Just bought my Model 48SAMS from Timber can't wait to join the big boys.

Randomblame said:

Nice spectrum and for sure useful to increase over all efficiency. Far-red for instance can be useful because it allows the plants to ripen out faster and it compensates for the different states of excitement of PS-I and PS-II which occur with LED lighting.(see paper below).
Red and deep reds photosyntetic radiation is used to 100 and 98% by the plants. No energy is wasted for less efficient wavelength. If you add these wavelength to your white LED fixture you pump up the efficiency of the whole light.
I see enough reasons why they are permanently sold out ..

Click to expand...

Randomblame said:

Nice spectrum and for sure useful to increase over all efficiency. Far-red for instance can be useful because it allows the plants to ripen out faster and it compensates for the different states of excitement of PS-I and PS-II which occur with LED lighting.(see paper below).
Red and deep reds photosyntetic radiation is used to 100 and 98% by the plants. No energy is wasted for less efficient wavelength. If you add these wavelength to your white LED fixture you pump up the efficiency of the whole light.
I see enough reasons why they are permanently sold out ..

Click to expand...

Randomblame said:

Good question! Such research specifically for cannabis does not yet exist but it doesn't matters if its lettuce or other plants. The chart below is the action spectra for 18 different species do you realy think cannabis has different requirements?
View attachment 4181758

Most plants species use far-red to recognize their direct environment. Is there any competition, are they taller than me or do I even stand in the shade of them? All these are questions that plants answer with the help of far red light and I'm 99% sure the same goes for other mechanisms related to far-red light like phytochrome far-red response, end of day treatment and like here to even out PS-I and PS-II excitation states.
There are many members here who prefer to use 3000°k/CRI90 and above(up to 10% far-red) simply because it contains twice as much far-red as 3000°k/CRI80(~5%). Due to the lower efficiency one should believe that one gets less yield with CRI90+ but that is not the case(within same generations). Far-red wavelength are outside the PAR range so why is it not less yield compared to CRI80.
I'm pretty sure the effects of additional far red shown in the paper are also partly responsible for this. If you can increase the photosynthetic efficiency by 3-5% with a slightly higher far-red share that's already a lot.

The paper says it needs 50-90μMol/s/m2 far-red that's ~8-15PAR/w/m²(far-red's QER is ~6μMol/J). Typ. top bin far-red diodes like Cree XP-E or Osram Oslon are ~0,5PAR/w @700mA(1,5w). You now can figure out how much you need for your area. But keep in mind also CRI80 white has already a bit far-red so take this into account.
But single diodes are hella expensive compared to the far-red you get for free when you choose CRI90 instead of CRI80. And lets say you use 400w CRI90 LED/m² and ~10% is above 700nm that's already up to 20PAR/w.
No need to add much more to see an effect IMO.

I'm using currently a mix of CRI80 and 93 just because F-strips are not available in CRI90 and what is available is of lower efficiency. If strips with LM561c or 301b in CRI90 were available I would not hesitate a second...

Click to expand...

Or_Gro said:

Thanks for data, i’ll work on turning it into info...

As i said earlier i understand the theory, i just want to understand hiw to apply it to cannabis in my 4x4.

I’d bet the reasearch has already been done, but our laws have made it valuable to keep the results proprietary.

I don’t understand the details in your explanation well enuff to translate into simple grower language, so what’s apparently available is still not “info” to me or others like me.

I’ll get by, just have to reinvent the wheel again, tho.

Click to expand...

Randomblame said:

Basically, I've recommended you use CRI90 to benefit from far-red. You can use a little more if you want (10-15w/m2 or in your case, 15-30w above a 4x4' area) but with CRI90 you have basically enough far-red. Too much only cause unwanted stretch.

There is no need to keep such research locked up especially not since more and more states decided to legalize it.(ye-ah, ye-ah).

Below is a bit more research about different wavelengths and for what they are used but only the last one is especially about weed. But believe me, there is no difference to other C3 plants. All plants in mother nature get the same sun light only the intensity is different depending on the location on the planet.
There are claims that aliens have exposed MJ here on earth a few thousand years ago (E.T. after all was an interstellar gardener according to William Kotzwinkle[author]), but even if, until today it had accustomed to our sun since a long time. Look at the photosytethic action spectra I've posted above and try to mimic it as good as possible. Then add other wavelengths like far-red or UVA/B to optimize the two ends of the spectrum.
While far-red can shorten the entire cycle by one week or more the high-energy wavelengths such as UVA and B will increase the drug content.
Both wavelengths have no or only slightly effects on photosynthesis but the beneficial effects are well known.

Click to expand...

Or_Gro said:

Thanks again.

I won’t be using cri 90, cuz i just bought 8 cri 80 3000K LM301b boards. And, because they only have 3% >700nm, i bought the hlg35s.

There is plenty of reason to keep basic research proprietary, it’s called competitive advantage; especially in a developing, for-profit, government-regulated industry, with huge revenue potential, that is likely to become monopolistic/ologopolistic as deep-pocketed corporations get more and more involved. Watch what happens as tobacco, alcohol, drug and agri/chem cos start getting in (yesterday, Constellation, one of the biggest alcohol corps, publicly entered). Info is $, and corps know how to proprietize it.

