Hortilux Ceramic HPS - Total trash?

growin-Jables said:

H


High end LEDS that cost grands per fixture ....compared to 400 bucks for a 630. And I am not sure that all high end leds can beat out cmh on yields. I yielded 700 grams with my 630w cmh and was only filling 2/3 of my 5x5 text with 6 plants. So probably 1.5gpw or more would be possible with perfect conditions

Click to expand...

mauricem00 said:

in farming there is always a trade off between yield and quality. HPS or high end LED's like 561 strip lights will produce slightly higher yields than CMH or T5's but slightly lower quality. for a PU MMJ grower like myself quality is more important but for a commercial grower yield is more important. a gram of white widow with a 16% THC content sells for the same price as a gram of white widow with a 19% thc content at the dispensary so there is nothing to gain from sacrificing yield for quality.

Click to expand...

homebrewer said:

I'd bet the farm on the fact that in a blind test no one could tell the difference between herb grown with any of the popular lighting options these days.

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

Then you would lose your farm.
I've always been able to tell the differance between differant lighting and growing conditions...
Most people can tell a huge differance between clones of the exact same strain from differant growers.
Every variable counts.

Click to expand...

homebrewer said:

I agree, every variable does count, and hardly anyone has all of those variables dialed in to the extent that lighting makes any kind of noticeable difference to the end user.

It's like homebrewers talking about the differences between extract and all-grain brewing. There is a difference but in competitions that I've judged I've never been like 'oh, this is definitely extract'. Quality is quality, my friend.

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

If by end user you mean somebody that doesnt have a refined palette, sure, those people can never tell a differance. But those people are becoming more and more rare.
I honestly believe the bulb makes a big difference. So far the photos I'm seeing of buds this bulb produces are a HUGE letdown.
Lots of these new bulbs are letdowns to me honestly... they seem to be doing fantastic at growing the plant in veg, and growing leaf in bud, but I dont want that.
A high leaf to calyx ratio has never been a desirable trait... but led grows some leafy fox trailed bud, an it's looking like this chps does also.

Gimme a 1kw super hps hortilux over this imo. Tried an true.
BUT I still want to see lots of pictures of dried bud before I get too judgy. These are just my impressions so far.

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

An btw, not all homebrew is created equally... I only have a little experiance with it but in my own stock I can tell you want I personally prefer hands down over other of my own stock.

At the end of the day I can always tell differances in every change I make, and I'm the one I grow for or brew for. If I can tell, fuck the plebs.

Click to expand...

homebrewer said:

I'm not saying that we shouldn't make the tweaks in our garden that we think produce the best flowers, it's just that tweaking something like lighting from, as you said, the tried and true super HPS has probably negligible gains (if any) that would go unnoticed by the patients we grow for. For instance, missing a watering or two during flower can take herb from a hypothetical A+ to an A-. Dry a little too fast and skimp on the cure and now you're down to B/B+ territory. It doesn't take much to negatively change the quality. Now if you're already at A+ and you tweak lighting, who is going to notice a difference? If you're growing B+ herb and you change your lighting, who cares, right? Your herb still sucks, lol.




Sometimes it's hard to judge our own though because like you I make lots of tweaks that I *think* make a difference but I have yet to hear a comment about how 'something was better this time'. We're too close, unsolicited feedback on an increase in quality is what I'm talking about here.

Click to expand...

TheSacredTrichome said:

I’d like to Chime in on this. I’ve been using hortilux since I started growing almost 20 years ago; looks to me they are up to only bs, now. Ive been running three chps/SE600 for about 60 days and can say this; definately not what they are hyped to be. Very intense heat, leafy plants, stressed in different ways. Definately loses compared to the super hps. For all those who know about the science of spectrum, and were posting about the light having terrible par and 50% IR, like a heater lol! and than those who know nothing about the technicalities, just “fan boys” who believe it’s good because it’s hortilux. Seems like hortilux doesn’t know what to do anymore to gain more popularity in the cannabis market? Bottom line

CHPS is not a great spectrum for cannabis, and if it would work well and not stress plants would probably take more work than it’s worth. Stick with CMH Or super hps

Click to expand...

TheSacredTrichome said:

Total trash I’m switching back to super hps today, thankfully, my plants will be much happier , stick to what you know

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

I get what your saying, but that's why you make a change, run it for a while, and then try the old way again.

