Search results

thanks, the ppfd nor the uva is a sorrow to me, all good in this regard basically. the timer problem is.... dumb.

sad to see these deformed buds, not my usual standard and the genetics can do way better. last run was really good with these genes, yield was also very good. i thought this run is even better, prob chances for this are gone, can be happy when they dont hermie. basically am impressed how thick...

i had been very happy so har. they where growing real quick, made the transistion quick. food is on point, they stand a lot light. BUT, i forgot to set the timer right 10 days ago and they had 24h UVA since. not good at all, that was day now 24h for them. i got some reveg and they slowed down...

thanks, could really be your bricks where well buffered.

sad to hear they clearly could had need a bit more time. otherwise your mix seems to work fine. on paper cocos contains a lot K and NaCl. was your cocos straight from the bag? or did you made anything to prepare it? i guess growing like you do you dont work with runoff, or if then little.

very good. have you washed and or buffered the cocos used in your mix? do you think it works any better then peat only or similar?

it should be mostly the soil itself doing the job. i gave 5-3-7 organic pellets beginning of flower. also topdressed bat guano and a little charged bio char. and i gave maybe 2 times a mild dose organic vinasse based liquid fertilizer. not sure if all of the mentioned stuff was needed to get...

so far so good.

good question, there is room for wild theories. what seems to work extremly well atm is the nutrient supply. overall soil, peat with ewc basically, is very forgiving. its all on point, but i wonder too. a wild, while halfway scinece backed, theorie would be that there is a lot mycorrhizae or...

dehumidifiers basically help a lot vs. budrot, while now its course a bit late and can only slow down the rot.

took some measurements today. its awesome what they can take this time. some tops are at 1500ppfd. the average is of course lower. 1100ppfd here 720ppfd 450ppf in the lower corners. using 270W whites and 32W 660nm red.

nothing spectacular, all is doing well and the grow is flawless so far. theyre well in to flower now, made their transition. am still on organic food and it looks like the soil with all the EWC is quite rich in food. i have given them organic tomato pellets after going 12/12 and they also got a...

i would fear the cat simply prefer infrared :D.

thanks, nutrients and lights really seems to be fine. after a bit cleanup. i squeezed her under the net 2 days ago allready, saved me a few inches. have to see, it could allready work out, there is some space left.

all good so far. introduced some nematodes, as i saw a fungus gnats, none on the sticky traps so far and none flying around. but the neamtodes should take care now, i hate gnats a bit. i will trim her a bit, its a bit dense and there is quite some way to go. looks all healthy to me. the soil...

this thread is getting a good link collection.

i was just refering to that most mccree curves are scaled to a 100% peak, so you can not really guess the real absorbtion. your chart seems to me better in this. its just a common scaling issue, i think no one claimed that green is only reflected and not absorbed, but its clearly more reflected...

this is some very good paper too and the infos of it arent well knowen here. never sawn this one before. 340nm, yes thats the way it seems, it encourages using more UVA. i havent read it all now, i am not very clear how long the exposure was and which strenght it had, while i could guess some if...

that data is very helpfull to understand, very good study. havent read it completly but its a very good one for sure. goes also hand in hand what bugbee is saying and demonstrating with the cross section of the leaf pictures. " Typical values of absorptance at 550 nm range from 50% in Lactuca...

thats some good chart, prob most others are scalled to 100% as max while the real world is at least about 7% lower. goes well in hand with what were talking about here.