Mammoth mint white emerald green 880w

D

Diode.Dude

Member
KitnerPush said:
No one claiming 'the only way here...' I always looked at XPG to a SSL competitor or maybe even a Oslon Square competitor. These new osconiqs however are the newest leap in 4Q 2024.

A light like this could easily be designed using other monos and hp whites and still be impressive. Cree has always been decent and still is. HLG are using them in their new tomahawk... But people weren't raving about them like the Diabolos.
Click to expand...
Newest yet not leading in performance. Weather looking at total output or efficacy. Interesting coolaid to drink.

Raving about? Equally as many "F this spectrum" on the diablos and "greatest thing ever" using samsung's. It's a basic white+ red. No brand spd are significantly different than the next. Horti white...low red content whites...aka photopyll select in cree world. Lumileds had their version a few years ago. Again...if you think anyone is leading by more than a few percent...you have drank too much of the coolaid.

HLG used the 2835 G class(4 years old at this point) from cree on the tomahawk because of price. under .03(or less) vs .055. That is why.

Fluence pays half of what HLG pays for their 301's. People need to get off the HLG BS and realize they were one of handfuls of good customers driving volume on the 301. HLG was not top dog for samsung. Not even in the US.
 
K

KitnerPush

Active Member
Diode.Dude said:
Newest yet not leading in performance. Weather looking at total output or efficacy. Interesting coolaid to drink.

Raving about? Equally as many "F this spectrum" on the diablos and "greatest thing ever" using samsung's. It's a basic white+ red. No brand spd are significantly different than the next. Horti white...low red content whites...aka photopyll select in cree world. Lumileds had their version a few years ago. Again...if you think anyone is leading by more than a few percent...you have drank too much of the coolaid.

HLG used the 2835 G class(4 years old at this point) from cree on the tomahawk because of price. under .03(or less) vs .055. That is why.

Fluence pays half of what HLG pays for their 301's. People need to get off the HLG BS and realize they were one of handfuls of good customers driving volume on the 301. HLG was not top dog for samsung. Not even in the US.
Click to expand...
Where were you when the first quantum boards hit? And who was competing?
 
tstick

tstick

Well-Known Member
I was here when Greengenes and Growmaus(sp?) and even "Jeff" from Area51 were all talking about how to build lights. Some of the old homemade designs that Growmaus had were exceptional. No wonder he went on to work for ChilLED and HLG. The boy knew his stuff! All those guys were really looking at how to improve the lights and answer demands. I think they all did a pretty good job. The Quantum Board idea was certainly discussed here a lot before any of it actually came to fruition. I own a couple of them and they work just fine.

But, then China started improving their stuff and now the market is flooded with thousands of lights....flood light....*cough*....Anyway, back then there was a lot of spirited discussion about the same things -except the technology wasn't as advanced....And, the technology will never reach a pinnacle. The chips, etc., will keep improving every year and there will be the studies to back it all up....forever.

In the future, tents will have walls and ceiling and floors made of material that will produce the light. Fixtures will become a thing of the past. You'll just plug your tent into an outlet, dial in the spectrum you want and bam.
 
D

Diode.Dude

Member
KitnerPush said:
Where were you when the first quantum boards hit? And who was competing?
Click to expand...
Where was I? I was using mostly XTE and 219 3535's with XPE 660nm. Had some mono supplemented CXA and Vero29 builds. But not sure what that has to do with what we are talking about.
As for who was competing in the horti LED market back then from a supplier side. LG and Samsung were owning the 5630 market. BML(build my LED) actually using them interchangeably and continued into first year of them being fluence till LG left the market.
Robin(Amit) had been testing the samsung 5630 based L2s for a while prior to joining HLG and is the reason for the QB's. Steve had johnson running COB's nothing original there. Nichia was king of the 3030's at that time. And even once samsung 301's came around, Nichia never left the chat. But canna industry being more hype driven, not to mention most getting in it didn't come from lighting industry and only know what the other guys are doing aka used samsungs. But most established lighting companies that got into it, used their preference of diodes(Cree, Osram, Nichia, Lumileds...) to build great lights that could match or exceed a samsung spec'ed light, but just couldn't overcome the marketing hype of using samsung. Osram did and still does great in 660nm. Later on Samsung used there white business to leverage accounts into using their 660nm, which did actually end up being pretty good as of latest gen. But Osram is king of the 660nm. Just a very slim margin if att all right now. Just depends on your business relationship on for bin avaiablity.
Then can also get into the whole 301b and H being the same, but again lighting companies knew the market and didn't care cause they worked with samsung and were told first hand. Canna only guys pushing the H cause they literally didn't know enough about it and didn't actually work with samsung on designs. Purchasing from a disti vs havign Samsung team involved even if you buy from a disti was valuable.

