Why is my plant so compact and bushy?

[Delps8]

Mars Hydro TSL2000. Full spectrum. Not a veg light.

I haven't done any LST lol. This is all natural. So I have one telling me not to top, and one telling me to top. I'm confused. I apologize for going back and forth here, I just want to optimize the plants. I usually end up with branches too low to produce good bud, mostly popcorn. You guys leave the lower branches, too?

The biggest plus is to get lots of light on the plant. Nutes, topping, magic incantations are all for naught if you're not getting lotsa light on your plant.

My advice - spend $32 on a light meter and get 1000µmol on your grow. There's simply nothing in the grow environment that can make up for not feeding your plant. Light is the only way that plants make food and, with a light light the TSL 2000 you can get plenty of photons on your grow.

I've attached the PPFD map for that light and Mars has really upped their game. It's a little weak around the edges but you can still get a fine crop if you turn up the dial.

That doesn't click with a lot of growers but, over the past few years, I've seen a shift toward accepting that plants do better with more light.

I've also attached a picture of the parameters of the grow environment (use is as a checklist to get your grow squared away) as well as a PDF I wrote about how to convert lux meter readings to PPFD.

The only thing I'd ever grown before I grew cannabis was "old" but I've followed the basics and it's amazing how much cannabis you'll get if you just give it lots of light, water it, and don't muck with it. And I've had superb yields from autos. The way they grow, their beasts, and have zero complaints about yields.

 

[amneziaHaze]

Thanks for reminding me to take a deep breath. I’ve had a few great grows, but the last few flopped.
I’ll let it grow naturally and see what happens. The autopots don’t have tie downs to spread the branches, so the colas grow too close. I’m learning.

Cant you just melt a few hole spots? And tie them down? Or make a little W from hard wire and bend them with that

 

[Ambz90]

Thanks for reminding me to take a deep breath. I’ve had a few great grows, but the last few flopped.
I’ll let it grow naturally and see what happens. The autopots don’t have tie downs to spread the branches, so the colas grow too close. I’m learning.

I'm guna get a ring puncher kit to put metal rings in my fabric pots but u can't do that so that was a wasted convo lol! Sorry pal. Just read the "auto pot" but yh just let em grow for a bit. U still unsure then drop us all a message. Plenty of advice. Just be careful cuz u start taking too much advice then ull spin out with overload. I did. Everyone does things different. I'm sure u got a routine and u just got a bit flustered. I know the score bro! U got this. If not we got you!

 

[wheelyman]

The biggest plus is to get lots of light on the plant. Nutes, topping, magic incantations are all for naught if you're not getting lotsa light on your plant.

My advice - spend $32 on a light meter and get 1000µmol on your grow. There's simply nothing in the grow environment that can make up for not feeding your plant. Light is the only way that plants make food and, with a light light the TSL 2000 you can get plenty of photons on your grow.

I've attached the PPFD map for that light and Mars has really upped their game. It's a little weak around the edges but you can still get a fine crop if you turn up the dial.

That doesn't click with a lot of growers but, over the past few years, I've seen a shift toward accepting that plants do better with more light.

I've also attached a picture of the parameters of the grow environment (use is as a checklist to get your grow squared away) as well as a PDF I wrote about how to convert lux meter readings to PPFD.

The only thing I'd ever grown before I grew cannabis was "old" but I've followed the basics and it's amazing how much cannabis you'll get if you just give it lots of light, water it, and don't muck with it. And I've had superb yields from autos. The way they grow, their beasts, and have zero complaints about yields.

View attachment 5405028


View attachment 5405029

Very informative!! I downloaded and purchased Photone for full spectrum led.

 

[Ambz90]

Mars Hydro TSL2000. Full spectrum. Not a veg light.

I haven't done any LST lol. This is all natural. So I have one telling me not to top, and one telling me to top. I'm confused. I apologize for going back and forth here, I just want to optimize the plants. I usually end up with branches too low to produce good bud, mostly popcorn. You guys leave the lower branches, too?

Don't top an auto! Low stress train all the way. U don't wanna waste a day to repairs when it's an auto! They're on a timer! Don't f*ck wiv that timer bro

 

[Delps8]

Very informative!! I downloaded and purchased Photone for full spectrum led.

Glad you like it.

