Fonzarelli
Active Member
Whoa, only $1200 for a light proven to grow mass amounts of micro-greens that are 3" tall. Seems like a good buy.
LED Companies w/ LINKS
- Thread starter Beefbisquit
- Start date
HiloReign
Well-Known Member
Coming from the guy who started the thread:"Why do the Kessil H350 Deep Purple's suck so much ass? " LOL!
Fonzarelli
Active Member
^^^hahah guod one!
Bumping Spheda
Well-Known Member
zippywalnut
Well-Known Member
Get out of here. Do your damn research.
Perro Negro
Member
Hello again LED enthusiasts. I had to drop out to deal with work and also to try to understand why everyone is so interested in bashing in the forums. If you are interested in having a discussion about the merits of lights and their ability to grow I am all in for that. Thank you to those of you who contacted me via PM to express your concerns about the posts after I joined this thread, it is what has brought me back to try to talk again.
At the end of the day aren't we all interested in results? Unfortunately I cannot give out some of the information requested. We have spent over three years researching and conducting our own research on growing with LEDs and it would not be prudent as a business to give away what is one of our largest advantages. Many of the companies mentioned in this thread haven't been around for most of the time it took us and would love to know the details of our spectrum and other hard earned knowledge. I hope you can understand this.
All of our work at Black Dog LED has reaffirmed our belief that to be the best light you need two things; power and spectrum. Power in the form of photons or more simply you have to push some real wattage. Companies that say you can flower a 4' x 4' area with 300-400 or even less watts are flat out lying. The accepted standard for HID is 1,000 watts for a 4 x 4 area and I can tell you that you cannot get a light in that wattage to flower as well as a 1,000. Just not possible. For spectrum, we are constantly working on improving our spectrum and it is one of if not the most complete spectrum on the market. This is not hyperbole, we have a $4,000 spectroradiometer to test light sources so we know that what we design on paper translates to the real world. If anyone has a light that they think has a better spectrum or even a spectrum as good as the manufacturer claims we would be happy to test it as we have for many customers that have walked into our shop.
We believe most LED manufacturers overestimate their footprints and do not have the power to do what they claim in their marketing. We are going to post information regarding this in the coming weeks. We will be releasing PAR values at varying heights and distances from center as has sort of become the standard. To see what I am talking about and to see what we will be comparing ours numbers to, check out the charts posted on GrowersHouse.com (Hydro Grow Penetrator, Stealth Grow, multiple smaller lights, Solarstorm). The only problem with their numbers is that they may be slightly skewed. Some of the leaders in the field say using the Quantum Sensor as they do in the test at GrowersHouse. The issue is that for very bright light sources (such as grow lights) they are not completely accurate and a spectroradiometer should be used. Of course a Quantum Meter costs less than $400 and a Spectroradiometer costs $4,000 and up.
With regard to this I would like to ask a couple questions for the more educated readers following this thread. We have spent considerable time looking for research on the absolute PAR values and cannot find anything conclusive so I would like to know your thoughts on this.
- What is the maximum PAR that cannabis can can use during flower? By this I mean that at some point you reach saturation and additional light will result in increased yields or quality. I have seen some numbers quoted at 400 and 600 PAR being the maximum, but nothing conclusive.
- What is the minimum PAR for effective flowering? This is a bit more subjective since "effective flowering" leaves some ambiguity but our feeling based on research is that this is probably between 100-150 PAR.
- What is the minimum for effective vegging? Again, a bit ambiguous but I have seen research on this saying that 14 PAR is the minimum for keeping a plant alive and healthy. For effective vegging where you get solid vegetative growth is in the 40-50 PAR range.
We all need a way to measure light sources and while PAR is far from perfect it is light years ahead of using lumens. PAR does have some serious shortcomings but that is another discussion entirely. If we agree that PAR is the best standard measurement we have today, then we need to agree on how to apply it, which is the purpose of my questions.
I appreciate any thoughts you have on this subject.
At the end of the day aren't we all interested in results? Unfortunately I cannot give out some of the information requested. We have spent over three years researching and conducting our own research on growing with LEDs and it would not be prudent as a business to give away what is one of our largest advantages. Many of the companies mentioned in this thread haven't been around for most of the time it took us and would love to know the details of our spectrum and other hard earned knowledge. I hope you can understand this.