In other situations, universities do this research. But due to sched 1 classification, it is too risky, in the US, at least. As a result, corps - who have the cash and expertise - will do it, and they won’t put it on the internet.

Again, i understand the theory, i don’t understand how this specifically applies to and optimizes for cannabis. Sure cannabis has similar mechanisms as other short-day, c3 plants; but that doesn’t answer the questions i have.

I’ll take a look at your attachments, and see if that gets me any closer.

In the meantime, i’ll slap two hlg35s onto my two 48sams, uva-b, and sleepytime far red, and observe-adjust-repeat.

Not trying to be an ass, but your talking down at me is getting my hackles up.

Click to expand...

Humple said:

Brother @Randomblame isn't talking down to you, friend. If I recall correctly, English isn't his first language, so sometimes people take him the wrong way, but he's truly one of the most helpful and friendly members on this forum.

Click to expand...

Randomblame said:

Basically, I've recommended you use CRI90 to benefit from far-red. You can use a little more if you want (10-15w/m2 or in your case, 15-30w above a 4x4' area) but with CRI90 you have basically enough far-red. Too much only cause unwanted stretch.

There is no need to keep such research locked up especially not since more and more states decided to legalize it.(ye-ah, ye-ah).

Below is a bit more research about different wavelengths and for what they are used but only the last one is especially about weed. But believe me, there is no difference to other C3 plants. All plants in mother nature get the same sun light only the intensity is different depending on the location on the planet.
There are claims that aliens have exposed MJ here on earth a few thousand years ago (E.T. after all was an interstellar gardener according to William Kotzwinkle[author]), but even if, until today it had accustomed to our sun since a long time. Look at the photosytethic action spectra I've posted above and try to mimic it as good as possible. Then add other wavelengths like far-red or UVA/B to optimize the two ends of the spectrum.
While far-red can shorten the entire cycle by one week or more the high-energy wavelengths such as UVA and B will increase the drug content.
Both wavelengths have no or only slightly effects on photosynthesis but the beneficial effects are well known.

Click to expand...

Or_Gro said:

Thanks again.

I am familiar with chandra et al. i took time to read most of the others: very dense and non-specific to cannabis, but especially good lit review in second article.

I plan to run lightsout fr, from day 1 flower; some as yet undetermined length of time per day w/ 2 hlg 35s, after stretch; qbs at ~1350 ppfd, 13.5:10.5, 25-30c; and as yet undetermined co2 level from day 1 flower; undetermined start & daily dose of agromax uva-b; on the mainlined plants shown earlier in this thread.

Feel free to add any comments you have.

Click to expand...

Randomblame said:

Sounds like an ambitious plan. Good luck!
We have threads about FR EoD treatment and several about UVA/B. Everything you need to know can be found there. However, you must be aware that it is a sort of balancing act because you are moving your plants to the limit of what is possible and keeping them healthy will not be easy. You definitely need a hydro system to get more control over each nutrient and to ensure adequate supply.
A good nutrient mix could not be adequate under such a high radiation density. Small mistakes can quickly become problems because the metabolism is running at full speed. Make sure there is enough CalMag from the beginnimng and to add a Silicia product is also a good idea.

Hope you let us in and open a thread when you're ready. Good luck!

PS.Excuse me, if it sounds like I'm talking down to you. English is not my mother tongue as Humble already said and what I can I've learned by myself. It is not intended to create an unwanted undertone.

Click to expand...

Randomblame said:

I forget to say, that the HLG35 with red, deep- and far-red will not work/can not be used as flower initiatior.
If the plants get both wavelength 660 and 730nm like in natural sun light phytochrome red(660nm) and far-red(730nm) will be triggered both to switch from inactive back to it's active state and vice versa.
To "put them into sleep mode" you need far-red only. You don't want them to switch back immediately, they should'nt wake up until the light goes on again.
But the good news is you need only a little far-red. If you plan to run it for 15mins from lights out one of the gromau5 puks(9,6w) from rapidled should be enough for a 4x 4" area.

Edit:
Have just read, you already have a far-red trigger, so please forget the post.

Click to expand...

Or_Gro said:

I mainly post on another site (posted these maps on several sites, for just this reason), nfhiggs can confirm i have a major rag-on about light makers not posting similar mapping.

My feeling is you don’t know didley about how diff lights compare in their primary function unless there is a published (and verifiable) ppfd mapping like this.

I’ll be mapping my Kind led combos after this next flowering cycle. I already know they have pretty deep penetration and high intensity centers, but poor high-intensity uniformity across a grid @ 22”. Will see where they’re better and worse.

Hopefully companies start providing, or enough growers do something like me.

Buy a legit ppfd meter, map your light, post it to help fellow growers.

Click to expand...

Or_Gro said:

Btw, at ~70% intensity, i lose about 15-35 PPFD per clear inch of distance from light [at higher intensity i lose more per clear inch; at lower intensity i lose less per clear inch].

i lose 30-70 PPFD per canopy inch, for canopy that looks like this
View attachment 4179473

View attachment 4179476

Currently seeing this:
View attachment 4179479

Click to expand...

led1k said:

Very helpful to see the mapping. Thank you for posting! Curious what the 4 pipes(?) are coming out of the tops of your buckets... Help?

Click to expand...