I agree the new change hype can be missleading. Its helpful to go back and be sure.
My hope was that the chps would grow a bud like the super hps, I still haven't seen anyone running it the way I would, so it's hard to tell what my results would look like. Most of these shots look heat stressed imo...
im pretty sure these bulbs can run on any digital ballast, since they run on the hortilux gold eballast, and those came out before these bulbs did. I'd really like to see them ran in a air cooled with glass situation, preferably 2 bulbs in one hood to make it 1200 watts. But almost nobody grows like that now..

Click to expand...

MichiganMedGrower said:

I am considering running one in my air cooled blockbuster. I run 2 with 600 super hps. I prefer the natural light of my 315 cmh but it is not powerful enough to match the 600 so.......

If they give even the same results I would prefer to run them. I am concerned they need a different height than the super hps.

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

Pretty much everyone in my circle is pot snobs.

every time I try something under 1000 watts it is a poor fit for me. I'm just so used to throwing a ton of watts in my area and that gives me a certain kind of results I look for.
I've heard they have 1000 watt de cmh now though so that's got my interest.

I used to have a fixture that could hold 3 bulbs and I'd regularly put 2x 1kw hps bulbs in it. I'm def gonna need to get more like that if this trend continues towards low art bulbs..

I'm holding out for a 1kw chps an I'll give it a shot if they do.

Click to expand...

MichiganMedGrower said:

I have low ceilings in my old converted lake cabin. The 600’s in the 3.5’x3.5’ space are more than powerful enough to grow great weed.

I can’t hold on to it long enough to even get a decent cure. And I like it. And commercial growers here and other places keep requesting it.

Pretty sure I have the right light for my space.

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

Sure, your growing in a 3.5x3.5 I wouldnt do that myself. My tent is a 5x5, and its stretching a 1000w to do it. And if i took the tent down it would be to do the whole room.

I just dont dig small areas like that, but I understand that's where the biggest portion of growers is at now, small tents, closets. 2x2 and 3x3 is super super common.

Click to expand...

MichiganMedGrower said:

I am considering running one in my air cooled blockbuster. I run 2 with 600 super hps. I prefer the natural light of my 315 cmh but it is not powerful enough to match the 600 so.......

If they give even the same results I would prefer to run them. I am concerned they need a different height than the super hps.

I will run it on my galaxy ballast.

Click to expand...

growin-Jables said:

Well the cant expect alot of power for flower with only 315w ...which is why I use the 315 for veg and 630w cmh for flower

Click to expand...

growin-Jables said:

H


High end LEDS that cost grands per fixture ....compared to 400 bucks for a 630. And I am not sure that all high end leds can beat out cmh on yields. I yielded 700 grams with my 630w cmh and was only filling 2/3 of my 5x5 text with 6 plants. So probably 1.5gpw or more would be possible with perfect conditions

Click to expand...

mauricem00 said:

I built a test light using bridgelux strips and it matched the yield of my 150 watt HPS while using only 112 watts of power (measured from the wall. but it cost more to build than a plug and play 150 watt HPS and 1000 watt DE HPS or CMH are so much more efficient that on paper their seems to be no advantage using the best LEDs on the market and it would cost 4 time as much for a DIY led that powerful. DE HPS lights are still the most popular with commercial growers up here but many are switching to CMH lights.LEDs are just not cost effective way of growing. as a small PU MMJ closet grower I prefer T5 HOs . they are just as efficient as SE CMH and with modern horticultural bulbs I can get any spectrum I want. I'm currently running enhanced UV and DEEP RED (660nm bulb) but we are all different and have different needs and goals. and if a new grower is too lazy to do their own research they may pay for their education the hard way

Click to expand...

growingforfun said:

Pretty much everyone in my circle is pot snobs.

every time I try something under 1000 watts it is a poor fit for me. I'm just so used to throwing a ton of watts in my area and that gives me a certain kind of results I look for.
I've heard they have 1000 watt de cmh now though so that's got my interest.

I used to have a fixture that could hold 3 bulbs and I'd regularly put 2x 1kw hps bulbs in it. I'm def gonna need to get more like that if this trend continues towards low art bulbs..

I'm holding out for a 1kw chps an I'll give it a shot if they do.

Click to expand...