All of our work at Black Dog LED has reaffirmed our belief that to be the best light you need two things; power and spectrum. Power in the form of photons or more simply you have to push some real wattage. Companies that say you can flower a 4' x 4' area with 300-400 or even less watts are flat out lying. The accepted standard for HID is 1,000 watts for a 4 x 4 area and I can tell you that you cannot get a light in that wattage to flower as well as a 1,000. Just not possible. For spectrum, we are constantly working on improving our spectrum and it is one of if not the most complete spectrum on the market. This is not hyperbole, we have a $4,000 spectroradiometer to test light sources so we know that what we design on paper translates to the real world. If anyone has a light that they think has a better spectrum or even a spectrum as good as the manufacturer claims we would be happy to test it as we have for many customers that have walked into our shop.
We believe most LED manufacturers overestimate their footprints and do not have the power to do what they claim in their marketing. We are going to post information regarding this in the coming weeks. We will be releasing PAR values at varying heights and distances from center as has sort of become the standard. To see what I am talking about and to see what we will be comparing ours numbers to, check out the charts posted on GrowersHouse.com (Hydro Grow Penetrator, Stealth Grow, multiple smaller lights, Solarstorm). The only problem with their numbers is that they may be slightly skewed. Some of the leaders in the field say using the Quantum Sensor as they do in the test at GrowersHouse. The issue is that for very bright light sources (such as grow lights) they are not completely accurate and a spectroradiometer should be used. Of course a Quantum Meter costs less than $400 and a Spectroradiometer costs $4,000 and up.
With regard to this I would like to ask a couple questions for the more educated readers following this thread. We have spent considerable time looking for research on the absolute PAR values and cannot find anything conclusive so I would like to know your thoughts on this.
- What is the maximum PAR that cannabis can can use during flower? By this I mean that at some point you reach saturation and additional light will result in increased yields or quality. I have seen some numbers quoted at 400 and 600 PAR being the maximum, but nothing conclusive.
- What is the minimum PAR for effective flowering? This is a bit more subjective since "effective flowering" leaves some ambiguity but our feeling based on research is that this is probably between 100-150 PAR.
- What is the minimum for effective vegging? Again, a bit ambiguous but I have seen research on this saying that 14 PAR is the minimum for keeping a plant alive and healthy. For effective vegging where you get solid vegetative growth is in the 40-50 PAR range.
We all need a way to measure light sources and while PAR is far from perfect it is light years ahead of using lumens. PAR does have some serious shortcomings but that is another discussion entirely. If we agree that PAR is the best standard measurement we have today, then we need to agree on how to apply it, which is the purpose of my questions.
I appreciate any thoughts you have on this subject.
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
3 years of research, and you're asking a forum what is the best PAR for a cannabis plant?
Really?
Really?
Perro Negro
Member
Sorry, since you are apparently knowledgeable can you point me to ONE single piece of research that provides the answer to my questions?
I did state numbers and the numbers I stated are based on our research, both applied and novel. If you have an answer then please share it. Keep in mind we still see people talking about lumens and the research on PAR generated by artificial lighting is limited at best.
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
For someone that has their own LED company, as do I, and that has researched for 3+ years (I'm at 2+ in my research), you should know what is the best amount of PAR for your plants.
If you can afford that $4000 thing you can afford a $300-$400 PAR meter, and then check your PAR at plant tops where plants are healthiest, after many readings from many plants, you'll know what the best PAR values for whatever stages of a plant.
It's what I have done in my own tests, and I have come to my own conclusions.
To answer your question, PAR is spectrum and ratio dependent. You need (and should have done long ago by the way) to find out what is the best PAR using YOUR OWN LIGHTS, and testing it yourself.
You're welcome.
If you can afford that $4000 thing you can afford a $300-$400 PAR meter, and then check your PAR at plant tops where plants are healthiest, after many readings from many plants, you'll know what the best PAR values for whatever stages of a plant.
It's what I have done in my own tests, and I have come to my own conclusions.
