Photobio MX



Icarus Li2 + Vert (Bios)


----------



## Southernontariogrower (Jan 9, 2022)

Im liking fluence myself. The board bar hybrid lights look like the newest type of light out. Please let me know if you stay with fluence or find something new. Would love to see what you come up with in end. Sure its going to do very well. Best of luck.


----------



## Astral22 (Jan 9, 2022)

Ok, my 3rd and final suggestion. To be honest i'm not exactly sure what you're looking for because i'm a noob, but i would really like to help you out, so i'll just throw this one more and then i'm off. Sorry if i'm not helping and i wish you the best of luck.









Slim 720S - Dimmable LED Grow Light - 720w (Triple Dimmer) 3500K (UV/IR) LH351H v2 - 5x5


USA Orders - 2-4 day delivery International - 2-5 day delivery Slim 720S Preview - January 1st, 2022 Release Date [email protected]



opticled.com












(Sold Out) Slim 650S - Dimmable LED Grow Light - 650w (Triple Dimmer) 3500K (UV/IR) LH351H v2


Click the "Watch On Youtube"link to watch 650 Watt Dimmable LED Grow Light USA Orders: Slim 650S NextGen is now available Europe & UK Orders: 3-7 Day Delivery Canada & Japan Orders: 3-7 Day Delivery



opticled.com





This seems like my dream light and one day i will get it for sure!
High power, high efficiency, great coverage, triple dimmer to control all the spectrums (white, blue, red, uv, ir), Samsung diodes, Meanwell driver,10 years of warranty, decent price.. Seems like a great quality if i'm not mistaken. Mr.Autoflower on youtube offers discounts as well.

With this light you should be able to set the exact spectrum you like at any given moment.
The only thing that may be an issue, the dimmer for the red spectrum also controls the UV and IR, so if i understand correctly they are always turned on together.

But if you really like the Fluence, by all means go for it and if it's proven to you, then you won't regret it. My motto is: 'Don't change what already works perfectly'


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 10, 2022)

Astral22 said:


> Ok, my 3rd and final suggestion. To be honest i'm not exactly sure what you're looking for because i'm a noob, but i would really like to help you out, so i'll just throw this one more and then i'm off. Sorry if i'm not helping and i wish you the best of luck.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Thanks!

Grabbed spectrum graphs from your links, primary factor I'm using along with some other suggestions in this thread. 

I'd put all the graphs in one comment but, eventually, we lose the ability to edit an old comment.

https://opticled.com/collections/slim-series/products/slim-650s-dimmable-led-grow-light-650w-triple-dimmer-3500k-uv-ir-lh351h-v2 and
https://opticled.com/collections/slim-series/products/slim-650s-dimmable-led-grow-light-650w-triple-dimmer-3500k-uv-ir-lh351h-v2, I grabbed this


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 10, 2022)

Astral22 said:


> I think Migro Aray should run cool. The driver is placed outside as well. He also recommends a pretty low positioning, 7'' or 18cm
> 
> From Migro website:
> 
> ...


Thanks.

Quick comparisons. PAR Range, usable PPF.

Fluence's indoor spectrum appears to beat out all PAR Ranges.
While other suggestions appear to have a higher efficacy value the Migro Aray 4 has a lower efficacy than the 66" Ray (though Migro probably beats the 22 and 44" Fluence Rays). 

Thanks! Once growers suggest what runs coolest, I can just compare them with the 66" Fluence Ray (at least the factors I care most about besides length).


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 10, 2022)

Astral22 said:


> I searched for some keywords such as ''led grow light vertical farming racks'' and i found hundreds of pages, but they are all unknown lights to me at least. And most of them seem industrial/commercial, with no price for a single product, only asking for a quota for wholesale business i guess.
> 
> Are you looking for something like this maybe?
> 
> ...


Thanks! Note "greenhouse" and "indoor" LEDs are separated by a comma.
From what I can tell, there appears to be a difference between *indoor-specific *and *greenhouse-specific *LEDs (e.g., PAR range, efficacy).
Looks like greenhouse-specific have a less impressive PAR range, though their efficacy value is likely higher.


----------



## windycheese (Jan 11, 2022)

What would you say about the Kind LED X series lights?


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 11, 2022)

windycheese said:


> What would you say about the Kind LED X series lights?


First, hilarious name/meme coordination. Well-done.



Kind LED X series
observations:
- heavy compared to Fluence 66" Ray
- PAR range doesn't seem as complete as the indoor spec Ray.
- it's not a bar. looks like it's supposed to be hung like much higher than a bar (~6" v. 24-36"). Not sure -- all things considered, it doesn't look that close a comparison. Just my opinion based on not much, fwiw.


