Growing in blue lights

British_Hempire · Mar 27, 2009

Not at all, a lot of places would be fine, we're only talking about determining if UV is at all important. Personally I think it isn't as if it was, greenhouse grows would produce less potent buds than outdoor, and I don't think that's the case at all. I am pretty sure the grows reef did in the tropics were under glass and glass blocks UV.

Nirrity · Mar 27, 2009

British_Hempire said:
Not at all, a lot of places would be fine

I think only equator and tropics.
Table
Calculated clear sky noontime erythemally effective UVB irradiances (mW m-2 CIE erythemally weighted) on a horizontal surface as a function of latitude and time of year for the sea level in the Northern Hemisphere using typical ozone values

Hazeman · Mar 27, 2009

hey NIRRITY in that picture of the first plant with the wire mesh did you cut off all the fan leaves ? :420:

Nirrity · Mar 27, 2009

[offtopic]That's pre-harvest foto after 5 days in dark[/offtopic]

Josey Wales · Mar 28, 2009

Jalisco Kid said:
I feel that growing sat leaning plants indoors without uvb is is like the difference between bubble and dry sift. They both work but one is a better smoke. I have nothing to guage this by but 20 years of smoking but I can feel the difference in my oax. under uvb and without. Of course it could be my sub-conscious justifying the cost and time. JK

Hey JK,

What do you think is better, bubble or dry? I'm guessing dry bcuz traditional hash is made from dry isn't it? I have never done a comparison and only made bubble hash for myself.

Jalisco Kid · Mar 28, 2009

JW I feel bubble has a sterile taste to it, loses some flavor. JK

British_Hempire · Mar 28, 2009

Jalisco Kid said:
JW I feel bubble has a sterile taste to it, loses some flavor. JK

Me, hazyfontazy and thc4sim all agree fully with this, sat here discussing same thing, terpenoids and other nice tasting stuff is water solubke so is lost in the water/ice hash prcoess but nit in dry sift, made two batches of dry sift here tonight, one by hand with a silk screen and one in a scuffbox motor tumbler, both from nice frozen trim and oh so tasty, sod bubble, the finest hash is well aged clean dry sift!

Josey Wales · Mar 28, 2009

Yield wise, is dry comparable to bubble?

Reeferman · Mar 28, 2009

I dont even make bubble anymore only dry that kinda says it all !

Nirrity · Mar 29, 2009

I wonder what makes hash brown, dark or blonde

convex · Mar 29, 2009

Hello Nirrity!

I am dismantling my reef aquarium in the next few weeks, will transfer 10,000K 250watt MH and 2x96w dual spectrum actinic into veg area and see how they perform.

Cheers

Nirrity · Mar 29, 2009

Greetings Convex! Do you believe in UV-B/UV-A/blue or you just kind enough to support my idea? :)

BTW, how long did you MH lamps work?

British_Hempire · Mar 29, 2009

I am putting together a small 2 foot x 1 foot test grow to trial this UV/Blue theory, I happen to have a number of LED panels I made a while back to enable spectral experiments of this type. I have 3 panels with 385nm UV LEDs, 1 with 390nm UV LEDs, 1 with 400nm UV LEDs, 3 that are half 440-470nm blue, half cool white, 4 that are one third 385nm UV, one third blue and one third warm white and 3 that are mostly red 645nm with 20% warm white. Each panel is 6W and runs on it's own PSU, so I will have 15 x 6W of LEDs with a large amount of UVA and Blue, a total of 90W. Add in the 100W Luxeon LED array I also have that uses 12 x 3W 645nm red, 6 x 3W warm white and 6 x 660nm red and I will be able to experiment nicely. I will do two plants, one an indica, probably Purple Afghan, and the other a sativa, probably Haze. with 190W of LED lighting covering 2 square foot that's a lot of light, plus I have added 50W of warm white CFLs (one 30W, one 20W) AND four 12 inch 6W 617nm red CCFLs running on two inverters powered by an old AT computer PSU, so I will have 264W of lighting for only 2 square feet so we'll see if UVA and blue make a difference as I'll do a run with all the lighting on then a second run with the same cuts with the same lighting minus the UVA and see if the UVA makes any difference at all. After that I will do some further experiments with different spectrums as with all these different light sources I can do a lot of tweaking. I'm not using digital plugin timers, instead I have setup an old IBM thinkpad I have installed Linux on to use it as an X11 automation controller, when I get it all wired up I will be able to switch each LED panel, CFL and CCFL individually as many times as I like so I can develop all kinds of sophisticated lighting patterns and do all kinds of experiments. I'll start a thread with pics and all the info shortly.

convex · Mar 29, 2009

Nirrity said:
Greetings Convex! Do you believe in UV-B/UV-A/blue or you just kind enough to support my idea? :)

BTW, how long did you MH lamps work?