Anyways....is that enough history?
 
Last edited:
K

KitnerPush

Active Member
tstick said:
I was here when Greengenes and Growmaus(sp?) and even "Jeff" from Area51 were all talking about how to build lights. Some of the old homemade designs that Growmaus had were exceptional. No wonder he went on to work for ChilLED and HLG. The boy knew his stuff! All those guys were really looking at how to improve the lights and answer demands. I think they all did a pretty good job. The Quantum Board idea was certainly discussed here a lot before any of it actually came to fruition. I own a couple of them and they work just fine.

But, then China started improving their stuff and now the market is flooded with thousands of lights....flood light....*cough*....Anyway, back then there was a lot of spirited discussion about the same things -except the technology wasn't as advanced....And, the technology will never reach a pinnacle. The chips, etc., will keep improving every year and there will be the studies to back it all up....forever.

In the future, tents will have walls and ceiling and floors made of material that will produce the light. Fixtures will become a thing of the past. You'll just plug your tent into an outlet, dial in the spectrum you want and bam.
Click to expand...
Yep, that's exactly right. Growmau5 is legend, especially in the DIY space and sharing knowledge. The quantum board was the catalyst.
 
D

Diode.Dude

Member
tstick said:
I was here when Greengenes and Growmaus(sp?) and even "Jeff" from Area51 were all talking about how to build lights. Some of the old homemade designs that Growmaus had were exceptional. No wonder he went on to work for ChilLED and HLG. The boy knew his stuff! All those guys were really looking at how to improve the lights and answer demands. I think they all did a pretty good job. The Quantum Board idea was certainly discussed here a lot before any of it actually came to fruition. I own a couple of them and they work just fine.

But, then China started improving their stuff and now the market is flooded with thousands of lights....flood light....*cough*....Anyway, back then there was a lot of spirited discussion about the same things -except the technology wasn't as advanced....And, the technology will never reach a pinnacle. The chips, etc., will keep improving every year and there will be the studies to back it all up....forever.

In the future, tents will have walls and ceiling and floors made of material that will produce the light. Fixtures will become a thing of the past. You'll just plug your tent into an outlet, dial in the spectrum you want and bam.
Click to expand...
Oh man. Really briunging up the good times!

SupraSPL, Guod, StardustSailor.... And had A51 and Apache, and Hans for legit companies. A lot of Cidly factory based low end brands back then.
Then came GG and Mau5 and DIY took off.
Most every company people knows of all followed.
Kingbrite got big. Then china overall flooded.

Crazy to think back at those times.
 
K

KitnerPush

Active Member
Diode.Dude said:
Where was I? I was using mostly XTE and 219 3535's with XPE 660nm. Had some mono supplemented CXA and Vero29 builds. But not sure what that has to do with what we are talking about.
As for who was competing in the horti LED market back then from a supplier side. LG and Samsung were owning the 5630 market. BML(build my LED) actually using them interchangeably and continued into first year of them being fluence till LG left the market.
Robin(Amit) had been testing the samsung 5630 based L2s for a while prior to joining HLG and is the reason for the QB's. Steve had johnson running COB's nothing original there. Nichia was king of the 3030's at that time. And even once samsung 301's came around, Nichia never left the chat. But canna industry being more hype driven, not to mention most getting in it didn't come from lighting industry and only know what the other guys are doing aka used samsungs. But most established lighting companies that got into it, used their preference of diodes(Cree, Osram, Nichia, Lumileds...) to build great lights that could match or exceed a samsung spec'ed light, but just couldn't overcome the marketing hype of using samsung. Osram did and still does great in 660nm. Later on Samsung used there white business to leverage accounts into using their 660nm, which did actually end up being pretty good as of latest gen. But Osram is king of the 660nm. Just a very slim margin if att all right now. Just depends on your business relationship on for bin avaiablity.
Then can also get into the whole 301b and H being the same, but again lighting companies knew the market and didn't care cause they worked with samsung and were told first hand. Canna only guys pushing the H cause they literally didn't know enough about it and didn't actually work with samsung on designs. Purchasing from a disti vs havign Samsung team involved even if you buy from a disti was valuable.