To answer your question, PAR is spectrum and ratio dependent. You need (and should have done long ago by the way) to find out what is the best PAR using YOUR OWN LIGHTS, and testing it yourself.
You're welcome.
guod
Well-Known Member
People often refer to light output in terms of PAR. Technically, this is incorrect. PAR is typically measured as PPFD.
PAR(W/m²) PPFD( µmol/(m²s))
i think this gives is a good start...
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-02/sj/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-03/sj/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-04/sj/index.php
PAR(W/m²) PPFD( µmol/(m²s))
i think this gives is a good start...
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-02/sj/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-03/sj/index.php
http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-04/sj/index.php
Perro Negro
Member
We do know what works through research AND real world testing/experience but you use words like "best amount of PAR" which I did not ask anywhere. I am looking for absolutes, assuming we don't start discussing genetic variability and MOST importantly CO2 levels which are shown to have a drastic effect on a plants ability to utilize light for photosynthesis.
As I said, the manufactures actually claim that you should not use a PAR meter (quantum meter) for particularly bright light sources. And any good grow light would be considered a bright light source. They do recommend a Spectroradiometer which gives us a more accurate PAR reading than a "PAR meter" for the application. If you took a minute to look up a specroradiometer or "thing" as you put it you would have seen it is capable of producing PAR results and much more. Most importantly it provides us with a real-time spectrum reading. This is as important as PAR which was my point of bringing up since I can show you lights that have a high PAR but you could never actually flower with. Do us both a favor and use your PAR meter to measure the PAR of a bright green light you would use during the dark cycle of flower and tell me how high a PAR it registers, then tell me how you can flower with it.
I don't believe I asked you what PAR is, and no, it is not ratio dependent. PAR measures the light that falls into the photosynthetically available radiation curve but does not take into account ratios, see my comment about green light above. Perhaps you are thinking of YPF (Yield Photon Flux) which does attempt to take into account the actual ratios, although I believe it is also flawed for our uses and most don't have access to a device to measure YPF.
Perro Negro
Member
Thanks guod. The information in your second link goes into detail about why one MUST look at the spectrum in addition to and absolute PAR value. The example of two different light sources with relatively the same PAR but drastically different spectrums illustrates this perfectly.
HiloReign
Well-Known Member
Absolute values for something that has no absolute variables? Maybe this is way over my head?
Perro Negro
Member
hey Eraserhead, take a look at the last link guod posted (http://reefkeeping.com/issues/2006-04/sj/index.php) which has the following in it near the bottom:
For the purpose of photosynthesis, light is termed Photosynthetically Available Radiation (PAR). This radiation's range is identical to what humans can see in the 400-700 nm range, but each photon is treated uniformly in this measurement (unlike the photometric measurement, which weights the photons according to how the human eye sees them).
You still think that PAR is ratio dependent or where you referring to something else?
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
There are no absolutes. The best amount of PAR is dependent on what your spectrum is. I said that already.
I do not really care for LED companies that are secretive about their spectrum and other specs, but then bloats that they are the best and no other can beat it. If that is the case, let's see some datasheets? Why not share your spectrum?
I buy my LEDs directly from the factory that makes them, helipto.com , and I show my customers data sheets if they ask. I tell them PAR values if they ask. And I tell them parts numbers and where I got the LEDs from if they ask. And I am not in any threat of going out of business any time soon. I make decent money and I have fun doing what I do. I encourage people to copy me.
Why not tell us about your Epistar LEDs? Do you use a 660nm that is more than 70mA max power?
Spoiler alert! Epistar does not make most of the colors you are using.
PAR specific, I have found that 600-800 Umol'/s at the plant tops is best for flowering plants, 300-500 Umol'/s is good for veg.
I have also learned, the more heavy you are in the 500-600nm area, the more plants can tolerate higher amounts of PAR. If there's too much 500-600nm, it doesn't help yield anymore.
I have learned that on some plants, bleaching occurs at 950 Umol'/s, and when bleaching is going on, so is stunting.
I do not have a fancy spectroradiometer, but I do have a spreadsheet that simulates the spectrum by using, well, I do not feel like explaining it, just look up LEDengins spectrum tool, I have one that is similar that is particular to the LEDs I use, which I tell everyone what they are, no secrets. Can you show us at least a simulation like this here:
Or at least something that you want your customers to think is in there?
If 1000 Umol'/s (for the sake of using an easy number) is ideal when you have a proper spectrum, wouldn't it take more than 1000 Umol'/s to achieve that same results if the spectrum is off?
I do not really care for LED companies that are secretive about their spectrum and other specs, but then bloats that they are the best and no other can beat it. If that is the case, let's see some datasheets? Why not share your spectrum?
I buy my LEDs directly from the factory that makes them, helipto.com , and I show my customers data sheets if they ask. I tell them PAR values if they ask. And I tell them parts numbers and where I got the LEDs from if they ask. And I am not in any threat of going out of business any time soon. I make decent money and I have fun doing what I do. I encourage people to copy me.
Why not tell us about your Epistar LEDs? Do you use a 660nm that is more than 70mA max power?
Spoiler alert! Epistar does not make most of the colors you are using.
Like I said, I do not mind if people know my what I learned in my research.
PAR specific, I have found that 600-800 Umol'/s at the plant tops is best for flowering plants, 300-500 Umol'/s is good for veg.
I have also learned, the more heavy you are in the 500-600nm area, the more plants can tolerate higher amounts of PAR. If there's too much 500-600nm, it doesn't help yield anymore.
I have learned that on some plants, bleaching occurs at 950 Umol'/s, and when bleaching is going on, so is stunting.
I do not have a fancy spectroradiometer, but I do have a spreadsheet that simulates the spectrum by using, well, I do not feel like explaining it, just look up LEDengins spectrum tool, I have one that is similar that is particular to the LEDs I use, which I tell everyone what they are, no secrets. Can you show us at least a simulation like this here:
Or at least something that you want your customers to think is in there?
The amount of PAR a plant needs is most definitely spectrum and ratio dependent!!
If 1000 Umol'/s (for the sake of using an easy number) is ideal when you have a proper spectrum, wouldn't it take more than 1000 Umol'/s to achieve that same results if the spectrum is off?
Rorschachi
Member
EH, BH, VS - Those are for "Eraserhead" (Decepticon)
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
Event Horizon & Black Hole?
stardustsailor
Well-Known Member
........+1!
...+10!
...+100!
...+1000 !
May I add ,that the amount of PAR ( 360-750 nm ) a plant needs is -apart from spectrum and ratio dependent-also dependent
from light angle and dispersion ,duration,photomorphogenesis and genetics of plant ,temperature,CO2 concentration,fertilisation and few other variables....
So ...I may also add to the example that 500umoles/sec of a " biased but balanced " spectrum,probably can be utilised ( ...differently...) to achieve same / close enough results as with a " proper " spectrum ,of 1000umoles/sec flux ....
...
Maybe...
Eraserhead
Well-Known Member
How's things going SDS? Any good progress with the Astir panels? I'm eyeing a few of those for my smaller 2x2 tent. Maybe we can do a trade or something.
One of the reasons I dropped the blue LEDs in place of the whites. Light angle and dispersion.
Plants do not like all colors equally. Blue being one of the colors they need less of, and too much messes them up.
In an LED panel, regardless of size and shape, all the LEDs will cross paths in the middle, and directly beneath the panel will have the highest concentration of everything.
There maybe enough proper amounts of blue not under the panel, but 3-4Xs too much right under it, which in most cases, is the core of the plant.
The same goes for too much 660nm. I think some needs to be there, but just in moderation.
Bigger the light, the less blue should be used. My opinion anyways. Not definitive.
This is true.
One of the reasons I dropped the blue LEDs in place of the whites. Light angle and dispersion.
Plants do not like all colors equally. Blue being one of the colors they need less of, and too much messes them up.
In an LED panel, regardless of size and shape, all the LEDs will cross paths in the middle, and directly beneath the panel will have the highest concentration of everything.
There maybe enough proper amounts of blue not under the panel, but 3-4Xs too much right under it, which in most cases, is the core of the plant.
The same goes for too much 660nm. I think some needs to be there, but just in moderation.
Bigger the light, the less blue should be used. My opinion anyways. Not definitive.