-
Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
-
Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!
The LED Company I've Been Waiting For
- Thread starter PetFlora
- Start date
Hope you dropped by my grow thread for final pics and weight
In the ~ 3 months since I've flowered with it, BML has already introduced a SPYDR 1000, with 8 bars
I am still intrigued by options like...
Hot off the press
http://www.cree.com/LED-Components-...ys-Directional/XLamp-XML2-EZW?WT.mc_id=CRX420
Having seen lots of 600w hps harvests, I feel confident saying the SPYDR 600 provides an excellent energy efficient alternative, with far better canopy coverage and a lot less heat
I have also been a close follower of COB tech= one spectrum on a PBC (looks like sunny side up egg). It is already proving its' value for mj growers on other threads and here as well
Of great interest is: it is Fairly easy to do a modular 50-100w DIY, then simply add more of the same (but different spectrum) as $$$ permits
It's getting to point where even I might be successful doing a DIY
In the ~ 3 months since I've flowered with it, BML has already introduced a SPYDR 1000, with 8 bars
I am still intrigued by options like...
Hot off the press
http://www.cree.com/LED-Components-...ys-Directional/XLamp-XML2-EZW?WT.mc_id=CRX420
Having seen lots of 600w hps harvests, I feel confident saying the SPYDR 600 provides an excellent energy efficient alternative, with far better canopy coverage and a lot less heat
I have also been a close follower of COB tech= one spectrum on a PBC (looks like sunny side up egg). It is already proving its' value for mj growers on other threads and here as well
Of great interest is: it is Fairly easy to do a modular 50-100w DIY, then simply add more of the same (but different spectrum) as $$$ permits
It's getting to point where even I might be successful doing a DIY
Seems to Validate Using Osram Diodes
Seems to Validate Using Osram Diodes
BML uses Osrams
http://www.budmaster.co.uk/parmageddon.html
Minimum Output Drop Over Time
For example most led’s are made for industrial, commercial or domestic applications and they measure their drop in output over time based on a short general usage time.
So for example a Cree diode designed to be used in flood lighting or car headlights will drop output considerably when used for horticulture as these type of diodes are only expected to be on for 2-3 hours maximum at a time not for 12 – 20 hours at a time.
With the Osram led’s that we are using they are designed to be on for long periods of time and have a lifespan of double a normal led at a staggering 100,000 hours with very minimal drop in output over time.
Seems to Validate Using Osram Diodes
BML uses Osrams
http://www.budmaster.co.uk/parmageddon.html
Minimum Output Drop Over Time
For example most led’s are made for industrial, commercial or domestic applications and they measure their drop in output over time based on a short general usage time.
So for example a Cree diode designed to be used in flood lighting or car headlights will drop output considerably when used for horticulture as these type of diodes are only expected to be on for 2-3 hours maximum at a time not for 12 – 20 hours at a time.
With the Osram led’s that we are using they are designed to be on for long periods of time and have a lifespan of double a normal led at a staggering 100,000 hours with very minimal drop in output over time.
Those guys need to Google LM-80. Crees are tested.
http://www.cree.com/~/media/Files/C...Lamp/XLamp Application Notes/LM80_Results.pdf
the short: A cree cxa3050 running at an insane 105C was tested 6000 times and it's brightness based on the testing will be at 75% at 36,000 hours. This is non-stop running and testing.
I can find announcements of lm80 testing on osrams, but can't find the docs. I would be curious how many hours it will take to be at 75%. Saying something will die in 100,000 hours is not the same as saying how long it will be effective.
geneva_sativa
Well-known member
Greetings Pet Flora,
am curious,
how was the high from the spyder herb ?
and do you feel confident in the configuration of spectrum for veg and flower ?
would you do anything different ?
best regards,
geneva
am curious,
how was the high from the spyder herb ?
and do you feel confident in the configuration of spectrum for veg and flower ?
would you do anything different ?
best regards,
geneva
I have some pretty nit-picky customers who can afford the best. 2 have reordered
I gift some instead of tips. Their feedback is also extremely high (NPI)
I overshot the veg spectrum a bit.
If I were choosing one SPYDR 600 today, for both V & B, I would mix 10-15% 6000k and the rest 2700k.
hth
geneva_sativa
Well-known member
thanks PetFlora
that helps a lot !
If you are going to order please mention me
Also, I'm think 2 bars would be cool white, the other 4 @ 2700K
The CW bars probably in position 2 & 4
but they may not provide that yet, so you might have to mix the CW in with the 2700Ks, which will work just fine, too- maybe better
geneva_sativa
Well-known member
^^ cheers PetFlora
Why Green NMs are Important
Why Green NMs are Important
Phototropin 1 and cryptochrome action in response to green light in combination with other wavelengths.
Wang Y1, Maruhnich SA, Mageroy MH, Justice JR, Folta KM.
Author information
Abstract
Genetic studies have shown the effects of various photoreceptors on early photomorphogenic processes, defining the precise time course of red (RL), far-red (FrL) and blue light (BL) action. In this study, the effect of green wavebands in conjunction with these responses is examined. Longer-term (end point; 24-96 h) analysis of hypocotyl elongation in enriched green environments shows an increase in growth compared to seedlings under blue, red or both together. The effect was only observed at lower fluence rates (<10 μmol/m² s). Genetic analyses demonstrate that cryptochromes are required for this GL effect, consistent with earlier findings, and that the phy receptors have no influence. However, analysis of early (minutes to hours) stem growth kinetics indicates that GL cannot reverse the cryptochrome-mediated BL effect during early stem growth inhibition, and instead acts additively with BL to drive cryptochrome-mediated inhibition. Green light (GL) treatments antagonize RL and FrL-mediated hypocotyl inhibition. The GL opposition of RL responses persists in phyA, phyB, cry1cry2 and phot2 mutants. The response requires phot1 and NPH3, suggesting that this is not a GL response, but instead a response to extremely low-fluence rate BL. Tests with dim BL (<0.1 μmol/m² s) confirm a previously uncharacterized phot1-dependent promotion of stem growth, opposing the effects of RL. These findings demonstrate how enriched green environments may adjust RL and BL photomorphogenic responses through both the crys and phot1 receptors, and define a new role for phot1 in stem growth promotion.
Why Green NMs are Important
Phototropin 1 and cryptochrome action in response to green light in combination with other wavelengths.
Wang Y1, Maruhnich SA, Mageroy MH, Justice JR, Folta KM.
Author information
Abstract
Genetic studies have shown the effects of various photoreceptors on early photomorphogenic processes, defining the precise time course of red (RL), far-red (FrL) and blue light (BL) action. In this study, the effect of green wavebands in conjunction with these responses is examined. Longer-term (end point; 24-96 h) analysis of hypocotyl elongation in enriched green environments shows an increase in growth compared to seedlings under blue, red or both together. The effect was only observed at lower fluence rates (<10 μmol/m² s). Genetic analyses demonstrate that cryptochromes are required for this GL effect, consistent with earlier findings, and that the phy receptors have no influence. However, analysis of early (minutes to hours) stem growth kinetics indicates that GL cannot reverse the cryptochrome-mediated BL effect during early stem growth inhibition, and instead acts additively with BL to drive cryptochrome-mediated inhibition. Green light (GL) treatments antagonize RL and FrL-mediated hypocotyl inhibition. The GL opposition of RL responses persists in phyA, phyB, cry1cry2 and phot2 mutants. The response requires phot1 and NPH3, suggesting that this is not a GL response, but instead a response to extremely low-fluence rate BL. Tests with dim BL (<0.1 μmol/m² s) confirm a previously uncharacterized phot1-dependent promotion of stem growth, opposing the effects of RL. These findings demonstrate how enriched green environments may adjust RL and BL photomorphogenic responses through both the crys and phot1 receptors, and define a new role for phot1 in stem growth promotion.
Thanks very much for all the very good info. I've been interested in BML and through searching them found your thread. Happy to see you using full spectrum LED test grows which look great. I have also been looking at their LED build site and thinking that the
PPF (micromoles/sec)**
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule)
are the main stats to use as a guide and perhaps the "wall plug efficiency" for comparisons sake between sets.
It seems to me the highest PPF levels are achieved with the 5000K & 6500K diodes, but I guess from your experience you feel the 2700K is better? Could you explain?