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 11, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> First, hilarious name/meme coordination. Well-done.
> 
> View attachment 5064915
> 
> ...


These numbers seem way too low, my homemade led has an even light spread of 750-800 [email protected] 28", even in the corners(reflective walls)


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 11, 2022)

Markshomegrown said:


> These numbers seem way too low, my homemade led has an even light spread of 750-800 [email protected] 28", even in the corners(reflective walls)


too low to be good or too low to be accurate for that brand/product? that's what they advertise on their own website, not a 3rd-party. But I agree with you, it's too low/uneven.


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 11, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> too low to be good or too low to be accurate for that brand/product? that's what they advertise on their own website, not a 3rd-party. But I agree with you.


All the canopy, every ft2 needs to have a par reading between 500 and 850 or it's a waste of time.


----------



## PadawanWarrior (Jan 11, 2022)

PJ Diaz said:


> Some people understand elementary physics, others understand proper word usage; a few understand both.


Most people that understand basic physics already know proper grammar though, lol.


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 11, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> Icarus Li2 - BIOS Lighting
> 
> 
> Need info
> ...


Trying to find that second light but having no luck... And these babies aren't cheap!!!


----------



## windycheese (Jan 11, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> First, hilarious name/meme coordination. Well-done.
> 
> View attachment 5064915
> 
> ...


Heh, thanks!

I should have clarified. I meant the Kind Led x220/x330/x420. How do you compare those to systems like the Icarus Li2 and Migro Aray?


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 11, 2022)

windycheese said:


> Heh, thanks!
> 
> I should have clarified. I meant the Kind Led x220/x330/x420. How do you compare those to systems like the Icarus Li2 and Migro Aray?


Fluence 66" Ray is close to 1lb per 120 W. Kind LED is 15lbs/420 W.
Lifetime is about the same.
But 5.5' long beats 4'.
So, you're arguably going to save $$ with a Kind LED X420, depending on space and whether you decide to supplement UV/far-red to match Fluence's sole-source spectrum.

X420's efficacy (whichever one is shown below) is ~0.1 better than 66" Fluence Ray. But often, greenhouse-specific lights have > efficacy than an indoor spec ... but indoor spec probably has broader PAR range.

Looking at X420's par range, it doesn't quite match the UV and Far-red sections of the Fluence indoor spectrum. If that's important to you, you'd need to supplement it unless you purchased a "sole-source" light like the Fluence Ray Indoor Spectrum. X420's PAR range looks like it might peak higher in red but not far-red. And Fluence looks fuller in the oranges and blue areas. But Fluence blasts that same indoor spectrum in veg and bloom -- no adjusting, just dimming.

Personally, I run veg-dedicated and bloom-dedicated grow areas. So, all those knobs and adjustments would be pointless for me. Look at grower's photos of their buds. Some look awesome, yield's great, but there's just something lacking in aesthetics/complexity of the bud structure. Then look at the PAR spectrum and efficacy for their lights. As we gain experience growing, we learn to make finer distinctions. Real connoisseur shit. I don't know, I'm going to stop and consider those things when they mention what they used and show bud pics ... instead of just oggling their plants or busting their chops?

x420, https://www.kindledgrowlights.com/products/x420



X420 spectrums component-wise. Standard spectrum v. Kind spectrum (veg and flower).


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 11, 2022)

Frank Nitty said:


> Trying to find that second light but having no luck... And these babies aren't cheap!!!











Phantom PHOTOBIO MX 680W LED Fixture - 100-277V S4 Spectrum + iLOC On-Board Dimming (with 10ft 110-120V Cord) - Economy Price 2lbs a light - Call our sales team if buying more than 10 for better price - Free Shipping


The PHOTOBIO•MX changes everything. We took a step back, evaluated all the fixtures on the market, and then set out to do things entirely different. The result is a 680W fixture delivering 15% more light to your canopy, using 35% less power than a 1000W DE fixture. Increase yields while driving...




growgreenmi.com


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 11, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> Phantom PHOTOBIO MX 680W LED Fixture - 100-277V S4 Spectrum + iLOC On-Board Dimming (with 10ft 110-120V Cord) - Economy Price 2lbs a light - Call our sales team if buying more than 10 for better price - Free Shipping
> 
> 
> The PHOTOBIO•MX changes everything. We took a step back, evaluated all the fixtures on the market, and then set out to do things entirely different. The result is a 680W fixture delivering 15% more light to your canopy, using 35% less power than a 1000W DE fixture. Increase yields while driving...
> ...


My man!!!


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 11, 2022)

760 bucks!!! Dammit,Jim!!! I like it though!!! For almost 800 dollars it had better earn it's keep!!!


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 11, 2022)

What the hell, I'm buying one of these!!!


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 11, 2022)

This might be even better!!! All for 850... Top and side lighting!!!


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 12, 2022)

Frank Nitty said:


> This might be even better!!! All for 850... Top and side lighting!!!View attachment 5065242


Getting closer to Fluence's indoor spectrum. Both use Osram's Red. Still think Fluence goes further left to blue and right to far-red. I know a little about that, not entirely sure of its significance. There's no official graph format that would make it easier to compare -- they use the same units, but it's getting so close you'd need to really have a good image to determine the disparity between far-red/uv. 

Luxx has a high, steep blue peak closer to the peak in Fluence's greenhouse-spectrum. I'd like to know more about that to understand why Fluence's indoor spectrum formula has a lower peak. Reminds me of chemistry when we'd look at graphs to determine molecular structure/bonds.... Fun times, it also reminds me why I didn't choose that as a career.

They both project light at 120 degree angles for close proximity. 

But, for my money, Fluence still has the edge. 
- 5.5' long. 6 of them = 720W but each bar provides an extra 1.5' (1.5' x 6 is room to help you fit another 2-3 plants in the total space).
$295 x 6 = ~$1,800. expensive af.
$850 (on sale, marked down from ~$1k) + 2 clone lights. That's a good deal even if you had to supplement UV/far-red. 

- Luxx appears to have ~ 1/2 the lifetime. Seems like you might exceed the lifetime before you exceed the warranty.
- 31 lbs per 6 Luxx bars v. 6 lbs for 6 (larger) 66" Fluence bar lights.

Fluence



Luxx spectrum (Luxx white + Osram Red)



Luxx technical specifications


----------



## Horselover fat (Jan 12, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> Getting closer to Fluence's indoor spectrum. Both use Osram's Red. Still think Fluence goes further left to blue and right to far-red. I know a little about that, not entirely sure of its significance.


Very little significance. Sure, go ahead and get the spectrum you want, but the differences will not be much. A regular white light led alone will grow very well. Redder spectrum grows a little longer nodes and bluer shorter nodes. UV or near uv may, perhaps, give a tiny bit more thc, but maybe not. The total light output, the efficiency it is produced with and proper light spread for your space are the most important aspects of a grow light.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 12, 2022)

Horselover fat said:


> Very little significance. Sure, go ahead and get the spectrum you want, but the differences will not be much. A regular white light led alone will grow very well. Redder spectrum grows a little longer nodes and bluer shorter nodes. UV or near uv may, perhaps, give a tiny bit more thc, but maybe not. The total light output, the efficiency it is produced with and proper light spread for your space are the most important aspects of a grow light.


I was thinking that, then it seemed a little counter-intuitive that fluence's greenhouse-specific spectrum would have a higher efficacy than its indoor spec (by almost 0.4); but fluence's sole-source indoor spec has a far broader/richer color spectrum than its greenhouse-spectrum, which is supplemented by the sun. Sorry, I think a lot of growers try to oversimplify this as a way to justify buying inexpensive lights (sometimes to their detriment).

Dismissing that much science is en vogue, but I don't agree with it.


----------



## Horselover fat (Jan 12, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> I was thinking that, then it seemed a little counter-intuitive that fluence's greenhouse-specific spectrum would have a higher efficacy than its indoor spec (by almost 0.4); but fluence's sole-source indoor spec has a far broader/richer color spectrum than its greenhouse-spectrum, which is supplemented by the sun. Sorry, I think a lot of growers try to oversimplify this as a way to justify buying inexpensive lights (sometimes to their detriment).
> 
> Dismissing that much science is en vogue, but I don't agree with it.


Blue and red chips have much higher efficacy than white light leds, because energy is not wasted in converting the light with phosphors. The science we actually have says the spectrum doesn't matter that much.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 12, 2022)

Horselover fat said:


> The science we actually have says the spectrum doesn't matter that much.


Trying not to be dismissive ... asking a follow-up question (i.e., the Socratic Method) is often more constructive.






Are white LEDs used in LED grow lights better for growing? – Platinum LED







platinumgrowlights.com


----------



## Horselover fat (Jan 13, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> Trying not to be dismissive ... asking a follow-up question (i.e., the Socratic Method) is often more constructive.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Why do we want to read that ad?


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

Horselover fat said:


> Why do we want to read that ad?


part of it's educational. i could google and pull any # of similarly-written articles that state the same basic concepts. 

ignore if you want to, some folks are fine with a B/B-.


----------



## Horselover fat (Jan 13, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> part of it's educational. i could google and pull any # of similarly-written articles that state the same basic concepts.
> 
> ignore if you want to, some folks are fine with a B/B-.


From what i glanced there was some basic level info and some bs to promote their lights. Should've just stuck with explaining how you can make more efficient lights with just blue and red instead of claiming a magic spectrum. Then again: they don't want to tell us how much light their fixtures produce so I'm guessing there's a reason they go on about the spectrum.


----------



## Horselover fat (Jan 13, 2022)

Look up bruce bugbee's videos. They prove green is used efficiently by the plants. There's no difference in plant mass between white light and just red&blue.


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Horselover fat said:


> Look up bruce bugbee's videos. They prove green is used efficiently by the plants. There's no difference in plant mass between white light and just red&blue.


The science we have definitely supports the notion that "Spectrum Matters"
Bugbee is just 1 spoke in the wheel of plant lighting science and I kinda feel he is partially to blame for allowing all those pos china blurple lights to flood the market for so many years, so many $$ lost by unsuspecting people just looking to save a few bucks growing their indoor plants 

Anyhow, great discussion going on over on this part of the site without the typical bickering and bashing of the LED section.

Here's an interesting read on spectrum and lettuce. The opposite of what is commonly recommended in the led community 









LEDs on lettuce: White light versus red + blue light


A closer look at a lighting debate from the crop production perspective




www.producegrower.com


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> I was thinking that, then it seemed a little counter-intuitive that fluence's greenhouse-specific spectrum would have a higher efficacy than its indoor spec (by almost 0.4); but fluence's sole-source indoor spec has a far broader/richer color spectrum than its greenhouse-spectrum, which is supplemented by the sun. Sorry, I think a lot of growers try to oversimplify this as a way to justify buying inexpensive lights (sometimes to their detriment).
> 
> Dismissing that much science is en vogue, but I don't agree with it.


They pump the blue to pump the efficiency ratings on indoor lights and on greenhouse lights is not so important since the sun is so powerful even on a cloudy day that it fills out the spectrum.

I am curious, were you the once stating that you can tell in photo's which led spectrums where used? What are the different characteristics you would attribute to the different spectrums?


----------



## Horselover fat (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> The science we have definitely supports the notion that "Spectrum Matters"
> Bugbee is just 1 spoke in the wheel of plant lighting science and I kinda feel he is partially to blame for allowing all those pos china blurple lights to flood the market for so many years, so many $$ lost by unsuspecting people just looking to save a few bucks growing their indoor plants
> 
> Anyhow, great discussion going on over on this part of the site without the typical bickering and bashing of the LED section.
> ...


Yeah, the spectrum does change plant morphology and in lettuce's case yield depends a lot on it. I'm not saying spectrum is irrelevant for us either, but I am saying the differences in the end result between reasonable spectrums is not that big. I don't think most of us are on a level where slight differences in spectrum would yield significantly more bud or thc. Grower is the weakest link in my grow at least. 

I might have built a blurple for myself, but the cost for a high efficacy blurple fixture was just way too much. I paid 500€ for my diy fixture with board level efficacy at almost 3umol/j. Using blues and reds I could have gone to near four, iirc, but the fixture would've been like 1500€. Anyways, I don't think you can pin the blurples on bugbee. He always recommended white light


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> They pump the blue to pump the efficiency ratings on indoor lights and on greenhouse lights is not so important since the sun is so powerful even on a cloudy day that it fills out the spectrum.
> 
> I am curious, were you the once stating that you can tell in photo's which led spectrums where used? What are the different characteristics you would attribute to the different spectrums?


You said, "they pump the blue to pump the efficiency ratings on indoor lights and on greenhouse lights is not so important since the sun is so powerful even on a cloudy day that it fills out the spectrum."

I've seen that. and some of what you're saying makes sense -- for example, a tall blue peak in a spectrum to pump efficacy; and greenhouse needing less of a lower blue peak because of the sun. But from what I've observed, greenhouse lights can have lower peaks and yet also have a higher efficacy (e.g., Fluence's product line (greenhouse v. indoor spec)). And fluence's indoor spec has a wider blue peak that's not as steep/high a peak as other brands suggested on this thread.

And as for your 2nd paragraph, I don't want to be unnecessarily rude to other growers -- this all takes a lot of work/effort regardless of results -- but if, instead of growers suggesting lights, they posted pics of their buds on this thread along with their lights' color-spectrum, the overall mystery of spectrum significance would sort itself out like we were rolling around with Shaggy (or Mike Tyson Mysteries' Pigeon (RIP, Norm)) in the Mystery Machine. After a handful of pics, we'd start to see differences. Some of the density, richness of color, etc. can be explained by genetics, nutrients, and experience; but after enough examples, I believe we'd all see a pattern we could point to in observing spectrum difference. Otherwise, it's all one big marketing scheme.

Either way, these f#ckers charge a lot for lights and I want answers -- if it's a bs marketing term used to justify charging, in some cases, 2 or 3x as much money per light, I want to know for sure. Wouldn't we all?


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

How about we play "Guess the Spectrum"?

Birthday Funk



Moby Dick


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> How about we play "Guess the Spectrum"?
> 
> Birthday Funk
> 
> ...


Gorgeous! I don't know how we'd do the guessing game -- maybe post with efficacy value and PAR range. We could passively learn as patterns/trends emerge and sort themselves out.


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> Gorgeous! I don't know how we'd do the guessing game -- maybe post with efficacy value and PAR range. We could passively learn as patterns/trends emerge and sort themselves out.


300 - 700ppfd


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> How about we play "Guess the Spectrum"?
> 
> Birthday Funk
> 
> ...


My question is: Are any of these high priced lights actually worth the price??? And how would you really know??? I would think that you would either have to be rich to buy and test all these lights or these companies let us test the lights for them... And not the cheapest ones, the top shelf ones, to cee if there's any difference in the grow itself...


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> 300 - 700ppfd
> 
> View attachment 5066300


Cool. And the benchmark growers care about -- μmol/J?

Fluence 66" Ray reports 2.42 μmol/J.

Part of my issues are that I'm still trying to figure out how to interpret some of these measurements/significant benchmarks/acronyms/units. And I mis-spoke about the greenhouse v. indoor spec efficacy difference with Fluence. Although efficacy increases with light bar length (22" < 44" < 66"), greenhouse and indoor have the same efficacy, though their PAR ranges/peaks are much different.

Fluence starts at 360 nm, are you referring to 300 nm? At first glance, that appears to be off the charts?


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

Frank Nitty said:


> My question is: Are any of these high priced lights actually worth the price??? And how would you really know??? I would think that you would either have to be rich to buy and test all these lights or these companies let us test the lights for them... And not the cheapest ones, the top shelf ones, to cee if there's any difference in the grow itself...


Practically-speaking, a lot of us probably use ~700W units. Someone might have multiple, but 680-720W might be a good measurement to compare. With enough feedback, we'd either see measurable differences or conclude it's hype. Newbies -- I consider myself still in this category -- may not be the best indicator. Assuming knowledgeable vets "give it a grow," posting bud pics with PAR range and efficacy benchmark, we'll have to see it to believe it.

Right now, the strongest argument for Fluence 66" Ray (the most affordable of the Rays, possibly any of their products) is that it's light, durable, and the additional 1.5' could be a scalable advantage. You'd have to assume that buying a less expensive light would mean you'd have to buy additional units to cover the same space as longer Fluence lights and/or you'd have to buy supplemental lighting to match Fluence's spectrum. Those seem like the biggest factors. I also like individual bars and ballasts, but that's almost completely a preference thing.


----------



## Frank Nitty (Jan 13, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> Practically-speaking, a lot of us probably use ~700W units. Someone might have multiple, but 680-720W might be a good measurement to compare. With enough feedback, we'd either see measurable differences or conclude it's hype. Newbies -- I consider myself still in this category -- may not be the best indicator. Assuming knowledgeable vets "give it a grow," posting bud pics with PAR range and efficacy benchmark, we'll have to see it to believe it.
> 
> Right now, the strongest argument for Fluence 66" Ray (the most affordable of the Rays, possibly any of their products) is that it's light, durable, and the additional 1.5' could be a scalable advantage. You'd have to assume that buying a less expensive light would mean you'd have to buy additional units to cover the same space as longer Fluence lights and/or you'd have to buy supplemental lighting to match Fluence's spectrum. Those seem like the biggest factors. I also like individual bars and ballasts, but that's almost completely a preference thing.


Thank you for putting this in layman's terms!!! So would you say that the best efficiency comes from lights that touch each corner of a tent??? Does that question make sense???


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

Frank Nitty said:


> Thank you for putting this in layman's terms!!! So would you say that the best efficiency comes from lights that touch each corner of a tent??? Does that question make sense???


