NLITE HORTICULTURAL GROW LIGHTS @ Spiritgarden.co.uk

[Bushpig]

OK, here goes.  LW you started the by saying they were incapable of both veg and flowering, you have spoken to your 'friend' and seem to have now conceded in regards to veg, yet fail to recognise it in an honourable fashion.  My reference to stretch was in regards to this comment you made:

The floro grow will be stretchy and the best growth will occur on the top few inches while flowers/fruit a foot below the canopy level suffer from inadequate lighting, greatly decreasing final yield potential.

My call on Rife a few posts back was to give a second opinion on this 'stretch'.

Furthur back in the post you asked for a comparison, I told you that such a comparison was hard to make but that I asked for some details so that I may try, you ignored this and on my second atttempt you ignored that also.

You talk of evidence from your commercial grower 'in the know' yet you also say most growers around your way are 10 years behind ( duh ?)

In your latest thread, the first paragraph is rhetoric and means nothing, the second paragraph is a back peddling and shift compared to that in your original position, your third paragraph about a vocab session is nonsense, and your fourth paragraph is bitchyness, tell me LW do you debate on these forums for your ego or to actually learn ?  If so I implore you to calm youreself and look at the science and debate in a clean respectable fashion.

Anyway...to move on your last concern was

The main reason you keep those bulbs so close to the plants is that they have only a few inches of effective reach

Have you looked up and studied the inverse square law yet ? With an understanding of that coupled with a knowledge of where plants get there ligth from we can proceed somewhat,

Boooshpig

[Lumenshroom]

I think LW says it all at the bottom of all his posts - 'Wastes more than some people grow....'

Really, if you're growing trees then you're plants are the WRONG shape !!!

Also you really SHOULD look up the science, if you can look up Etoliation, then you can look up the Definition of a LUMEN with respect to the photopic response curve. Then you can compare this to typical photsynthetic efficiency spectrums of you're chosen plant. Then compare to the published SPD for the lamp you choose, and multiply the curves you have to obtain the total of photosynthetically useful radiation availble to the plants.
Then use the inverse square law to work out how tiny a fraction of that light actually reaches the different parts of your shade giving trees- assuming you using old school point source lighting tech.
Then think AGAIN about efficiency and what it means.
Then think and realise that LUMENS ONLY measure how bright a lamp appears to us, and LUMENS DO NOT measure ANYTHING that allows a useful comparsion between growlamps.

I guess you havent seen these T5HO close up (especially the Purple ones), but the funny think is, is that VPirate is correct. You put your lamps close to your plants... no so much because you have to - but because you CAN !!!

BP will no doubt tell you that new lamps are due soon that are made SPECIFICALLY to be used like that.

Why you say....
Because 95% of the light that a plant uses does not come from the tiny 5% of the sky that the sun occupies...

In fact direct hot sun for many sun loving plants can be too much and cause extreme photo-inhibition... Plant is also working flat out using its energy to cool down and repair radition damage. Also they transpire xtra water which could be a limited resource, and energy used for this extra  transpiration energy is not being used for growing or flowering.

Use lots T5 Fluoros close up....speard them about ....  you get a better spread of more even diffuse multidirectional light... the light goes where you need it  (ALL AROUND AND UNDERNEATH your buds if you like) and you use LESS light altogether because you LOSE your inverse square law losses !!
You will use LESS water and LESS nutes cos the plants are less STRESSED, and they spend more energy growing rather than surviving.

For your info LW i have tested this theory repeatedly, even using standard    20 watt CFL from woolworths. Last crop was very nice and tasty, and finished perfectly under 6 of these lamps. Wispy ? no

Now I use 24w strips because this geometry is useful for plant geometries.

So LW, read some science, then ASK intelligent questions. Professional growers been using these all over the EU these last couple of years, they HAVE published results, and ALL report that Flouros give a SMALLER TASTER crop a week or so quicker. ALL report that HPS give a chunkier yield. All report that the other effieciency and space saving factors more than compensate.

Photos ? Oh yes, I start new crops right now, and post the results here every few days.

Any one else out there growing mutant plants with unatural point source lights ?

love and Light,
Lumenshroom

[laughingwillow]

Hey, boosh, looks like you got your product supplier on board now, too eh? hahahahaha

At least this guy has used the lights in question. I doubt you, boosh have ever ran plants through the complete lifecycle with either the t-5's or hps/mh. So tow the company line.

I'll stick with chunkier growth and leave the wispy fruit to you pros in europe.

lw

[laughingwillow]

On the other hand, we do now appear to agree on one point: Runts do tend to finish about a week ahead of their "chunkier" sistas on this side of the pond, too..

lw