LED lites

[darklady]

i'm hearing alot of buzz on LED lites. has anyone seen them in use or actually tried them ?? from what i'm reading they seem too good to be true. any opions one way or the other would be greatly appreciated

:confused:

[YukonBikerGuy]

I think you have hit the nail on the head with that phrase "too good to be true". I don't know of anyone using these to grow serious buds, in spite of manufacturer's claims. Perhaps in the future this technology my reach a useable point for us ganja farmers, but so far, LEDs are not the holy grail they wish to be.

[Razz]

sorry, led's suck ass! i just read i report in maximum yeilds magazine about the subject. even though our medicine uses blue light to grow and red light to veg, which can be manipulated using led's, the overall growth of the plant uses alot of its growing potential from the other spectrums ranging from green to orange, thus effecting the final result of the plant. maybe someday they will figure out which combination of led's colorwise will be the best for our particular plant. until then, i will continue to use my current choice of lighting. i hope this info helps out.

[YukonBikerGuy]

Yes, as Razz says...." they suck ass".

[johnnyballbag]

Yeah, you should generally try to keep any and all ass-sucking out of your growroom.

[colitas]

I will try and give you more info : Let;s start with the lighting process, it's true that LED 's are in the infant stage, but there needs to be more understanding of the subject. Light bulbs emit light in more than 180 degrees for that to be usable in a (grow sit) a reflector is used to "collimate" the light beams. Trad. light bulbs actually work best in the vertical domain not in the horizontal, hence the new vertical grow "boxes" There are very few LED's on the market that are collimated(i.e. have a reflector) but check out LEDwholesalers.com for the most anywhere that I have found, unless you are going to build your own.

Next color range is the next issue to consider even thogh most talk about photosynthesis curves, most don't talk about A or B there are two types with 2 seperate spikes on a Nanometer chart. Both in the Blue range and also the Red range. Blue is commonly used for Veg. while Red is used for Flower (um..Razz) there respective peaks are in nm( chl a :420 chl b: 460m while in the red it's chl a :660 chl b: 640). While most people in the past have focused on the these and usually the chl b peaks they leave out the photosynthetic curve which controls other plant triggers , hence they had i.e. elongation problems. The answer is to use both white LED and supplement the other ranges (blue and red). Changing the ratio for Veg or Flower . More REd in Flower room while more Blue in Veg , but still having the other present. The white would cover the orange (610-620) where chl b ramps up to it's peak.

When you combine these two lessons then you have to realize that you when you use nm specific lights their lumen values change, a Blue LED is usually brighter than the Red LED. SO in LED arays with these two colorbands ONLY you are going to have a mixed result. non the less they are having some comparable yields with some two band LED's. IMHO you would need more than those two color bands, that's why you would need some white LED more likely cool white b/c of the higher lumen. Even thought a warm LED would peak in the red range, the lumens are almost cut into half. That's why I would use some Cree collimated LED with some red and blue LEDs that are Seoul Semi-Conductors. Then the only edge you could give this would then add UVB light to supplement. Since there is evidence that UVB can transfer CB?(can't remember CBN or CBG) into THC... but that is another subject.

In conclusion plants respond to overall intensity, along with specific wavelengths ..
That's why you can flower with MH even though HPS is recommeded. Even though neither one of these lights peaks in the respective nm range associated with chl in the flowring stage. For more info check out HT's Master Grower's guide with a shoot out b/w a LED UFO and a 400w MH, also 400w HPS and a 600w HPS. Seems the UFO LED yielded 12% more than the 400w MH. While in the 400w HPS comparison the LED plants had to finish longer b/c the noticed the plants elongating, so they added some blue LEDs. In the end the UFO yielded only 5% less. "However it was reported in trial B that there were markedly different potencies, with the LED plant producing much more resin.... Final calculations taking into consideration the extra week of flowering time on the LED side found that in terms of grams yielded per kilowatt hour(KwH) consumed, the HPS yield was 1/4 that of the LED side. " Against the 600w HPS the yield was 20% less, to be expected. "An interesting side note on this trial was that the plants on the LED side needed considerably less water than their HPS side. also the grower noting on the lower production against the 600w HPS said the energy savings alone would off set the loss in product compared to the 600w HPS. Interesting enough, and remember the LEDs in those UFOs are not even collimated! ha, ha sounds like the future is getting nearer and just one more thing, the reason IMHO the plants use less water is the lack of far-infrared energy from the LEDs i.e. little heat ... so no FLIR worries either ...hm, ....I wonder

[colitas]

whoops light bulbs emit light in 360 degrees in a light bulb, without a reflector. While a LED emits in a 180 and less without a "collimator" to then condense down to i.e. a 40 degree or 25 degree beam or whatever.

[Razz]

wow, that post was very imformational, thank you.