Anyways....is that enough history?
Click to expand...
yeah, great, so we're on the same page. You can't say HLG weren't instrumental in the exploision of mid-power whites... if they are the biggest I'm not even sure. Like was mentioned above here, the chinese brands like Meijiu, Kingbrite, Mars Hydro and then spiderfarmer, medicgrow etc etc... blew up the market. None of them have really been in the efficiency race like the ChilLed and HLG have been. Also, Growmau5 went to work for HLG. ChilLed out of business? Cree was considered a good red, especially over epistar, but Osram really changed the game, like you're saying. HLG was using Samsung reds, until the Squares. Before the samsungs probably cree.

With the improved HP RGB, however, I'm more inclined to promote moving commercial lighting to the consumer market, rather than using midpowers of yesteryears. That's just my opinion though. I like the idea of 2 bars covering a 4x4, with optimized optics. I have nothing against midpowers in growtents, I've grown plenty of great bud even without added 660nm... but you need too many to breach the 3 mark.
 
ilovetoskiatalta

ilovetoskiatalta

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
I can say, for sure, that, even when lighting was in the primitive days, back in the 70's and 80's and 90's and everything was the "wrong" spectrum and inefficient and all that, etc., growers STILL grew great marijuana in spite of it. The goal, back then, was to get the "strongest" light....and, typically, that came from repurposing HID bulbs. You had two flavors back then, Metal Halide or High Pressure Sodium. But most of them ran on a 220 circuit and had different kinds of plugs. So, if you knew how to hook one up, then you could out-yield anyone who was using fluorescent shop lights -which was the other option. It had nothing to do with the spectrum. It had to do with intensity. If you were using fluorescents, then you kept them literally right on top of the plants and in the center area of the tubes, to get the intensity....Got great quality, but comparatively much lower yields.

And, even in the early days of LED fixtures, there were all kinds of theories about spectrums (blurple) and NASA research to back it up, etc. Might as well put those fixtures on The Antiques Road Show now! :)
Click to expand...
Remote open 1000w magnetic hps ballasts mounted to 3/4" plywood outside the room with se end horizontal hoods with hamster fans through the hoods...
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
waytoofaded said:
Greenhouse lighting is targeted because it's supplemented by the sun, all the greenhouse fixtures are heavy in red and some blues. The Philips greenhouse fixtures are pink, I'm guessing high in red with some whites.

If you see the indoor commercial grows, they mostly run white and red fixtures.
Click to expand...
There's a Philips LED horticulture lab at Colorado State University. It was funded by Philips and operates as a greenhouse with blurple light supplementation. Clearly, that's the direction they've decided to go and I suspect part of why they did it is to cover as many crop species as possible.

The tech has its strengths and weaknesses, though. With a transparent roof you don't have good control of your photoperiod, you have the variable of cloudy days and seasonality and your HVAC costs are higher to fight temperature swings both daily and seasonally. With low overnight temperatures in the negative double digits in the last few days, their power bill has to be ridiculous!

Just thought I'd share for those who'd like to know.

Pics of the facility;
20170823_132737.jpg20170823_131041.jpg20170823_131030.jpg20170823_130857.jpg20170823_130422.jpg
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
waytoofaded said:
If we agree that commercial growers has the most to lose/gain in all this, and you using the example of modern blurples being in a greenhouse, than how do you explain why commercial growers don't use those same red/blue fixtures when they grow indoors without the sun as a backdrop?
Click to expand...
Easy answer; it's a greenhouse, so they only use the wavelengths they want to supplement natural light with. There's no sense in adding green if there's plenty coming through the glass already.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
It goes to reason that, a light which produces spectra that are closest to that of the Sun, would be better than a light which is more limited in its output. Plants on Earth, have adapted to grow in Sunlight, but they will grow under lights that don't produce all the Sun's spectrum, too. We all know this from practical experience.
Click to expand...
You're making a lot of assumptions here that modern horticultural science have disproven. First, just because the sun was here first doesn't make it the best. Why? Because plants are biochemical machines that don't utilize all wavelengths the same, simply because the chemical processes they've evolved to convert light into leaves, stems, fruits and resins all use portions of the available spectrum. They didn't need to evolve to use the whole spectrum in a perfect match to sunlight because there's plenty of sunlight; it's not a scarce resource.

Since one of the main goals of horticultural lighting is maximizing efficiency, AKA treating Watts as a scarce resource, it only makes sense to carefully study the effects of every portion of the PAR spectrum with an eye towards getting the most desirable results with the least input.