Sorry to hear that you've spent money on Photone. I've tested Photone twice and recommend that its purchase only if you are able to calibrate it using a calibrated PAR meter or some other known good source.

I'm not against software - I've been a software engineer for 30+ years, including three for Apple. The problem is that phone sensors are designed differently than sensors in lux meters or PAR meters. The kludgy work around is to put a strip of paper over the sensor of an iPhone. With the rounded cover over a PAR/light meter sensor, the sensor can collect light "off axis". Adding the paper strip helps the problem, no doubt, but, unless you're using one of the phones that growlightmeter.com has tested, the readings could be correct or quite inaccurate.

In my first test, Photone couldn't give me a reading. That was with a blurple and I was using the correct "filter". I corresponded with the programmer and he had no solution. I tested Photone again about a year later and it came up 16% high. A few growers have compared their Photone readings with PAR meters and their readings have been high, as well. The fact that the readings are wrong is not unexpected. The fact that the (few) readings that I've seen compared are that Photone is reading high is unfortunate because that means growers will tend to not give their plants the maximal amount of light.

My suggestion would be to ditch Photone and spend $32 for a Uni-T lux meter. If you keep Photone, take the readings with a grain of salt and continue to increase PPFD until the plants indicate that they're at the light saturation point. That's the valid approach, whether regardless of how you're measuring PPFD (or even if you're not). The issue with Photone is that growers will see "Heh, I'm at 900µmol - that's enough" when, in reality, they may be at 800µmol which is well below where cannabis should be to get the best growth out of the plant.

Re. the PPFD recommendations a growlightmeter.com — when I started learning about grow lighting, the research indicated that cannabis should receive light at "the light saturation point" which is considered 800-1000µmol. In contrast, GLM.com was indicating that autos should get 45mols all the way through and they had a hinky little graph showing varying light levels. When I contacted the programmer about that asking for citations, he said that they were in the footnotes on a given page, if they had any. They didn't have any. .

There's nothing in research that indicates that varying light levels increases yield. Dropping light levels just means that growth slows down. Plants require glucose for growth and they make it when they use light for photosynthesis. When light levels drop, the rate of photosynthesis will drop so growth will tend to slow.

 

[Midnight Runner]

This community is always helpful, and I appreciate your help.

In week 3. Looks healthy, just super compact. Since it’s an auto, is it okay to top, or will that stunt it?

So many pics here with longer internodes. My DLI is around 30, and the internodes are much closer. Should I raise the lights?

Also never know if I should cut anything, like topping or giving it some breathing room.

Growing in autopots with Jack’s 321.
Any suggestions to help me learn and make my grows better?

Too much light. Lower the intensity until after the stretch, then you can slowly amp it up.

 

[amneziaHaze]

Glad you like it.

Sorry to hear that you've spent money on Photone. I've tested Photone twice and recommend that its purchase only if you are able to calibrate it using a calibrated PAR meter or some other known good source.

I'm not against software - I've been a software engineer for 30+ years, including three for Apple. The problem is that phone sensors are designed differently than sensors in lux meters or PAR meters. The kludgy work around is to put a strip of paper over the sensor of an iPhone. With the rounded cover over a PAR/light meter sensor, the sensor can collect light "off axis". Adding the paper strip helps the problem, no doubt, but, unless you're using one of the phones that growlightmeter.com has tested, the readings could be correct or quite inaccurate.

In my first test, Photone couldn't give me a reading. That was with a blurple and I was using the correct "filter". I corresponded with the programmer and he had no solution. I tested Photone again about a year later and it came up 16% high. A few growers have compared their Photone readings with PAR meters and their readings have been high, as well. The fact that the readings are wrong is not unexpected. The fact that the (few) readings that I've seen compared are that Photone is reading high is unfortunate because that means growers will tend to not give their plants the maximal amount of light.

My suggestion would be to ditch Photone and spend $32 for a Uni-T lux meter. If you keep Photone, take the readings with a grain of salt and continue to increase PPFD until the plants indicate that they're at the light saturation point. That's the valid approach, whether regardless of how you're measuring PPFD (or even if you're not). The issue with Photone is that growers will see "Heh, I'm at 900µmol - that's enough" when, in reality, they may be at 800µmol which is well below where cannabis should be to get the best growth out of the plant.

Re. the PPFD recommendations a growlightmeter.com — when I started learning about grow lighting, the research indicated that cannabis should receive light at "the light saturation point" which is considered 800-1000µmol. In contrast, GLM.com was indicating that autos should get 45mols all the way through and they had a hinky little graph showing varying light levels. When I contacted the programmer about that asking for citations, he said that they were in the footnotes on a given page, if they had any. They didn't have any. .

There's nothing in research that indicates that varying light levels increases yield. Dropping light levels just means that growth slows down. Plants require glucose for growth and they make it when they use light for photosynthesis. When light levels drop, the rate of photosynthesis will drop so growth will tend to slow.

You still have strains that will want 800 or 1000 allsoo you have rooms with more co2 and less soo the 15% mistake is nothing since still you will not know your max.
I think of it more like am i at 600 or 1000 usefull,but maxing is allways trial and error

 

[wheelyman]

You still have strains that will want 800 or 1000 allsoo you have rooms with more co2 and less soo the 15% mistake is nothing since still you will not know your max.
I think of it more like am i at 600 or 1000 usefull,but maxing is allways trial and error

That makes sense.

 

[Delps8]

You still have strains that will want 800 or 1000 allsoo you have rooms with more co2 and less soo the 15% mistake is nothing since still you will not know your max.
I think of it more like am i at 600 or 1000 usefull,but maxing is allways trial and error

I agree there's a lot of variance in strains and the goal should be to get the grow to its light saturation point. My opinion is that growers won't get to the LSP because they're afraid of damaging their plants. Instead, the number on the dial is a convenient way to "optimize" their grow.

The reason I recommend Photone under only very specific circumstances is first, that it requires a paper strip around the phone and, second, that the user has no idea that it might be very inaccurate. Many growers do not use the diffuser so their readings are highly inaccurate. Even if the paper strip is used, there's no way to know if it's accurate.

In contrast, for $32, you can get a product that is, in practical terms, as accurate as a $600 PAR meter.

Turning that around, you can get a number $5 (plus $1,000 for an iPhone) or get valid numbers for $32. I'd spend the extra $27 and "remove all doubt".

Having said that, these instruments should be use to "adjust fire" (I'm a former artillery officer) so a grower should be using the meter to get light levels up to about 800-1000µmol and then watching to see how the plants handle it.

Emphasis on "should be" and that's the punch line. My impression, from being on three cannabis sites, is that, if growers are aware of "PPFD" (most aren't) they are, for the most part, following the advice of sites light growlightmeter.com and are very hesitant to get their grows to 800, much less to the light saturation point.

This has been a topic of interest (hobby horse?) for me since I started growing in early 2021 and growers are gradually coming around to focusing on light (pardon the pun)*.

Three years ago, the mantra was "nutes, nutes, nutes" and my impression is that the body of growers is starting to accept that it's all the same 18 chemicals and more≠better. Over that time period, the cost of grow lighting has plummeted and there's more research available so growers are starting to get interested in the topic of grow lighting. It still takes time for the herd to follow a different path and my sense is that the body of growers will trust the number on the meter as being the destination rather than using it as a guide.

To your point, it should be a means to an end (move it toward 1k on the meter and see how the plants react) but I do sincerely believe that measuring light is so new that it is still an end in itself and there's a hard stop when that number is "too high".

Just my tuppence and I very much appreciate your perspective.

*RIU seems to be changing the most rapidly; another site that I'm on, the one with the police call sign in the name which is where I have my grow diaries, seems to be pretty well set in their ways; and the site for autoflowers, which I don't frequent much any more, is (was) similar to RIU in how the growers adopt technology.

 

[wheelyman]

I agree there's a lot of variance in strains and the goal should be to get the grow to its light saturation point. My opinion is that growers won't get to the LSP because they're afraid of damaging their plants. Instead, the number on the dial is a convenient way to "optimize" their grow.

The reason I recommend Photone under only very specific circumstances is first, that it requires a paper strip around the phone and, second, that the user has no idea that it might be very inaccurate. Many growers do not use the diffuser so their readings are highly inaccurate. Even if the paper strip is used, there's no way to know if it's accurate.

In contrast, for $32, you can get a product that is, in practical terms, as accurate as a $600 PAR meter.

Turning that around, you can get a number $5 (plus $1,000 for an iPhone) or get valid numbers for $32. I'd spend the extra $27 and "remove all doubt".