When I try 13X 2700K w 2X 6500K I get:
PPF (micromoles/sec)** 24.9
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule)1.3
"wall plug efficiency" of 27%
Whereas with just 15X 5000K I get:
PPF (micromoles/sec)** 32.1
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule)1.7
"wall plug efficiency" of 37%
I had also been concerned Far Red spectrum would not be well enough supported and perhaps even the breadth of blues so looked at that as well.
I feel like the only thing I have to really go by is PPF and PPFD to try to achieve a given Day Light Integral.
Thanks,
NC
The charts are a bit misleading from a PPF/D efficiency standpoint
Blues are more efficient than reds but the red wavelength is bigger/broader
When designing a SPYDR for both veg and flower certain compromises need to be made as more blue spectrum is needed to veg, whereas more red spectrum is needed to build buds.
If you look at the individual RBG make up of each diode on BMLs site you will see sufficient blue in the 2700K diode to grow mj.
A few growers are using only 3000K COBs for veg and flower, without the expected stretch, but mj benefits from having more cool white (~ 5000K)
Please tell BML my grow thread helped you to make your decision to go with BML
hth
Blues are more efficient than reds but the red wavelength is bigger/broader
When designing a SPYDR for both veg and flower certain compromises need to be made as more blue spectrum is needed to veg, whereas more red spectrum is needed to build buds.
If you look at the individual RBG make up of each diode on BMLs site you will see sufficient blue in the 2700K diode to grow mj.
A few growers are using only 3000K COBs for veg and flower, without the expected stretch, but mj benefits from having more cool white (~ 5000K)
Please tell BML my grow thread helped you to make your decision to go with BML
hth
From reading lots of your other posts I get the impression that you are aware of all this, but I’ve spent some time trying to understand all of this and would like to share and move the conversation forward... and there may be others following along that could use some “detail” (perhaps too much, sorry)...So...
Yes, as I have been digging into this, I have noticed how the LED’s PAR charts relate the LED to itself instead of a power measuring metric (watts, lumens, or photosynthetic photon flux). Each band of the spectrum is shown as a percentage of the whole LED output, instead of relating it to a power measurement which makes it hard to compare one diode to the next to tell which one is more powerful or efficient.
However, this info is available on the LED customization page in the "Your Fixture's Estimated Performance Details*” block on the right. This block is further broken into three sections which provide calculated estimates for selected the LED “set” from three different “points of view”.
The first, are the “standard” measurements of how many watts of electricity are estimated to be “used” (“drawn from the wall”-I believe), an estimate of how many “radiometric watts” (radiant flux) [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometry ] will be put out by the LEDs, and then an efficiency calculation probably based on that radiant flux per watt of electricity used (Not sure though).
The second section is oriented toward the commercial lighting industry (not grow lighting or agricultural industry) and measures LEDs in lumens, also listed are CIE color space measurements, along with CCT (correlated color temperature) and CRI (color rendering index) measurements. All of these are oriented to how our eyes perceive light [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(unit) ].
Finally, the third section is oriented to the agricultural industry and how plants respond to light. Here we are provided with PPF (photosynthetic photon flux) in µmol (a very large number 6X10^23) per second. This is a measurement of the actual number of photons (amount of light) the leaf receives that are neither to high in energy therefore damaging the leaf (UV), or to low in energy (IR) to help photosynthesis. This band in the middle that fuels photosynthesis and other biochemical reactions in our plants is the photosynthetically active radiation or PAR portion of “light”. PPF is a measurement of how many of those useful photons are being put out by the LED per second. If accurate, (not sure where this data is from) this shows how much PAR is being put out by the LEDs in micro-moles of electrons per second. The PPF Efficacy (µmol/joule) number that follows is similar to the "wall plug efficiency" or lumen per watt above, in that it relates the PAR output to the power (joule=1 watt/sec) put in. The section finishes up by showing the percentages of blue, green, red, and far red which we commonly focus on when designing these LED systems to provide for the needs of our plants in their different stages of development.
That’s a lot so here are some examples:
Here’s a single 36” bar light that has three modules each having 15X “3 watt” LEDs. I’ve selected all 15 LEDs per module to be 6500K.