Remember, it's not just light wattage that's conserved, it's also HVAC wattage. All that heat has to go somewhere. The less heat generated and the less pumped out, the better for lower utility bills and attendant strain on the grid.

Simply mimicking the sun can be done pretty effectively with plasma lighting tech, and it's been done. Guess what they found? It's not very efficient because it made light in spectra the plants didn't need!
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
I can say, for sure, that, even when lighting was in the primitive days, back in the 70's and 80's and 90's and everything was the "wrong" spectrum and inefficient and all that, etc., growers STILL grew great marijuana in spite of it. The goal, back then, was to get the "strongest" light....and, typically, that came from repurposing HID bulbs. You had two flavors back then, Metal Halide or High Pressure Sodium. But most of them ran on a 220 circuit and had different kinds of plugs. So, if you knew how to hook one up, then you could out-yield anyone who was using fluorescent shop lights -which was the other option. It had nothing to do with the spectrum. It had to do with intensity. If you were using fluorescents, then you kept them literally right on top of the plants and in the center area of the tubes, to get the intensity....Got great quality, but comparatively much lower yields.

And, even in the early days of LED fixtures, there were all kinds of theories about spectrums (blurple) and NASA research to back it up, etc. Might as well put those fixtures on The Antiques Road Show now! :)
Click to expand...
As an old fart, I've had personal experience with most of these lights and I can say from decades long personal experience that weed got better with better lights, most noticeably with the advent of white LED. The new blurple is a shit ton better than the stuff from 15-20 years ago, which is why it didn't really take off at that time.

As I've mentioned above, efficiency is the name of the game now that we can create the spectrum we want.
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
I can say, for sure, that, even when lighting was in the primitive days, back in the 70's and 80's and 90's and everything was the "wrong" spectrum and inefficient and all that, etc., growers STILL grew great marijuana in spite of it. The goal, back then, was to get the "strongest" light....and, typically, that came from repurposing HID bulbs. You had two flavors back then, Metal Halide or High Pressure Sodium. But most of them ran on a 220 circuit and had different kinds of plugs. So, if you knew how to hook one up, then you could out-yield anyone who was using fluorescent shop lights -which was the other option. It had nothing to do with the spectrum. It had to do with intensity. If you were using fluorescents, then you kept them literally right on top of the plants and in the center area of the tubes, to get the intensity....Got great quality, but comparatively much lower yields.

And, even in the early days of LED fixtures, there were all kinds of theories about spectrums (blurple) and NASA research to back it up, etc. Might as well put those fixtures on The Antiques Road Show now! :)
Click to expand...
Oh, I almost forgot; some of the finest cannabis I've ever seen was grown under fluorescent lights by an old buddy named @RM3 , may he rest in peace. His wasn't a terribly efficient setup and therefore not very scalable but that shit would put heavy medical users on their ass. It had legs for days and strain fatigue was not a thing.

We have a lot to learn about lighting and growing environments yet.
 
Last edited:
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
tstick said:
I was here when Greengenes and Growmaus(sp?) and even "Jeff" from Area51 were all talking about how to build lights. Some of the old homemade designs that Growmaus had were exceptional. No wonder he went on to work for ChilLED and HLG. The boy knew his stuff! All those guys were really looking at how to improve the lights and answer demands. I think they all did a pretty good job. The Quantum Board idea was certainly discussed here a lot before any of it actually came to fruition. I own a couple of them and they work just fine.

But, then China started improving their stuff and now the market is flooded with thousands of lights....flood light....*cough*....Anyway, back then there was a lot of spirited discussion about the same things -except the technology wasn't as advanced....And, the technology will never reach a pinnacle. The chips, etc., will keep improving every year and there will be the studies to back it all up....forever.

In the future, tents will have walls and ceiling and floors made of material that will produce the light. Fixtures will become a thing of the past. You'll just plug your tent into an outlet, dial in the spectrum you want and bam.
Click to expand...
As someone who does this kind of thing for a living, I call bullshit. It makes no sense at all to combine lighting and shelter. There are too many configurations needed and not everyone wants to fuck with tents, like me!
 
ttystikk

ttystikk

Well-Known Member
ilovetoskiatalta said:
Remote open 1000w magnetic hps ballasts mounted to 3/4" plywood outside the room with se end horizontal hoods with hamster fans through the hoods...
Click to expand...
I ran an SE HPS on a mag with an early wing style reflector and a rotating light mover of my own design in the late 80s and early 90s.

That was a whole ass lifetime ago!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top