mosfetti said:I mean that we care about the AREA of the grow, and not everything else.
micro |ˈmīkrō|
adjective [ attrib. ]
extremely small
I think that lighting, number of plants, yield, and everything else should not be a sort of 'measurement' to establish exactly if a grow is still micro or not.
I don't live in an "english speaking" country, so I apologize for my bad way to explain things!
Hope everything sounds clear enough! yo!
No problem Mosfetti, I understood fully and I am mostly in agreement. The amount of light, number of plants, (yield has it's own variables) and everything else is, for the most part, area dependent. Trying to base it on plant count is pretty much rendered moot by Dr Bud's SOG thread (along with yield), and microRU's "Nano" machine is certainly pushing the limits of w/sqft. But for generalized use these factors HAVE to come into play as far as the area to grow is concerned. I have heard many times here, that one plant/sqft, 50w/sqft, and one g/w was a good standard by which to judge one's own grow. Going on that it would seem that for just four plants one could yield, all things being optimal, 12 to 16 ounces. So that, at least to me, precludes more than, say, two square feet from the micro designation. At 100w/sqft, a 200w HID (yeah, I know, flouro's would make that a bit less problematic) would definitely put design skills to the test and anything more is for those rare individuals who LIKE pushing the envelope. I don't know, maybe trying to put parameters on something seemingly so elusive is just chasing the wind.
Namaste, mess
btw: Your english is better than some whose ONLY tongue is english and since you know more than one language, that makes you smarter than me.
Last edited: