using more watts in veg and reducing watts in flowering = better yield?

[pistone1971]

Thanks for all the thought provoking dialogue and the introduction to TED and that video was well worth the 18 minutes invested. I'm now a subscriber to that site.

In the spirit of 'protecting the vacuum' are you familiar with the design obsolescence characteristics of HID lamps in general and horticultural in particular? There used to be a group of lamp manufacturers that set these standards and they were referred to as the Phoebus Cartel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
Certainly with the anti-trust laws we have in place that could not still be the case could it? Our governments protect us from this type of collusion.

Thanks for the reply to what I'm sure was a very colorful post by whatever the hell his name was (the ignore button erases him completely from the thread--pretty sweet!)--but end of the day it's not worth it.

Better to spend time saying something to a person who uses sense, rather than someone who desperately wants to make some--but can't seem to.

There is always resistance like this when someone calls out a particular process as wrong or inefficient--especially one that is so widely used. People have used these processes as "logical supports" if you will in their arguments to themselves about why or how they should do a particular thing to a plant.

They don't want to realize that those logical supports are in fact illogical, and not very supportive--they especially don't want to do this when the process they've been using has proven to be better than something they used before. Better isn't best, though.

When I get into arguments like this, I'm reminded of the following (very poignant) speech given by Elaine Morgan. It's about people protecting the absence of knowledge--because much of the iterative knowledge they have built has it's support in a discredited theory.

No one wants to throw grams per watt out--because a helluva lot of analysis has been based on this figure.

I call this, as Elaine does, "protecting a vacuum."

It's why the guy couldn't come up with a good counter-point, he's protecting the absence of a good explanation--and as a result he doesn't have a good explanation for why he's doing that. Ends up looking the fool, at least to logical folk (which are the folk that matter to me, generally).

Anyway, check it out--well worth the 18 minutes. This is the type of lady that gives me the strength to grapple with people like this till I'm sure no amenable conclusion can be met (something you've let me know previously that you admire, and can't understand about me):

e

 

[squiggly]

It certainly could be that way--they can't technically collude with each other this way, but much as politicians don't need to have a conspiracy meeting to know whats good for them, neither do these guys.

...and yeah, TED is an absolutely amazing website--have fun paroozing all the videos.

 

[ttystikk]

Thanks for all the thought provoking dialogue and the introduction to TED and that video was well worth the 18 minutes invested. I'm now a subscriber to that site.

In the spirit of 'protecting the vacuum' are you familiar with the design obsolescence characteristics of HID lamps in general and horticultural in particular? There used to be a group of lamp manufacturers that set these standards and they were referred to as the Phoebus Cartel. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phoebus_cartel
Certainly with the anti-trust laws we have in place that could not still be the case could it? Our governments protect us from this type of collusion.
e

I find it interesting that this cartel existed right under the nose of the Smoot-Hawley antitrust act and wasn't affirmatively stopped. In America, it seems, corporations get to do what the fuck they want until forced to stop or change. At least in Europe, this is no longer the case, as the Eurozone's antitrust watchdogs take their job very seriously indeed. I do hope Elizabeth Warren is elected the next junior Senator from Mass-a-two-shits, to underscore the need for SOMEONE in our government to be looking out for the consumer!

Why is it so quickly forgotten that this country has made its biggest economic gains when the middle class was most protected and encouraged? I mean, how do the megacorps expect to make any damned money without one? The answer; 'overseas expansion'; yes, that's right- after ruining the market here with anticompetitive policies that impoverish our citizens, they just expand overseas and deny any responsibility for the havoc caused in our society...

 

[Toker Ace]

Wow that was a hell of a read! Squiggly my hat is off to you. I am amazed at how profoundly ignorant someone can be. Back to the topic of 10 pages ago, several readers have opined that the intuitively obvious of "less light =less yield". Is the thread about using less light at the end of flower? The main strain that I am growing now doesn't really seem to put on much real weight in the last 7 to 10 days and I believe that using less light that last week would not decrease my yield. Ty, seems that if you could measure your light in one spot over time and record it for a 12 hr period then you could get a Light /hour measurement. GPW= masturbating. What a useless concept.

 

[ttystikk]

Wow that was a hell of a read! Squiggly my hat is off to you. I am amazed at how profoundly ignorant someone can be. Back to the topic of 10 pages ago, several readers have opined that the intuitively obvious of "less light =less yield". Is the thread about using less light at the end of flower? The main strain that I am growing now doesn't really seem to put on much real weight in the last 7 to 10 days and I believe that using less light that last week would not decrease my yield. Ty, seems that if you could measure your light in one spot over time and record it for a 12 hr period then you could get a Light /hour measurement. GPW= masturbating. What a useless concept.

Toker, agreed that your suggestion would give me a good 12 hour average of lighting intensity. That would be a bit misleading and would not address the core feature of the system, which is blasting the plants with more lumens than they can handle continuously, but only doing it intermittently. For that, I think I'm going to have to just run a head to head, while eliminating all other variables as best I can.

 

[Toker Ace]

Toker, agreed that your suggestion would give me a good 12 hour average of lighting intensity. That would be a bit misleading and would not address the core feature of the system, which is blasting the plants with more lumens than they can handle continuously, but only doing it intermittently. For that, I think I'm going to have to just run a head to head, while eliminating all other variables as best I can.

Yes I see what you mean. Light /time would indicate how well your light mover spreads the light out, it's irrelevant to the efficiency that the light is being used. I think movers work. I use one. I have no way to quantify how much yield is improved(not maximized by any stretch of the imagination).
I read an article on photoperiodism that discussed light saturation as a side topic of what actually happens during 12 hrs of dark. The conclusion was that a 15 minute dose of the correct wavelength of red light will "reset" the plant instead of 12 hrs of dark. The ramifications are profound. I will try to find it.
Let's use standard units at the farm like Squig says.
At least use a light meter with lumens. Watts means nothing except for power demand. Even if another farmer is using different units, comparative analysis can still be done. (I changed lights from x bulb to y bulb and mid canopy lumens dropped 50%) This I believe is why some are adamant about not wasting experiment time collecting useless data.
pH should be a number. Not "kind of sweet or sour"
EC instead of converted ppms
Bringing up GPW should bring on a shitstorm of ridicule because it's so fucking retarded that it isn't even wrong.
G/KWH is how much power you use to grow buds.
Ty, Squiggly, keep up the great work and try to keep bringing the "artists" over to some scientific method. Squiggly, I'm an old man and kind of judgmental so here goes: you gave that guy way more of your time than he deserved. I read the closed off mind at the second or third post where he was ridiculing you for being intelligent.

 

[Disambiguator]

Thanks for the Phoebus Cartel info which is new to me. Obsolescence is alive and well, planned and/or unplanned. Cheap 'Made in China' products, particularly w/ moving parts have a quick turnover. It's no reflection on the ability of the Chinese to manufacture quality products. In the 50's, Made in Japan had the same stigma. The automobile industry demonstrates planned obsolescence at it's best. I was giving my neighbor a jump the other day, popped the hood and saw that they had replaced a hood rod, which is virtually indestructible, w/ a dinky hydraulic push rod.
Right on w/ the G/KWH!

 

[ttystikk]

Toker, your point about measurement is well taken. Since a little cheapie light meter doesn't log any data- and its readings can be gamed in so many ways- I'm saving up for a 'quantum meter', a device that at $350, will do a much better job of measuring PAR light and will log high and low light intensities, averages, etc, etc. Many also have an optional mounting system that reduces the chance of erroneous readings due to improper placement. BUT, if I end up looking or sounding like Scott Bakula, I'm getting a refund!

"Where fraud is permitted and connived at, or has no law to punish it, ​

the honest dealer is always undone, and the knave gets the advantage.~ Gulliver's Travels"​

Disambiguator, I really like this quote at the bottom of your posts. It neatly sums up what is basically wrong with the republican party's positions on corporate governance- and until the American people wake up to how badly we're being screwed by this, it won't change.

 

[Crysmatic]

Photosynthesis stops when light reaches a threshold. Zero light produces no photosynthesis. So I would say that alternating like that wouldn't work well...kind of like burning a frozen steak...it doesn't average out. The right conditions produces a mouth watering, juicy, grilled steak. (can you tell I'm hungry?) If the grill temp isn't quite bang on, you need to leave the steak on more or less...and still get a great result.

The idea of reducing hours/intensity after a certain point in the bloom phase is interesting. However, tropical plants see 12 hours of light from seed to flower. At some point bloom really slows down, and it would be interesting at what point you can cut light and not hurt yield (not interesting enough). On an 8 week cycle, 11 hours in the 7th week, and 10 hours in the 8th week, is a 3.125% savings. Again, with a 1000W light, who would risk losing roughly an oz, to save $1.25? I couldn't even justify the lost yield even if it cut the cycle short by several days (another $5). I'd also think that reducing your day shortens your harvest window, making it trickier to harvest at peak potency.

I know for a fact that a 1000W grow can use less than $5 worth of nutes per cycle - because I sell a buddy his nutes! Californians paying $0.204/kWh comes to $137 for a 1000W light per 8 week cycle. Figure in hvac, dehumidifier, air filter, fans, etc and pay yourself $1.50/hr for labour. Even if 32 oz of grade A bud costs $300, that's under $10/oz (way cheaper than a Starbucks' coffee habit!). If a few bucks per ounce really bothers you, then grow outdoors, or move! That's how you can minimise your electricity cost :)

Seriously, a real business would move where laws and uitlity costs are most favourable (China, lol). They try to minimise all of their expenses. Lighting cost only SEEMS high in the hobby field because our labour costs aren't figured in, and many growers pay ridiculous prices for hobby nutes. There's more to gain by treating your grow as a business, than trying to eke out a few grams, or save a few kWh (assuming you're already a good grower).