I have no experience using UV-B, however I have always believed it does play some part.

I have finished a number of MezoAmerican sats indoors and they are great in all aspects, but don't compare to the psycho-active trippy stones columbians and mexicans had back in the day. i can write off some of the effects back then to low tolerance and being new to smoking, but that can only account for some of the effects, and considering I was still getting stupified by sats after daily smoking for years back then, I do believe thier is something to the old "outdoor is better" line of thinking.

Back to the lights, the 10,000K is only a few months old - not sure of the lifespan yet.
I have always thought the blue actinic spectrum may be beneficial as it provides photosynthesis to the symbiotic algae in corals, therfore I suspect the 420-465 nm range may be quite useful to a plant as well.

Cheers

Cheers

Geoff

British_Hempire · Mar 30, 2009

I've installed 11 of the LED panels in the small cabinet I'll be using for the test. There are also two aluminum reflectors mounted in the top that currently hold a 30W CFL and a 20W CFL, I might change these CFLs for LED bulbs if high wattage but not too expensive units turn up.

Nirrity · Mar 30, 2009

That go insane friends! British_Hempire bro, you have missed 280nm-315nm !! That's the real UV-B, 350 is UV-AI. I use Philips TL12 which emitted a broad spectrum of UVB radiation between 280 and 360 nm with a peak at about 305 nm. In peoples TL12 gives much more MEDs than TL01 which is far more refined and less harmful in medical application, but since cannabinols have a peak absorbtion about 280-300nm I think better coverage of this area is possible with TL12 only.
Look at hte plots to compare.

British_Hempire · Mar 30, 2009

Very true, I realise i have no UVB, I will add some later after doing some preliminary testing with just UVA.

doggystyled73 · Mar 31, 2009

wow.. this thread just brought me back to a previous one concerning UVB, trying to find the link now, and i remember BH mentioning that every time the discussion comes up, an article published by some "loon" comes up that's total bologni. I do remember back on Reef's site about 2 years ago there was a thread concerning the UVB relation to THC/Terpenoid production, and there was a link to an article that explained it pretty thoroughly which i saved but unfortunately cannot retrieve on my PC due to the site being down. I believe if Reeferman has all his forum information saved that article could be retrieved. The guy who produced it basically explained that the only way to produce bud indoors as good as outdoor bud, you'd have to replicate EVERY thing the sun/environment plays to produced this so called "fully realized THC". It involved using a light high in the red spectrum in the morning(HPS or incadascent) then a light high in UVB in the 270-290 nano range in the afternoon, before switching back to the HPS or red light in the evening. Personally after reading this article it inspired me to try some experiments myself but wasn't able to conduct them with success. The UVB light i used was the Mega Zoo Ray. I should have used about 4 of them to direct the light at different angles but cash was tight at the time. I will post a pic of the box it came in.
Link to the "hallucigenic buds" article from ReeferWorld that no longer works:

doggystyled73 · Mar 31, 2009

The infamous reptile light: link to nanometer range:
http://www.reptileuv.com/docs/MegaRayPrototypeMetalHalidesOct2008.pdf

Nirrity · Mar 31, 2009

That was a bullshit article, the "fully realized THC" is oxymoron by itself, it's either THC or not THC at all :) I do believe that UV-B play a role but such articles sounds like a sectants scripting. Let's stay clear-headed

Growing in blue lights

Growing in blue lights

British_Hempire

Guest

Nirrity

Attachments

Hazeman

Breeder

Nirrity

Josey Wales

Jalisco Kid

Guest

British_Hempire

Guest

Josey Wales

Reeferman

Guest

Nirrity

convex

Nirrity

British_Hempire

Guest

convex

British_Hempire

Guest

Attachments

Nirrity

Attachments

British_Hempire

Guest

doggystyled73

Guest

doggystyled73

Guest

Attachments

Nirrity

Growing in blue lights

Growing in blue lights

British_Hempire

Guest

Nirrity

Attachments

Hazeman

Breeder

Nirrity

Josey Wales

Jalisco Kid

Guest

British_Hempire

Guest

Josey Wales

Reeferman

Guest

Nirrity

convex

Nirrity

British_Hempire

Guest

convex

British_Hempire

Guest

Attachments

Nirrity

Attachments

British_Hempire

Guest

doggystyled73

Guest

doggystyled73

Guest

Attachments

Nirrity

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency