Your Grandpa's Weed or is UV supplementation really needed?

Olive Drab Green

Olive Drab Green

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
WTF are you talking about??? I was asking a legitimate question, I'm curious is all. Why are you defending something that doesn't need defending? Did I question his strains? Did I question his ability? I'm thinking you just like to see yourself in print!! Fuck!!!
Click to expand...
Dude, reread what I said. Nothing I said was said to incite. I even admitted I didn't know the context of your conversation. I was just giving you some perspective on the man. I was just giving you a basis upon which you can build trust for his understanding of it all. Relax.
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green said:
Dude, reread what I said. Nothing I said was said to incite. I even admitted I didn't know the context of your conversation. I was just giving you some perspective on the man. I was just giving you a basis upon which you can build trust for his understanding of it all. Relax.
Click to expand...
Ummm why would anything I asked require you to think you needed to build trust between us? It was just questions to him about his grow, it was actually RM in his former self that turned me on to T5's a few years ago.
 
Budley Doright

Budley Doright

Well-Known Member
So this is the thread that I was reading that made me think you had re thought your canopy temps.

"It's not some random thing I pull average two a light of top quality at 71° canopy running 1300ppm at 35% and I'm not the only one @RM3 and now we have @ttystikk changing his as well as he has seen the light. Better quality better yield. I have a agricultural consultant business and genetics company and have worked commercially. 71° enriched at 1300ppm with 35% rh is optimal didn't use to get a bonus if we didn't pull over 2.3lbs a light in rooms of 180 plants 20+ strains 45k watts"
 
BobCajun

BobCajun

Well-Known Member
I found that only using the reptile lights for the final 3 days was better than for the final full week. I think it may actually degrade it after a certain amount of time. But then I run them for the full photoperiod. I've read that it works if you run them for 15 minutes of the hour for 4 hours in the middle of the photoperiod. Well, that's only an hour a day total so if you did that for the final 2 weeks it would only be 14 hours total UV. That may be why I only need to run them for 3 days for 12 hours, total 36 hours. Actually I leave the lights on continuously for the last 24-48 hours so it's little more. Anyway, seems to work, though it's just a subjective judgment.
 
N

NewI

Well-Known Member
BobCajun said:
I found that only using the reptile lights for the final 3 days was better than for the final full week. I think it may actually degrade it after a certain amount of time. But then I run them for the full photoperiod. I've read that it works if you run them for 15 minutes of the hour for 4 hours in the middle of the photoperiod. Well, that's only an hour a day total so if you did that for the final 2 weeks it would only be 14 hours total UV. That may be why I only need to run them for 3 days for 12 hours, total 36 hours. Actually I leave the lights on continuously for the last 24-48 hours so it's little more. Anyway, seems to work, though it's just a subjective judgment.
Click to expand...
I think many people run it for 4 min instead on the 15. And it's a bit logical to not do it for 12h. Less is better? You give the planta time to rest/process what's happening? Idk...
 
BobCajun

BobCajun

Well-Known Member
NewI said:
I think many people run it for 4 min instead on the 15. And it's a bit logical to not do it for 12h. Less is better? You give the planta time to rest/process what's happening? Idk...
Click to expand...
Possibly, but maybe it's the total dose regardless of how it's delivered.
 
Chunky Stool

Chunky Stool

Well-Known Member
BobCajun said:
I found that only using the reptile lights for the final 3 days was better than for the final full week. I think it may actually degrade it after a certain amount of time. But then I run them for the full photoperiod. I've read that it works if you run them for 15 minutes of the hour for 4 hours in the middle of the photoperiod. Well, that's only an hour a day total so if you did that for the final 2 weeks it would only be 14 hours total UV. That may be why I only need to run them for 3 days for 12 hours, total 36 hours. Actually I leave the lights on continuously for the last 24-48 hours so it's little more. Anyway, seems to work, though it's just a subjective judgment.
Click to expand...
I run five lizard lights the entire photoperiod, veg & flower.
My latest sativa run looks pretty damn frosty for a bunch of stunted clones that were started outdoors. (They are sleeping or I'd snap a fresh pic.) Durban Poison plants seem to love the UV, but Jack Herer gave me nothing but problems. Not sure if it was a UV sensitivity, but it definitely didn't finish right. Took too long and kept popping bananas. Finished product was disappointing. Now I know why people call it "Jock Horror". I won't be growing that one again.
 
RM3

RM3

Well-Known Member
Budley Doright said:
So this is the thread that I was reading that made me think you had re thought your canopy temps.

"It's not some random thing I pull average two a light of top quality at 71° canopy running 1300ppm at 35% and I'm not the only one @RM3 and now we have @ttystikk changing his as well as he has seen the light. Better quality better yield. I have a agricultural consultant business and genetics company and have worked commercially. 71° enriched at 1300ppm with 35% rh is optimal didn't use to get a bonus if we didn't pull over 2.3lbs a light in rooms of 180 plants 20+ strains 45k watts"
Click to expand...
I agree that a "room" temp of 72 and an RH of 32% are the sweet spot which is what he is sayin here but I run the canopy at 90
 
BobCajun

BobCajun

Well-Known Member
Chunky Stool said:
I run five lizard lights the entire photoperiod, veg & flower.
My latest sativa run looks pretty damn frosty for a bunch of stunted clones that were started outdoors. (They are sleeping or I'd snap a fresh pic.) Durban Poison plants seem to love the UV, but Jack Herer gave me nothing but problems. Not sure if it was a UV sensitivity, but it definitely didn't finish right. Took too long and kept popping bananas. Finished product was disappointing. Now I know why people call it "Jock Horror". I won't be growing that one again.
Click to expand...
But lizard lights are costly and their UV output degrades within 6 months to a year of steady use. By only using it at the very end I save on bulbs and also get more yield because people have reported decreased yields with UV. Though just subjective, it seems to me like you only need the UV for a few days at the end.
 