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ]
Below is the "Your Fixture's Estimated Performance” details. I’ve included all three “perspectives” as I find all interesting and informative. The 6500K LEDs are a pretty efficient set. However, I think the 6500K probably has more green than our plants need compared to the red and blue percentages. It will probably provide good results but some of that green would not be used by the plant and therefore a waste of electricity to generate. Also it’s heavier in blue than red so more of a spectrum better at supporting tight inter-nodal growth in the vegetative phase of plants development.
Estimated Electrical Watts 56.5
Radiometric Watts 21.6
Wall Plug Efficiency 38%
--------------
Lumens 6773
Lumens per Watt 120
CIE X-Coordinate 0.307
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.329
CCT 6832
CRI 71
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 96.19
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.7
Blue (400 – 499nm) 28%
Green (500 – 599nm) 48%
Red (600 – 699nm) 22%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 2%
Here’s one configured with all 5000k LEDs
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ]
It is only very slightly less efficient, but with it’s shift in spectrum, the percentage of blue and green dropping with more red and far red, it’s a little more suited for “flowering”, but maybe not enough. Although I certainly don’t know, I am not an expert here, I think it still has probably too much green, but given recent research I’ve read, I’m not so sure. I think the research is still developing.
Estimated Electrical Watts 56.5
Radiometric Watts 21.1
Wall Plug Efficiency 37%
--------------
Lumens 6783
Lumens per Watt 120
CIE X-Coordinate 0.338
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.349
CCT 5292
CRI 74
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 96.18
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.7
Blue (400 – 499nm) 23%
Green (500 – 599nm) 47%
Red (600 – 699nm) 28%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 3%
Here then is a light based in mostly with 2700K with a couple of 6500Ks:
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102HHHAHHHHHHHAHHH ]
The percentage balance of red has shifted up and blue down but is this still too much green? Also our efficiency has dropped significantly as the 2700K LEDs are not as efficient converting electricity to photons.
Estimated Electrical Watts 56.5
Radiometric Watts 15.5
Wall Plug Efficiency 27%
--------------
Lumens 4670
Lumens per Watt 83
CIE X-Coordinate 0.424
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.387
CCT 3059
CRI 82
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 74.70
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.3
Blue (400 – 499nm) 12%
Green (500 – 599nm) 38%
Red (600 – 699nm) 44%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 6%
And here is an almost equal number of the most efficient red (615nm) and blue (470nm) diodes focusing on the basics of what has been the industry’s approach to early LED grow light designs.
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102RMRMRMRMRMRMRMR ]
They are more electrically efficient (use less electricity per radiometric watt) and they also have a higher PPF efficiency (PAR). It’s interesting to note that they are putting out much less lumens per watt, so are not as efficient for “seeing” not to mention their color rendering. I expect that although efficient and perhaps even effective the trend seems to be that plants need both wider spectrums of blue and red and some support in other areas as well. I’m pretty sure there is too little green and not enough of other spectral bands in this set either.
Estimated Electrical Watts 50.0
Radiometric Watts 20.9
Wall Plug Efficiency 42%
--------------
Lumens 3412
Lumens per Watt 68
CIE X-Coordinate 0.350
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.171
CCT 0
CRI NaN
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 94.09
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.9
Blue (400 – 499nm) 45%
Green (500 – 599nm) 4%
Red (600 – 699nm) 51%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 0%
So one can tweak pretty well the spectrum, but it can come at the expense of efficiency which will effect how much PAR you are giving your plants and how much money you are saving on your power bill.
Wow, that’s a lot….thanks, writing this up has helped me to clarify things for myself anyway….and I hope maybe for others. But many questions remain...
What are our “spectral” goals when design ing lights for our plants?
How much “blue”, “green”, “red”, and “far red” and at what specific spectral content?
There are lot’s of manufacturers out there that are selling their current answers to this question, but it continues to evolve and some of the directions have been misguided. I still don’t know these answers. I’ve seen pieces of the puzzle but am still seeking research and the wisdom of experience. BML provides us with an opportunity to choose and research for ourselves this cutting edge technology as it develops further in a nice functional package which I find interesting.
