Cloud Lighting is a name I made up because I don't know what it is called. Think I may have read it in a cannabis culture mag years ago. Some growers in Holland that would turn some of their lights off during flower to mimic the fact that sometimes clouds move in front of the sun and block light. Anyway the results were that by using half the watts they got 1.5 the yield compared to using all the lights. I thought it was very interesting but I never could utilize it.
Anybody ever try cloud lighting?
- Thread starter DaFreak
- Start date
srh88
Well-Known Member
Can you post the data?
srh88
Well-Known Member
Just seems like a waste of time and a coincidence on the growers side that they yielded more. But what do I know (other than the facts plants need light to grow) cutting off their life source every once in a while might be beneficial if you double the amount of milk you feed every other feeding and add a hair more cal/mag. Them bitches love cal/magCloud cover is not the same as turn out the light.
srh88
Well-Known Member
With a light mover you are just moving the light to hit spots that your light normally didn't hit. You posted about cutting off lights. Where's the source? You cant make a claim and get mad when I laugh at it.. considering you didn't even try to back up the claim. I call shenanigans
Singlemalt
Well-Known Member
Back in Grad school there was a lab in my dept. that did something similar; It's been over 40yrs so I don't recall the specifics; a growth chamber was rewired and outfitted with a pulsed timer (on-off 30 second cycle). 2 week old pea seedlings were used, and grown through 6 weeks. Control were pea seedlings from the same germination batch in a conventional growth chamber, one set of 18 hr standard day-night and the other was a 12-12 cycle. The flashers had more biomass than the 12-12 and just slightly more than the 18 hr cycle. There have also been present time exps using various species of algae that have shown great biomass under pulsed lights than normal cycles. The big drawback is that the increased biomass doesn't counter the massive wear/tear on the equipment to allow pulsing.
edit: and the power consumption was atrocious
edit: and the power consumption was atrocious
^^^OMG, now that is funny, can't just hit the like on this one.
srh88
Well-Known Member
Like I said, cannabis culture mag. I’m not making claims, I’m asking if anybody remembers it and has done it. You can call anything you want. It was an interesting story, made sense. If I remember correctly you’d need a certain number of lights in grids and turn them half off in checker board formation. Half the power and 50% increase.
srh88
Well-Known Member
No.. more power than usual. Most of the power goes into firing up the lights
These weren’t flashing, I forget the timing but over a 12 hour cycle they were split 6/6 or 3/3/3/3 but nothing too wild.
Most? Like what % of the power of a 12 hour cycle goes to firing up a bulb? Most would be over 50%. You sure?
srh88
Well-Known Member
About as sure as you are with thinking cutting lights is smart.. because clouds
srh88
Well-Known Member
Can someone post a gif for me? I'm too lazy to do my own research and find one on google.
Who's that remind you of freak?
Hahahaaa. Okay.. It an optimal outdoor grow. There would be no clouds.. Cloud are a limiting factor in outdoor and so are rainy day.. What would be a dream would be rain on a clear bleu sky... Has as cloud passes in frot of tge sun. Lumen goes down and photosythesis radiation par are filtered.. 1.5 pound grow mean nothing alone.. Canopy size and light intesity (penetration of light) and actual spectrum of light and the strain use all have an impact on final yield. The yield/m2 of a strain givin in a foot of camopy thickness. Lets says 550g per meter for a strain, then needd to be complemented by a light that covers the canopy in order to acheive that 550g. So giving the factor that you normal grow a strain that gives out 450g per square meters and then switch to a strain that can give 650g per squar meter and start playing with light intensity by lwering watage of by shuting lights out here and then and get 550g from that strain. And have 150g more then your average 400 g strain. Maybe you would be under that you yield more then you think. But the fack woult be that you've grown 100g less then actual strain suggest.... So no, you don't get more photosynthisis activity by reducing photosynthisis factor in your grow set up.. If you reduce a decisif factor in growing youbreduce growing performance in general.