Awesome, thanks! Makes sense, think you're suggesting even distribution. From what I've read on RIU, bar lights are the way to go. Even those units -- already combined bars -- show a weak spot somewhere at the perimeter. A brochure may also state that the company assumes you're getting 85% bounce back from a reflective surface. Perhaps some people overcome the perimeter issue with a second unit/additional bar or some other tweak. Maybe they use 800W and change environmental factor to keep plants cool -- we'll have to see how it plays out. I'm sure experienced growers have informed opinions about that.


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> Practically-speaking, a lot of us probably use ~700W units. Someone might have multiple, but 680-720W might be a good measurement to compare. With enough feedback, we'd either see measurable differences or conclude it's hype. Newbies -- I consider myself still in this category -- may not be the best indicator. Assuming knowledgeable vets "give it a grow," posting bud pics with PAR range and efficacy benchmark, we'll have to see it to believe it.
> 
> Right now, the strongest argument for Fluence 66" Ray (the most affordable of the Rays, possibly any of their products) is that it's light, durable, and the additional 1.5' could be a scalable advantage. You'd have to assume that buying a less expensive light would mean you'd have to buy additional units to cover the same space as longer Fluence lights and/or you'd have to buy supplemental lighting to match Fluence's spectrum. Those seem like the biggest factors. I also like individual bars and ballasts, but that's almost completely a preference thing.


A lot of the selection comes down to ones grow space configuration. I used to grow on 5x5's but have scaled it back to 4x4 to conserve some floor space in my new system.
Also, the advertised SPD's by these light companies are often misleading to make the product look like something special.

Let me illustrate - HLG Scorpion RSpec








HLG Scorpion® Rspec®


HLG Scorpion Rspec is designed for grows with low ceiling heights or vertical racks. HLG Scorpion Rspec uses 6x Rspec 288 Quantum Boards for an even light spread at just 12" from the canopy. QB 288 uses Samsung's latest LM301H and Deep Red LED 660nm. Commercial Indoor Horticulture LED grow light




horticulturelightinggroup.com





Advertised SPD



Third party realistic SPD



Always check the third party test data when available


----------



## Samwell Seed Well (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> A lot of the selection comes down to ones grow space configuration. I used to grow on 5x5's but have scaled it back to 4x4 to conserve some floor space in my new system.
> Also, the advertised SPD's by these light companies are often misleading to make the product look like something special.
> 
> Let me illustrate - HLG Scorpion RSpec
> ...


Nice 

California light works had some good ones too.










LED Grow Lights - California LightWorks Full Spectrum LED Lighting


Industry-leading manufacturer of best LED Grow Lights for Indoor, greenhouse, and vertical plants. Next-generation grow lighting made in USA




californialightworks.com


----------



## ComputerSaysNo (Jan 13, 2022)

Frank Nitty said:


> Thank you for putting this in layman's terms!!! So would you say that the best efficiency comes from lights that touch each corner of a tent??? Does that question make sense???


The question makes sense, but not the excess of exclamation and question marks 

Obviously if the light coverage is optimal, with all the canopy covered but not much extra light, then that is better than having too much. If the light doesn't touch the corners of the tent it's not a problem unless there are plants growing there.

I guess this is something you can overthink, however. The light does not have sharp edges, like a shadow on the moon does.

If some plants towards the rim are not covered perfectly, they'll still receive light, but probably yield less. But the yield won't be zero.

I would rather be conservative with the lighting than going overboard.


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> A lot of the selection comes down to ones grow space configuration. I used to grow on 5x5's but have scaled it back to 4x4 to conserve some floor space in my new system.
> Also, the advertised SPD's by these light companies are often misleading to make the product look like something special.
> 
> Let me illustrate - HLG Scorpion RSpec
> ...


You can build your own LEDs, the right size to give your room the perfect light spread, cost me £50, bulbs cost me £100 should last 2 years(85%), as LEDs bulbs get more effective, I can use more effective bulbs, cheap to buy, cheap to run, I am loving it, my buds look much larger and more healthy under the led vs HPS, Never going to buy a led panel. my led panel will last a good 20 years (bulb holder in your lamps/walls and ceiling last what 30-40 years)


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 13, 2022)

Samwell Seed Well said:


> Nice
> 
> California light works had some good ones too.
> View attachment 5066351
> ...


