Why are COBs better, and whats so great about the 3590?

Resinhound said:
There are HID bulbs designed specifically for growing plants, and those are the bulbs that are mainly used. So ya, there's that pesky science thing again.
Click to expand...
Fun facts.
1. People ran HID's long before horticultural bulbs existed.
2. Many growers don't use horticultural bulbs.
3. Growers that do use horticultural bulbs often do it because they last longer, not because of the "enhanced" spectrum.

You can throw the science word around all you like, but you've yet to post any actual science, or even facts for that matter.
 
stardustsailor said:
Simply because most (not all ...see : Valoya ... ) "major" LED grow light manufacturers are designing and manufacturing their fixtures as complementary lights and not as sole sources of light for plant growth .
You see, the sole (main ) sources of light that ALL the greenhouses use ,already provide good amounts of the "green" wavelength portion of visible light ,being the sun itself or plenty of MH/HPS lamps -mainly in colder climates.

Complementary ,is the key word ...
Most often overlooked and/or neglected ,by many-if not all- "blurple" hardcore fans ...
FGS ,even NASA has "revisited" the "solid state white light for plant growth " thingy ....

Still ,you should trust and believe your own eyes and not the industry's "trend" ...
As the latter is prone to constant change ,while what you experience as "it-does-the-job-fine" is not ...

" Watt for Watt ,have I seen/experienced a blurple light outperform a white light ? "
That's the right question you should be asking yourself .
As simple as that ....

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
HOLY SHIT STARDUST IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU! :) :) :)
 
stardustsailor said:
Simply because most (not all ...see : Valoya ... ) "major" LED grow light manufacturers are designing and manufacturing their fixtures as complementary lights and not as sole sources of light for plant growth .
You see, the sole (main ) sources of light that ALL the greenhouses use ,already provide good amounts of the "green" wavelength portion of visible light ,being the sun itself or plenty of MH/HPS lamps -mainly in colder climates.

Complementary ,is the key word ...
Most often overlooked and/or neglected ,by many-if not all- "blurple" hardcore fans ...
FGS ,even NASA has "revisited" the "solid state white light for plant growth " thingy ....

Still ,you should trust and believe your own eyes and not the industry's "trend" ...
As the latter is prone to constant change ,while what you experience as "it-does-the-job-fine" is not ...

" Watt for Watt ,have I seen/experienced a blurple light outperform a white light ? "
That's the right question you should be asking yourself .
As simple as that ....

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...

And osram "revisited" too:)......... good to see you, hope everything is going well!
 
Bubblin said:
Fun facts.
1. People ran HID's long before horticultural bulbs existed.
2. Many growers don't use horticultural bulbs.
3. Growers that do use horticultural bulbs often do it because they last longer, not because of the "enhanced" spectrum.

You can throw the science word around all you like, but you've yet to post any actual science, or even facts for that matter.
Click to expand...

I'm not here to post facts, only what's commonly known and my opinion, that's it. If you have a problem with my opinion, then I think you have to ask yourself why that is.

We don't have to defend cobs to the death you know... I doubt cree is sending you any royalty checks.
 
CobKits said:
the cobs have pretty astonishing lumen maintenance, and we run them even softer than that. really they are obsolete before you need to replace them
Click to expand...

Do you cut the silicone off chips ever ? I see people doing that and I think they must get more light but then it must mean dirt and moisture can damage your cob ? also if you touch the chip when its on with no silicone over it you must get a bit of a burn or a little zap off it ?

Just if a 3000k or 5000k cob gets the silicone cut off it must give off more uv and IR and light overall ?

I see the gardening chips the silicon is normally clear where as 3000k has a yellow tint and 5000k has a blue tint

How much light does that protective silicone lose me ? the main benefit seems to be its easy to clean if it gets dirty I assume an exposed cob is much harder to clean ?
 
Resinhound said:
You used HID as an excuse to defend the fact that cobs weren't designed for horticulture. Let's not be coy here.We know perfectly well why you even referenced HID in the first place.
Click to expand...
It was referenced because your statement was borderline special.

But feel free to science us at any time.
 
Bubblin said:
It was referenced because your statement was borderline special.

But feel free to science us at any time.
Click to expand...

