Ttystikk's vertical goodness

P

PurpletrainWrecker

Member
Hey sorry did not mean to bash your grow its just what i am observing and from prior experience in the same boat them lower buds just drained the fuck out of my grow what looked like a 2 - 3 pound plant ended up being 3/4 dry and bagged
To this day i still think weed ghosts stole some weed cause it sure looked like lots on the table only to go to it 2 days later and think Where the fuck did it all go
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
PurpletrainWrecker said:
Hey sorry did not mean to bash your grow its just what i am observing and from prior experience in the same boat them lower buds just drained the fuck out of my grow what looked like a 2 - 3 pound plant ended up being 3/4 dry and bagged
To this day i still think weed ghosts stole some weed cause it sure looked like lots on the table only to go to it 2 days later and think Where the fuck did it all go
Click to expand...
Vertical can look different. Keep in mind the bottom of the plant is getting as much light as the top. Plus it's tough to get a handle on the scale of it; that plant is six full feet tall from the top of its netpot. COB LED is also working in my favor, the buds it grows are tighter, harder and frostier. What's not to love? Lol
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
WestDenverPioneer said:
Less is more. Pruning to control the plant will (usually) give a better result.

Tittysticks method is scaled larger, but takes longer. Most of the comments on yield are comparing the longer grow time to harvest vs his total yield.
Click to expand...
Quite so.

Yet, the only part that takes longer is veg- and even then, only once; once you have your pipeline of stages filled, things crank out at the rate of your staging, which depending on how many stages you want to run can be anything, and indeed can be much shorter than the two weeks it takes to clone more plants!
 
sixstring2112

sixstring2112

Well-Known Member
yeah so without clusterfuckin that other thread i thought i would post in here.these both went from t5 to gavita.under the t5 they are within 2 inches of the tubes.under gavita i have them about 24 to 30 in away.my point is the intensity prob aint what has them messed up unless you have those cobs so close they are cooking them,like 6 to 12 in away?
IMG_0949.JPG

thats ^^^8 days in from t5 and shes sitting under a cluster of 3 gavita set at 825w

IMG_0951.JPG

same gig here,this plant prob has more light than any other i have grown in a long time lol.like about 80w per sq ft haha,my shop is low on plants right now so i just give her some extra space.but if i turn off too many lamps ill have hot spots .
i do see growing plants under the mars panel is quite a change up,those plants need alot more calmag than i have ever used on my stuff.it took me a few runs to figure out why the plants under led always looked hungry. im guessing your cobs are too close or the plants dont like what they are being fed under those lights.different spectrums different food needs type of thing.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
sixstring2112 said:
yeah so without clusterfuckin that other thread i thought i would post in here.these both went from t5 to gavita.under the t5 they are within 2 inches of the tubes.under gavita i have them about 24 to 30 in away.my point is the intensity prob aint what has them messed up unless you have those cobs so close they are cooking them,like 6 to 12 in away?
View attachment 3710089

thats ^^^8 days in from t5 and shes sitting under a cluster of 3 gavita set at 825w

View attachment 3710090

same gig here,this plant prob has more light than any other i have grown in a long time lol.like about 80w per sq ft haha,my shop is low on plants right now so i just give her some extra space.but if i turn off too many lamps ill have hot spots .
i do see growing plants under the mars panel is quite a change up,those plants need alot more calmag than i have ever used on my stuff.it took me a few runs to figure out why the plants under led always looked hungry. im guessing your cobs are too close or the plants dont like what they are being fed under those lights.different spectrums different food needs type of thing.
Click to expand...
The feed never changes and the plants put out green shoots after. Maybe it's temperature shock. They go from 80s to low 70s.

200W per panel to 900W of much more efficient lighting = 6 to 10 times more light.

The COBS are 18-24" from the plants.

The plants that did the best were in front of modules that had problems and so were shut off for a week or two right at the beginning of bloom. It's this data point that leads me to believe I'm shocking them.
 
Michael Huntherz

Michael Huntherz

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
The feed never changes and the plants put out green shoots after. Maybe it's temperature shock. They go from 80s to low 70s.

200W per panel to 900W of much more efficient lighting = 6 to 10 times more light.

The COBS are 18-24" from the plants.

The plants that did the best were in front of modules that had problems and so were shut off for a week or two right at the beginning of bloom. It's this data point that leads me to believe I'm shocking them.
Click to expand...
Having seen those plants in person leads me to agree with you.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
DesertGrow89 said:
You mentioned you're vegging in an ebb and flow system can ya show us some pics?
Click to expand...
Wellllllllll... not anymore? Lol I'm switching to coco so since such things have to start at the beginning, I'm not running ebb n flood anymore.

The problem happens between prebloom veg and bloom- and both of those stages are actually RDWC. They too will switch to coco as the youngsters grow up and move thru the system.

The first nutes they get in bloom are the very same veg nutes they've gotten all along. A week or two in they get a nute change which starts to shade towards a bloom recipe. By then, they've already shown shock.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Math on the transition problem from veg to bloom;

In prebloom veg;
330W x 4 = 1320W/6 panels = 220W x 38% PAR efficiency = 84 PAR Watts per trellis panel.

In bloom;
225W x 4 = 900W per panel x .56 PAR efficiency = 504 PAR Watts per panel.

504/84= 6x increase in PAR light from one to the next. Seems like an awful lot, which might explain what the plants are doing and when they're doing it.
 
Last edited:
OneHitDone

OneHitDone

Well-Known Member
ttystikk said:
Wellllllllll... not anymore? Lol I'm switching to coco so since such things have to start at the beginning, I'm not running ebb n flood anymore.

The problem happens between prebloom veg and bloom- and both of those stages are actually RDWC. They too will switch to coco as the youngsters grow up and move thru the system.

The first nutes they get in bloom are the very same veg nutes they've gotten all along. A week or two in they get a nute change which starts to shade towards a bloom recipe. By then, they've already shown shock.
Click to expand...
I call out the big dip around 480nm :mrgreen:
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
Netherfly said:
Maiiin @ttystikk the more i look at your topic the more i feel like tilting my panel :mrgreen:
Click to expand...
Do it! We need to get past the idea that we're merely replicating Mother Nature indoors; the environment is not the same and so different approaches are called for.

The advantages of vertical over flatlander style are many. An incomplete list;
Smaller footprint
Easier to ventilate
Eliminate reflectors and their attendant efficiency losses
Easier to work with, train and manage
Plants like to grow UP!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top