- lighter than some, still 22lbs. 
- efficacy, up to 3.5. On another page, it says 2.9. Higher than most either way
- spectrum seems lacking -- but literally just from the PAR range graph -- that's what I've mostly been comparing. A few of us have been kicking around ideas about how to measure the differences in outcome/bud quality attributable to PAR range and efficacy, individually and combined (i.e., how to determine whether the fuller "sole-source" spectrums (particularly far-red) actually improve yield/quality/potency (on top of everything else growers supplement/pump into their plants)).

-


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Markshomegrown said:


> You can build your own LEDs, the right size to give your room the perfect light spread, cost me £50, bulbs cost me £100 should last 2 years(85%), as LEDs bulbs get more effective, I can use more effective bulbs, cheap to buy, cheap to run, I am loving it, my buds look much larger and more healthy under the led vs HPS, Never going to buy a led panel. my led panel will last a good 20 years (bulb holder in your lamps/walls and ceiling last what 30-40 years)


Have any pictures of your rig?
Yes, Philips Par led's are awesome. There's am even nicer spectrum than that in a 17W.
Better bigger buds than hps? Not so sold on that


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Samwell Seed Well said:


> Nice
> 
> California light works had some good ones too.
> View attachment 5066351
> ...


This Bar light only runs on the "Mega Drive" system though correct?


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 13, 2022)

Markshomegrown said:


> You can build your own LEDs, the right size to give your room the perfect light spread, cost me £50, bulbs cost me £100 should last 2 years(85%), as LEDs bulbs get more effective, I can use more effective bulbs, cheap to buy, cheap to run, I am loving it, my buds look much larger and more healthy under the led vs HPS, Never going to buy a led panel. my led panel will last a good 20 years (bulb holder in your lamps/walls and ceiling last what 30-40 years)


This one is a real beauty


----------



## Samwell Seed Well (Jan 13, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> This Bar light only runs on the "Mega Drive" system though correct?


I believe so


----------



## Hairybuds (Jan 13, 2022)

Good gravy, so much written and I’m about to nod off, but what grows


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 14, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> Have any pictures of your rig?
> Yes, Philips Par led's are awesome. There's am even nicer spectrum than that in a 17W.
> Better bigger buds than hps? Not so sold on that


Here A picture of my LED 


As the lights go off, I have put 2 x3ft tube light on(timer) so I can water or take pictures, you can one shining though the led.
I turned these plants over to flower 31 days ago(12/12)

flower these off early 6" high/wide so you could say 18 days true flower(pistils start to grow).
the plants under the HPS don't look 100% buds are a little smaller and some fan leaves have curled.

buds under the LED


under the HPS


----------



## OneHitDone (Jan 14, 2022)

Markshomegrown said:


> Here A picture of my LED
> 
> View attachment 5066699View attachment 5066700
> As the lights go off, I have put 2 x3ft tube light on(timer) so I can water or take pictures, you can one shining though the led.
> ...


What model bulb is it that you are using? You removed diffuser and added a reflector?


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 14, 2022)

OneHitDone said:


> What model bulb is it that you are using? You removed diffuser and added a reflector?



you can buy packs of 10 on amazon for £32
I also added 4 4000k 12w led bulbs (same as bulb above, just the 4k version)
I used mylar and cut it into a comb shape, stuck it with double-sided tape, fits like a glove


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 14, 2022)

These bulbs look good for the price led bulb


----------



## ComputerSaysNo (Jan 14, 2022)

@Markshomegrown I love the idea, so obvious yet so few people are doing it. I've seen one video where a guy made a vertical grow in his basement (not cannabis, mostly leafy greens), and he also used regular LED bulbs from a hardware store.

Also I don't see why the performance from a self-made array of LED bulbs should be much different from a commercial grow light. You even have flexibility of manipulating the spectrum by putting in bulbs of different color temperatures.

Some quick maths (in Euros):

Standard E27 socket around €2
LED bulb 11W around €2 (this varies, can be even cheaper); let's say 0.2€/W
not much else needed in terms of materials
That means per 100W from 11W bulbs one pays €50 tops, and then there is a lot of flexibility for how to configure the array. This is a lot cheaper than regular grow light LED boards (or bars).

I've snatched a 100W Mars Hydro at Amazon for around €75 a while ago, and that already felt like a complete steal to me. This solution here is even cheaper by a margin.

It's possible to have single bulbs cover dark corners, very easy to make a vertical setup etc.

Some downsides that come to mind:

Dimmable bulbs are a lot more expensive, and then a quantum board is cheaper. Varying light intensity has to be achieved by making parts of the bulb array switchable.
Possibly the quantum boards have a better spectrum for growing. *I would really like some definitive information if this is true.* Right now I don't think the difference is that big; it would have to be quite the difference in efficiency for it to matter (say, 20%?)
DIY required, bulb heads have to be shaved off for maximum efficiency, messing with electric installations can be dangerous.
More bulky than a quantum board.
Right now I'm glad that I haven't invested a lot in regular LED lights as of late, because this is so much cheaper, I really need to try this.


----------



## ComputerSaysNo (Jan 14, 2022)

Quite relevant to the above, here is a very informative video of somebody building an array of LED bulbs and doing precise measurements on the efficiency.

It's striking how much it helps to cut the diffusers off the bulbs.

He gets around 1.8 umol/J efficiency; really good in my opinion.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 14, 2022)

Small plant, lollipopped. Low yield but happy with bud shape, size, density, frost, taste, appearance, and smoke. A little rough on the grinder.

elev8's Gorilla Cookies from clone:


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 14, 2022)

Samwell Seed Well said:


> I believe so


Saw that, wanted to ask about it. That driver looks huge. and adds to price?


----------



## Samwell Seed Well (Jan 14, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> Saw that, wanted to ask about it. That driver looks huge. and adds to price?


Ya, you can see i here in a photo of a 400 watt bar... those panels can't be more then 3-4 inches so not to big..

Proprietary power sources always tricky if and when the sources dries up or worse

Standardizes


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 14, 2022)

ComputerSaysNo said:


> Quite relevant to the above, here is a very informative video of somebody building an array of LED bulbs and doing precise measurements on the efficiency.
> 
> It's striking how much it helps to cut the diffusers off the bulbs.
> 
> He gets around 1.8 umol/J efficiency; really good in my opinion.


This is 1.8 umol/j with 6 bulbs, overlapping the light from each bulb will be more effective with a larger panel but this is the same with any led you buy, adding the reflectors makes them even more effective.


----------



## Apostatize (Jan 14, 2022)

Markshomegrown said:


> This is 1.8 umol/j with 6 bulbs, overlapping the light from each bulb will be more effective with a larger panel but this is the same with any led you buy, adding the reflectors makes them even more effective.


I see diy can ~get you there μmol/J-wise -- and it's tremendous what you've done -- but what's the PAR range look like? To what extent can you copy a spectrum out there in the market (apologies if you pasted the PAR range on an earlier comment)? 

I'm not familiar with the arrays of bulbs available online. For example, does Osram make a far-red bulb?


----------



## Markshomegrown (Jan 14, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> I see diy can ~get you there μmol/J-wise -- and it's tremendous what you've done -- but what's the PAR range look like? To what extent can you copy a spectrum out there in the market (apologies if you pasted the PAR range on an earlier comment)?
> 
> I'm not familiar with the arrays of bulbs available online. For example, does Osram make a far-red bulb?


Thanks Apostatize, The Philips 13w 2700k look a very effective bulb, from this picture on their website, 

So that's 24 x 2700k(13w) bulbs and 4 of the 4000k bulbs(12w) total of 360w
1.1m x 1.1m = 1.21m2, 360/1.21 = 297w per m2 
across the canopy its between 38k(corners) and 45k max, so the average is about 42k 


799 / 297 = 2.69 watts uMoles/j
not saying the DIY led is this effective but it could be closer to 2.5 (useable uMoles/j)
Lots of LEDs base their uMoles/j on the center being really high, 1500 par

lift the panel up, so the center reads 800, and the uMoles/j drops down, easy 30%


----------



## ComputerSaysNo (Jan 14, 2022)

Apostatize said:


> what's the PAR range look like? To what extent can you copy a spectrum out there in the market (apologies if you pasted the PAR range on an earlier comment)?


The guy from the video answers that question in another video: the exact spectrum does not matter much with regards to PAR, as long as you don't go too far into one extreme.

So you can use 2700K, 3000K, 4000K, 5000K lights and they'll all be very close in PAR.

The red lights added to modern grow lights make the light more efficient, but the LEDs are also more expensive than the white ones, so that's why they only use a few of them per board.

This was one of the questions that was nagging me, but he answered that very well, and it's all backed up by measurements.

So with the modern lights you spend (a lot) more money upfront, mainly due to the expensive red LEDs being added, but then you get more PAR efficiency, so you might make it up with additional yield, or respectively a lower power bill.

I think going with simple LED bulbs is extremely good to keep mother plants, for small veg areas, and cloning, simply because you just need adequate lighting and not more. Maybe for flowering a better light will pay off in the long run, especially with high energy costs (in my area energy is ~0.3€/kWh...)


----------