There may be some headway in "optimum" growing parameters...however, address the areas with the largest rewards FIRST. Don't obsess on the areas with the LEAST return. This is a success mentality, vs mental masturbation. my $.02

 

[LexLuthor]

Plants don't use watts, guess what, they don't use lumens either! Maybe the 50% drop in lumens from bulb x to y had alot to do with bulb x being "used" and bulb y being "new". Everybody does use Ph as a number and GPW is not retarded. If I veg for 4 weeks then bloom for 8 weeks and I harvest 1.2 GPW and you grew with the same time frame and got .4 GPW I think that is not a bad measure of how each one of us performed in our grow. It's not perfect but nothing else in life is perfect either, G/KWH is even less accurate of a measure to maximize light output. GPW is based on the exact watts being used in the grow room in terms of the amount of light and G/KWH has way too many variables in use i.e., microwave, stove, household lamps, computers, ect., so neither one is perfect but GPW is more accurate in terms of the grow room. Every bulb with the same wattage is rated within a PAR differential of about 10%, also light bulbs lose intensity over time with usage, therefore we will never have a perfect way of comparing eachothers grows unless everybody on Earth uses the exact same equipment, genetics and changes bulbs every 4 weeks (not gonna happen). So until then GPW is a great basis to compare results with one another as growers and the majority of growers use it with not many issues.

 

[ethnoman]

Even if reducing wattage during flowering doesn't affect yield (i.e. the yield neither increases nor decreases), I don't see any reason why it would actually lead to an increase. Unless dimmer light is a trigger for increased flower production, which to the best of my knowledge it isn't, how else could it work?

 

[Oregon Panda]

According to Joseph Pietri decreasing the hours of availible light increases yeilds. This is in a similar though pattern of saving money and maintaining( even gaining) on yeilds. This is just the first article I found but there are plenty more and you can even have a discussion about it with Joe on his facebook page, I talk to him rather frequently. (he has such great stories!) Anyway... Here is the article, there are plenty more availible on the subject with a simple google search.

 

[dankworth]

My plants want me to tailor the light intensity to their metabolic rate at the time.

 

[ttystikk]

According to Joseph Pietri decreasing the hours of availible light increases yeilds. This is in a similar though pattern of saving money and maintaining( even gaining) on yeilds. This is just the first article I found but there are plenty more and you can even have a discussion about it with Joe on his facebook page, I talk to him rather frequently. (he has such great stories!) Anyway... Here is the article, there are plenty more availible on the subject with a simple google search.

Fascinating article- thanks for the link! I use the 12/1 cycle in veg and I can attest to its efficiency. I don't know if it grows my girls in veg any faster, but it doesn't seem to slow them down at all.

I'm also experimenting with changing the day/night lengths in flower. In my case, I'm just emulating nature at this point; I start with 12 on/12 off (think Sept 21st), then every week, I cut 15 minutes off the day time, adding it to the dark length. This actually emulates nature's autumnal cycle quite well right around the 40th parallel. The schedule for flowering mentioned in the article seems a bit accelerated to me, but I'll try it at some point when the rest of my setup is well dialed in.

As far as teas are concerned, I got frustrated with my RDWC's touchiness and inconsistent results, so I'm going with a chow mix and topfeed for awhile. This will allow me to feed the roots with beneficial microbe teas with some confidence that they'll be in the substrate near the roots long enough to actually do some good, unlike water.

 

[ttystikk]

My plants want me to tailor the light intensity to their metabolic rate at the time.

So how do you know what that is?

 

[dankworth]

At the end, for example, when growth rate has slowed, and obvious external signs of growth are greatly diminished, then they want a more chilled out set of inputs. They do not want the environment they grew fast in.
So less light during the end. If they are growing hella fast, they can use higher light values effectively.
But it pisses them off at the end when there is too much light, they try to hide from the light because they cannot use all of it. Leaf shapes and angles tell a lot during this time.
They will also want lower daytime temps when things are slowing down, and correspondingly lower co2 ppm values.

 

[ttystikk]

At the end, for example, when growth rate has slowed, and obvious external signs of growth are greatly diminished, then they want a more chilled out set of inputs. They do not want the environment they grew fast in.
So less light during the end. If they are growing hella fast, they can use higher light values effectively.
But it pisses them off at the end when there is too much light, they try to hide from the light because they cannot use all of it. Leaf shapes and angles tell a lot during this time.
They will also want lower daytime temps when things are slowing down, and correspondingly lower co2 ppm values.

Hmmm... so less light duration, less light intensity, lower temps and less nutes. Sounds a lot like this season we like to call 'fall'. Coincidence?

 

[dankworth]

Hmmm... so less light duration, less light intensity, lower temps and less nutes. Sounds a lot like this season we like to call 'fall'. Coincidence?

For sure! They absolutely want fall-type conditions, at least mine do during flush to be happy. But with an abundance of blue light if you can help it.

 

[ttystikk]

For sure! They absolutely want fall-type conditions, at least mine do during flush to be happy. But with an abundance of blue light if you can help it.

Interesting re. the blue light- UVA and UVB to be precise? I'm already thinking of augmenting my spectrum this way, just not sure what sources I'll end up using.

 

[dankworth]

Interesting re. the blue light- UVA and UVB to be precise? I'm already thinking of augmenting my spectrum this way, just not sure what sources I'll end up using.

Dunno, they liked it better and better the more the light in the room was weighted towards MH spectrum during the 2-week flush.