Growing all red question.

Growing all red question.
[HR][/HR]I plan on experimenting with using all red led. I have heard of people using straight red from the beginning to the end of the process. I understand that this isn't exactly copying nature but there are some benefits as well is disadvantages to growing this way. Well I was thinking on trying red from seed to flower and the only thing I was worried about was stretching. I am going to do a homemade aero/hydro style setup. I want my plants to stay short say no greater than 24-36inches. When do I stop vegging and go into flowering mode. I am confused because I've read about people taking clones and just doing a 12/12 with a hps from the get go. This would also give me the ability to have clones and flowering plants right next to each other in the same system. what do you think?

i wonder if copying mother nature is actually the best? ..it would be like saying that sunlight is perfect and couldnt be improved to grow plants better.. ..i would think technology could improve on the sun's light...and i think LED will eventualy be that technology.....good luck with the all red grow i would like to see how this goes for sure ....as far as the clones..yes..once you switch to 12/12 there is nothing wrong with flowering clones at the same time.

What benefit is there to doing all Red LED's in your opinion? I also think stretching will be an issue w/o a bit of LST. I recommend having supplemental White spectrum bulbs or LED's on hand.

Do you plan to cut clones from a flowering plant? I believe clones will root better when under veg lighting hours (the cutting feels it has a better chance of producing seeds) and will be less likely to hermie. If the cutting comes from a flowering plant and you root in veg light then you'll stress and confuse the cutting by changing the light schedule. You could always veg the plant, top it at around the third or fourth real node, root the top, and once it roots switch over to 12-12. This could also help with the stretch issues that I'm anticipating you'll have.

The majority of what I read suggest the stretching comes from 2 things. The light not being close enough and genetics causing the plant to grow in size when switching to flowering. Red light travels less efficiently than blue light. Just like bass travels less efficiently than treble. Both light and sound both travel in a wave which is why the larger wave whether Red or Bass, is harder to produce and less efficient in travel. So with that being understood you can see why a predominately red light would make the plant think it needs to stretch to get "closer". Also I've read that blue slows down the hormone in the plants that make them grow along its apical stem and roots which is why a plant under predominately blue appears tighter and bushier.

I wasnt planning on taking clones from a flowering plant but rather having a mother plant to take clones from. But having a unit that I could put in a clone or clones among other vegging and or flowering plants sounds interesting but I am starting to learn more about the vegging period and why we let the plants grow out I am not sure if this would be choice.

My question is now. Do smaller plants produce higher quality bud as well as at a higher bio efficiency? Time to hit he books.....

My question is now. Do smaller plants produce higher quality bud as well as at a higher bio efficiency?

Click to expand...

higher bio efficiency?
Looks like it to me.
The older the plant the further the internode distance.......no?

higher quality bud?
Probably........
A larger plant is, well larger and the light has to travel farther to get to all the places it needs to. (SCROG would be an exception)

Red light travels less efficiently than Blue? Where did you hear this?

High frequency sounds are directional. Low frequency sounds expand in all directions.

High frequencies are so directional that they can even be reflected off a small object whereas low frequencies will simply bend around that same object. What I'm saying is that if my measuring equipment was directly behind a tweeter it would be very inefficient, and yet, the sub woofer would still be hella loud. Also:

The efficiency of loudspeaker drivers varies with frequency as well. For instance, the output of a woofer driver decreases as the input frequency decreases because of the increasingly poor match between air and the driver.

Click to expand...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loudspeaker

I think there's a lot more at hand here (in both sound and light scenarios). But I'm all for hitting the books. Hopefully we can answer some of these questions.

lol the well written paragraph above makes it sound like you knew what you talking about. Scared me for second....lol The graph you posted is the frequency characteristics of a loud speaker. The graph you posted is from here "http://www.allcarwiki.com/w/images/thumb/7/72/Bosch_36W_column_loudspeaker_polar_pattern.png/"

Let me explain to you what that graph represents. First of all if you think a 2 way speaker system. for example, with a 100watt tweeter and a 100watt subwoofer of matching input sensitivity is actually going to reproduce sound with a flat frequency response you are mistaken. You are more likely going to have a 30-50watt tweeter to match a 100watt sub. There's a reason for that.

• The efficiency of loudspeaker drivers varies with frequency as well. For instance, the output of a woofer driver decreases as the input frequency decreases because of the increasingly poor match between air and the driver
  
  
  ​
  
  
  
  

Yeah Like I said it takes more energy to produce lower frequencies. The polar pattern is topic of coverage,,,,, of a loudspeaker with many more variables then frequency response.

http://stna.resource.bosch.com/documents/Data_sheet_enUS_1911721995.pdf

Take a look at the frequency response of the same speaker you posted the polar patter of. You'll notice that those speakers have the highest output at 4.1k. A lot of this is real off topic because in the case of a speaker the drivers are all different in each speaker setup thus different results, not to mention we are arguing now about the mechanics of sound moving through air which is not how I initially compared sound and light. From high school science class you should know that " A smaller wavelength corresponds to a higher energy according to the equation E=hc/λ. ("E" is Energy; "h" is Planck's constant; "c" is the speed of light; "λ" is wavelength.)". See I can post from wiki too. Smaller wavelength also means higher frequency. And while your at it you can look up how blue light penetrates water farther than red as well.

OK back on topic. Does anyone have any examples of an all red led grow of marijuana. And I am talking about SMD LEDS not the epoxy capped leds which are inferior to HPS in efficiency.


If not. Get ready cause I am going to be the one to do it I guess. 500watts of pure 660nm light coming from a SMD LED diode that is about 3inches by 3inches attacked to a heatsink that is 19lbs..............lmao

Your interpretation of what that picture represents is 100% incorrect. Also, the key part of the quote above is "because of the increasingly poor match between air and the driver." This has nothing to do with light...

I agree, we are off topic, which is what I've been trying to say.

I hope you find what you're looking for.

Thanks.lol

Read this.
https://www.rollitup.org/led-other-lighting/563118-astir-grow-led-panel-project.html

Im still reading cause its a long read. But so far this guy isn't the most knowledgeable about leds. I come to that conclusion after he makes the claim that its hard to keepa 10watt led cool. Um cpus make about the same amount of heat per watt and guess what folks we cool them! About 100-230watts of cooling going in the average in concern of the cpu. Its called a fricken heatsink. And then he thinks that active cooling is the way to go.....yeah fricken right. For one your are relying on a electrical device to power a fan to cool your expensive led? What happens when that fan fails? It would literally take all but maybe 20 seconds and it would be fried. Passive cooling is the only way I would run a high powered led. Passive means it is functionally cooling without the aid of any moving parts. One less thing to break. The make 500watt passive heatsinks (theres a link to one in this thread go look) so why is it so hard to cool a 10watt led again. This guy says a lot of big words and some of it sounds feasible but since I am not as knowledgeable as he as about the topic I can not confirm or deny his claims about 660nm but I think he isn't as smart as nasa hes prolly misinterpreting.

I think we should keep studying. Here are some good reads

http://www.plantcell.org/content/17/4/1120.full <- The nasa study that lead me to conclude and I still believe that Red with hint of Blue is choice.

http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/43/7/1951.full.pdf <-- I'm still reading this.

another point id like to make. Look a the temps of this 500watt led and heatsink combo.

http://twfuhai.en.alibaba.com/product/575527471-103299261/NPOWERTEK_500W_LED_LIGHTING_led_heat_sinks.html

You could put that 500watt led pretty close to your plants. Thats only in theory, as far as I know that 500watts of light emitting down might be pretty intense radiation wise........

Big mouth ..
Tiny words ...

....

Keep reading...........

Growing with only red LED is sub optimal but it will work

what about Red with a tiny amount of blue then.

And big words are made from joining together tiny words..

Longer wavelength photons (red) are lower in energy than short wavelength photons (bluer). Lower energy photons are not higher in energy, as was said earlier. Plants have evolved to utilize the sun's light, therefore mimicry of the sun's spectrum and intensity is probably best. The absorbtion versus photosynthetic activity curves for light are well known. This is why you see many LED panels utilizing mostly red and blue lights, while omitting the green which is a minimum in the previously mentioned curve. Some people seem to think that blue led's might be slightly harmful to the plants, but I really have no idea about this. All I know is that UV light can interact with DNA to form things like cys-syn thymine dimers, which can impede DNA transcription and translation(this is bad for cells). That being said, I personally believe that one should try as best as possible to mimic the sun's spectrum, while placing an emphasis on reds and blues, with slightly higher prevalence of red light-especially for flowering.

Using only red an and blue will cause some types of problems.
The plant will not be able to produce all of the molecules that it needs to be completely healthy.

Remember to eat your vegetables!