Chunky Stool

Chunky Stool

Well-Known Member
BobCajuhttps://www.amazon.com/Exo-Terra-Repti-Glo-Fluorescent-Terrarium/dp/B00101GDIG/ref=pd_sim_199_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B00101GDIG&pd_rd_r=HSXTNDTWESSC8NZNN45H&pd_rd_w=slRTy&pd_rd_wg=mlnEz&psc=1&refRID=HSXTNDTWESSC8NZNN45Hn said:
But lizard lights are costly and their UV output degrades within 6 months to a year of steady use. By only using it at the very end I save on bulbs and also get more yield because people have reported decreased yields with UV. Though just subjective, it seems to me like you only need the UV for a few days at the end.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the tip! I forgot about the CFL bulbs degrading. Do you know how much intensity is lost after six months? I probably need to replace three of my bulbs. Or maybe I'll just run them and replace them all at once in a couple of months.
They really aren't that expensive. I can replace all five bulbs for a little over $60.
https://www.amazon.com/Exo-Terra-Repti-Glo-Fluorescent-Terrarium/dp/B00101JI2Y/ref=sr_1_2?s=pet-supplies&ie=UTF8&qid=1479919503&sr=1-2&keywords=exo+terra+light+bulb
-- edit --
Oops... I use the 150s, which are a couple of dollars more. So it will cost a little over $70 to replace all five.
https://www.amazon.com/Exo-Terra-Repti-Glo-Fluorescent-Terrarium/dp/B00101GDIG/ref=pd_sim_199_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B00101GDIG&pd_rd_r=HSXTNDTWESSC8NZNN45H&pd_rd_w=slRTy&pd_rd_wg=mlnEz&psc=1&refRID=HSXTNDTWESSC8NZNN45H
 
BobCajun

BobCajun

Well-Known Member
Chunky Stool said:
Thanks for the tip! I forgot about the CFL bulbs degrading. Do you know how much intensity is lost after six months? I probably need to replace three of my bulbs. Or maybe I'll just run them and replace them all at once in a couple of months.
They really aren't that expensive. I can replace all five bulbs for a little over $60.
https://www.amazon.com/Exo-Terra-Repti-Glo-Fluorescent-Terrarium/dp/B00101JI2Y/ref=sr_1_2?s=pet-supplies&ie=UTF8&qid=1479919503&sr=1-2&keywords=exo+terra+light+bulb
-- edit --
Oops... I use the 150s, which are a couple of dollars more. So it will cost a little over $70 to replace all five.
https://www.amazon.com/Exo-Terra-Repti-Glo-Fluorescent-Terrarium/dp/B00101GDIG/ref=pd_sim_199_7?_encoding=UTF8&pd_rd_i=B00101GDIG&pd_rd_r=HSXTNDTWESSC8NZNN45H&pd_rd_w=slRTy&pd_rd_wg=mlnEz&psc=1&refRID=HSXTNDTWESSC8NZNN45H
Click to expand...
I don't know offhand, no. An SPF meter might give a rough indication of the output, though I've read that SPF readings from the bulbs are unusually high.
 
Chunky Stool

Chunky Stool

Well-Known Member
BobCajun said:
I don't know offhand, no. An SPF meter might give a rough indication of the output, though I've read that SPF readings from the bulbs are unusually high.
Click to expand...
No doubt! I was serious when I said those things give me a tan if I spend time around them. Got them all on a single switch now so I can easily turn them off while I'm working in the area.
 
Last edited:
elkamino

elkamino

Well-Known Member
CannaBruh said:
My guy, what is your camera!? :shock:
Click to expand...
LOL :weed:

Canon EOS Rebel T4 body w/80-200mm F4L lens. Amateur-level camera w/pro-level lens. To get the serious macro I use a cheapo "lens extension kit". Any digital SLR with detachable lenses can use the extensions, they're just empty tubes that move the lens away from the sensor. So off-brands work fine. They are HARD to use, depth of field is about 1 trichome, so angles, light, focus, aperture are all way more critical than non-macro photography. And auto settings like exposure and focus don't work worth a damn. :bigjoint:

For Canon bodies here's one for $15:
https://www.amazon.com/Fotodiox-Canon-Extension-Extreme-Close-Ups/dp/B003Y60DZO/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1479932173&sr=8-2&keywords=canon+extension+tubes
 
elkamino

elkamino

Well-Known Member
Chunky Stool said:
Is that mold/PM in the first pic? (bottom leaf)
Looks suspicious. Tric tips don't spread out like that. They generally stick to whatever touched them.
Click to expand...
Fortunately NO! :bigjoint:

Its not mold, its the plants version of the placenta, the micro-thin skin that shrouds the cotyledons inside the seed. Looks like mold to me too in the pic but alas I'm in the clear. Haven't had any PM in the garden since I moved to Anchorage from Seward where we got over 90" of rain! Sucked. Despite dehumidifiers and fans we had mold on the plants and carpet and ceiling and got the hell outta there!

I'll dig a pic out that shows it better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top