It was referenced because you for some reason felt the need to come to cob lighting defense... Just like always a few rabid fan boys have to jump in to defend cobs to the death. And just like usual they don't stop to think why they feel the need to do that.

But anyways, have a good day.
 
puffenuff said:
I don't think those are the reasons, but an interesting point of view nonetheless.
Click to expand...

Because a 5W diode costs like less than $0.10 and a good COB it costs anywhere from $12-$45 Its all about how much they can sell it to you and about profit margins.

There are companies that use COB Tech like PLC, Northern Grow Light, and Timber to name a few. If you make something that costs $50-$80 (in parts) and re sell it for $700 then youve got a business... as long as its continued to be pushed to uneducated people. That said they work, and Im sure some people like the color... But that is preference, and I prefer to use something that is cost positive for myself. If Im dropping $800 on raw parts Im happy with wiring them myself knowing that they will be far superior.
 
And somewhere here lies the enigmatic (and with plenty of irony ...sort of ...) question :

How on earth it happens that a light (i.e. COB LEDs) that was not designed and made for use
for horticultural purposes ,outperforms a light (Red+Blue LEDs ) which was designed and made specifically for the job ?

As it was mentioned before ,complementary is a major key word for answering that ...
Still -to make things even more complicated for our friend Smoke-A-Cola - there are other things too ...

Most people here seem to overemphasize variables of light like : PPD ,PPF ,YPF ,RQE ,etc ....
But there are other variables (of a light source ) that play a major role in plant growth and reproduction ...

Variables that are seldomly mentioned ,let alone analysed ...
Variables like : LWIR & FIR (heat ) radiation , R:FR ratio ,
Phytochrome Photoequilibrium aka Phytochrome Photostationary State (PPE/PPS) and some
few others ...

It's not uncommon a very efficient solid state light source with high PPD/PPF/YPF & RQE values ,
while it performs great regarding the vegetative growth ,it sucks when it comes to reproductive stages
(flowering and/or fruiting ) ,simply because of the abnormally high PPE value ...

Food 4 Thought ...
 
stardustsailor said:
Simply because most (not all ...see : Valoya ... ) "major" LED grow light manufacturers are designing and manufacturing their fixtures as complementary lights and not as sole sources of light for plant growth .
You see, the sole (main ) sources of light that ALL the greenhouses use ,already provide good amounts of the "green" wavelength portion of visible light ,being the sun itself or plenty of MH/HPS lamps -mainly in colder climates.

Complementary ,is the key word ...
Most often overlooked and/or neglected ,by many-if not all- "blurple" hardcore fans ...
FGS ,even NASA has "revisited" the "solid state white light for plant growth " thingy ....

Still ,you should trust and believe your own eyes and not the industry's "trend" ...
As the latter is prone to constant change ,while what you experience as "it-does-the-job-fine" is not ...

" Watt for Watt ,have I seen/experienced a blurple light outperform a white light ? "
That's the right question you should be asking yourself .
As simple as that ....

Cheers.
:peace:
Click to expand...
Watt to watt you say??? Thats an easy challenge.
 
MeGaKiLlErMaN said:
Watt to watt you say??? Thats an easy challenge.
Click to expand...

" Watt" is used as a unit to measure both electric power and radiant light power ...

Easy challenge ?
It depends ...
Whether you want to compare which fixture is more efficient at turning electricity into light ,
or whether you want to compare which fixture is more efficient at turning electricity into buds ...
;-)
 
stardustsailor said:
" Watt" is used as a unit to measure both electric power and radiant light power ...

Easy challenge ?
It depends ...
Whether you want to compare which fixture is more efficient at turning electricity into light ,
or whether you want to compare which fixture is more efficient at turning electricity into buds ...
;-)
Click to expand...

For sure Im following, But Ive see what people get and Im just not impressed with the blurple is all.
According to: http://www.growweedeasy.com/kind-k5-xl1000-led-grow-light-journal
The average yield for a KindXL1000 is 11-11.5OZ in a 5x5. Not bad, but are we really happy with 0.479G/LightW at the wall? No never would I look at that as a success.

Now Once I get this side by side done then I will know for sure how cobs stack up against HPS which is the next closest thing. My first grow ever... was a DE HPS 1000W in a 5x5. Light at 2-3Ft. I netted .8G/ Room W and it had complications in the winter.

Facts show they are not great.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top