Having said that, these instruments should be use to "adjust fire" (I'm a former artillery officer) so a grower should be using the meter to get light levels up to about 800-1000µmol and then watching to see how the plants handle it.

Emphasis on "should be" and that's the punch line. My impression, from being on three cannabis sites, is that, if growers are aware of "PPFD" (most aren't) they are, for the most part, following the advice of sites light growlightmeter.com and are very hesitant to get their grows to 800, much less to the light saturation point.

This has been a topic of interest (hobby horse?) for me since I started growing in early 2021 and growers are gradually coming around to focusing on light (pardon the pun)*.

Three years ago, the mantra was "nutes, nutes, nutes" and my impression is that the body of growers is starting to accept that it's all the same 18 chemicals and more≠better. Over that time period, the cost of grow lighting has plummeted and there's more research available so growers are starting to get interested in the topic of grow lighting. It still takes time for the herd to follow a different path and my sense is that the body of growers will trust the number on the meter as being the destination rather than using it as a guide.

To your point, it should be a means to an end (move it toward 1k on the meter and see how the plants react) but I do sincerely believe that measuring light is so new that it is still an end in itself and there's a hard stop when that number is "too high".

Just my tuppence and I very much appreciate your perspective.

*RIU seems to be changing the most rapidly; another site that I'm on, the one with the police call sign in the name which is where I have my grow diaries, seems to be pretty well set in their ways; and the site for autoflowers, which I don't frequent much any more, is (was) similar to RIU in how the growers adopt technology.

I’ve read about the reliability (or lack thereof) of Photone. I ordered the lux meter recommended. It’ll be interesting to see the deviance from the phone app.

 

[wheelyman]

I had two separate strains. After planting, I realize they both have different growth patterns. One went into stretch. The other one is just about to.
I switched feeding to 2-2-2-1.2 Jack’s and MPK today.

Do you have any suggestions for the shrubby plant? Is that OK to leave it like that, or will it not have enough airflow? I was trying to find ways to tie it down for LST, but there’s nothing to fasten tree branches to.

 

[amneziaHaze]

looks like it starts to lie at 30 000 and for 5000 max acceptable is 85 000 soo doesnt lie that much and its free

 

[Delps8]

I had two separate strains. After planting, I realize they both have different growth patterns. One went into stretch. The other one is just about to.
I switched feeding to 2-2-2-1.2 Jack’s and MPK today.

Do you have any suggestions for the shrubby plant? Is that OK to leave it like that, or will it not have enough airflow? I was trying to find ways to tie it down for LST, but there’s nothing to fasten tree branches to.

You've got fabric pots so you can put holes around the lip of the pots and tie them down with a roll of twist tie.

My res has a solid plastic top so I use shower hooks and ½, 1, and 2 oz fishing weights. I use a silica supplement and veg using a very light so the branches are pretty strong. A few of the branches have 2 2oz weights to hold them down.

 

[Delps8]

looks like it starts to lie at 30 000 and for 5000 max acceptable is 85 000 soo doesnt lie that much and its free

It only goes up to 50k lux? That's suprising.

Attached is a document I wrote about converting lux to PPFD. Even with a very efficient light like a Growcraft flower light or a Diablo, that's only a bit over 800µmol. A standard white LED has a conversion factor of 0.015 so that would max out at 750µmol.

The values in the PDF are mostly from the manufacturer website or from public sources. The Growcraft is from Chilled's site and the XS-1500 is from my testing. The data for the 1500 are here:



It's a bit lower than 0.015 because the 1500 has a fair amount of blue.

 

[Delps8]

You've got fabric pots so you can put holes around the lip of the pots and tie them down with a roll of twist tie.

My res has a solid plastic top so I use shower hooks and ½, 1, and 2 oz fishing weights. I use a silica supplement and veg using a very light so the branches are pretty strong. A few of the branches have 2 2oz weights to hold them down.

I would not remove any leaves unless they're so old that they're sensescing, if they're damaged, or if they're blocking air flow. Other than that, I LTFA.

View attachment 5405608

 

[amneziaHaze]

It only goes up to 50k lux? That's suprising.

Attached is a document I wrote about converting lux to PPFD. Even with a very efficient light like a Growcraft flower light or a Diablo, that's only a bit over 800µmol. A standard white LED has a conversion factor of 0.015 so that would max out at 750µmol.

The values in the PDF are mostly from the manufacturer website or from public sources. The Growcraft is from Chilled's site and the XS-1500 is from my testing. The data for the 1500 are here:

View attachment 5405610

It's a bit lower than 0.015 because the 1500 has a fair amount of blue.

No my 60w lamp can go to 100k.
But lux is brightness not usable light.hard to convert it to ppfd when it reacts different to blue and green.
What i wanted to say it showed 85k just little belove the light bleach point

 

[Delps8]

No my 60w lamp can go to 100k.
But lux is brightness not usable light.hard to convert it to ppfd when it reacts different to blue and green.
What i wanted to say it showed 85k just little belove the light bleach point

The light a lux meter reads is usable because it's within the range of PAR. Light meters measure light in the spectrum to which the human eye is most sensitive. PAR meters measure a broader spectrum.

This graphic illustrates the difference in the spectra that the light meter reads vs the PAR meter.



Insofar as being "hard" to convert, if a reader can't wade through the document I've written then they can just multiply the lux reading by 0.015 and that will give a pretty decent answer. Shane@Migro does a good job of explaining this topic in some of the videos on his You Tube channel.

Re. lux meter vs the alternative - I bought an Apogee because I tried to use Photone (then called "Korona") with my blurple. That was back in early 2021 and Photone couldn't get a reading even though I was using the correct "filter". After trading email with the programmer, I decided against using Photone (I've been a software engineer for > 30 years, both freelance and captive) and bought the Apogee.

At that time, I was willing to spend the $$ to get accurate ("less inaccurate", in reality) readings. I've completely changed my position on that. In terms of maximizing yield*, I would argue that a lux meter + a conversion is just as accurate as a PAR meter.

The key phrase is "in practical terms" because a meter will tell you approximately how much light a plant is getting but only a plant can tell you when it's at the light saturation point. And that's the goal for maximum yield - get the plant to the light saturation point as quickly as possible and keep it there. A meter can get you close to the LSP, then the grower has to watch the plant.

*For documentation and reproducibility purposes, a PAR meter is a better bet


"What i wanted to say it showed 85k just little belove the light bleach point" -

85k lux is "Regular or extra crispy"!

 

[amneziaHaze]

Well now if you want to use it for free ppfd app is not making big mistakes. Of course if you pay you get even more precission.

Ps your calculation says i was growing at 1300ppfd

 

[Delps8]

Well now if you want to use it for free ppfd app is not making big mistakes. Of course if you pay you get even more precission.

precision ≠ accuracy.

Software solutions are very likely to be inaccurate because of the sensor. The calculations use the same conversion factors that I've posted.

One major source of error is that camera sensors are designed to read only light coming directly into the sensor. If you poke your nose into photography, you'll see that meters offer "averaging" (of the light falling on the sensor), as well as "center weighted" and "spot" readings, the latter read only the center 2°.

In contrast, sensors for light/PAR meters are curved so as to be able to measure the light falling on the sensor from a wide "angle of incidence" because that's how light falls on things, whether is the subject of a photograph for a canopy in a tent. Check out a Sekonic light meter, a very high end handheld light meter from back in the day. Just like the Uni-T and the Apogee sensors, it's got a parabolic cover.

Photone requires a diffuser to try to compensate for the high directionality of the cell phone camera sensor. Many growers are unaware of that so they get readings that are too low and they end up getting too much light on their plants.

Ps your calculation says i was growing at 1300ppfd

I haven't done any calculations. I've provided conversion factors for people to convert lux to PPFD. The values I've published are either at the sources that I've cited or are easily available by searching on the internet. In the case of the XS-1500, I tested that using my calibrated Apogeee MQ-1500 using a hang height of 18", per my previous posting.

If you find that any of the data are incorrect, either the conversion factors or if I've made a math error, I'd appreciate you letting me know so I can correct my paper.

1300µmol is a lot of light in ambient CO2. The max I've used for an extended period, is 1150µmol± for my last two photo grows and my autos topped out at 1000-1100µmol. If you're getting 1300µmol, I'd guess that your grow has an elevated level of CO2 (my tent maxes out at about 600ppm) or perhaps your lux meter is reading a little hight.