Thanks, NC
Yes, as I have been digging into this, I have noticed how the LED’s PAR charts relate the LED to itself instead of a power measuring metric (watts, lumens, or photosynthetic photon flux). Each band of the spectrum is shown as a percentage of the whole LED output, instead of relating it to a power measurement which makes it hard to compare one diode to the next to tell which one is more powerful or efficient.
However, this info is available on the LED customization page in the "Your Fixture's Estimated Performance Details*” block on the right. This block is further broken into three sections which provide calculated estimates for selected the LED “set” from three different “points of view”.
The first, are the “standard” measurements of how many watts of electricity are estimated to be “used” (“drawn from the wall”-I believe), an estimate of how many “radiometric watts” (radiant flux) [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometry ] will be put out by the LEDs, and then an efficiency calculation probably based on that radiant flux per watt of electricity used (Not sure though).
The second section is oriented toward the commercial lighting industry (not grow lighting or agricultural industry) and measures LEDs in lumens, also listed are CIE color space measurements, along with CCT (correlated color temperature) and CRI (color rendering index) measurements. All of these are oriented to how our eyes perceive light [ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lumen_(unit) ].
Finally, the third section is oriented to the agricultural industry and how plants respond to light. Here we are provided with PPF (photosynthetic photon flux) in µmol (a very large number 6X10^23) per second. This is a measurement of the actual number of photons (amount of light) the leaf receives that are neither to high in energy therefore damaging the leaf (UV), or to low in energy (IR) to help photosynthesis. This band in the middle that fuels photosynthesis and other biochemical reactions in our plants is the photosynthetically active radiation or PAR portion of “light”. PPF is a measurement of how many of those useful photons are being put out by the LED per second. If accurate, (not sure where this data is from) this shows how much PAR is being put out by the LEDs in micro-moles of electrons per second. The PPF Efficacy (µmol/joule) number that follows is similar to the "wall plug efficiency" or lumen per watt above, in that it relates the PAR output to the power (joule=1 watt/sec) put in. The section finishes up by showing the percentages of blue, green, red, and far red which we commonly focus on when designing these LED systems to provide for the needs of our plants in their different stages of development.
That’s a lot so here are some examples:
Here’s a single 36” bar light that has three modules each having 15X “3 watt” LEDs. I’ve selected all 15 LEDs per module to be 6500K.
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA ]
Below is the "Your Fixture's Estimated Performance” details. I’ve included all three “perspectives” as I find all interesting and informative. The 6500K LEDs are a pretty efficient set. However, I think the 6500K probably has more green than our plants need compared to the red and blue percentages. It will probably provide good results but some of that green would not be used by the plant and therefore a waste of electricity to generate. Also it’s heavier in blue than red so more of a spectrum better at supporting tight inter-nodal growth in the vegetative phase of plants development.
Estimated Electrical Watts 56.5
Radiometric Watts 21.6
Wall Plug Efficiency 38%
--------------
Lumens 6773
Lumens per Watt 120
CIE X-Coordinate 0.307
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.329
CCT 6832
CRI 71
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 96.19
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.7
Blue (400 – 499nm) 28%
Green (500 – 599nm) 48%
Red (600 – 699nm) 22%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 2%
Here’s one configured with all 5000k LEDs
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102CCCCCCCCCCCCCCC ]
It is only very slightly less efficient, but with it’s shift in spectrum, the percentage of blue and green dropping with more red and far red, it’s a little more suited for “flowering”, but maybe not enough. Although I certainly don’t know, I am not an expert here, I think it still has probably too much green, but given recent research I’ve read, I’m not so sure. I think the research is still developing.
Estimated Electrical Watts 56.5
Radiometric Watts 21.1
Wall Plug Efficiency 37%
--------------
Lumens 6783
Lumens per Watt 120
CIE X-Coordinate 0.338
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.349
CCT 5292
CRI 74
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 96.18
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.7
Blue (400 – 499nm) 23%
Green (500 – 599nm) 47%
Red (600 – 699nm) 28%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 3%
Here then is a light based in mostly with 2700K with a couple of 6500Ks:
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102HHHAHHHHHHHAHHH ]
The percentage balance of red has shifted up and blue down but is this still too much green? Also our efficiency has dropped significantly as the 2700K LEDs are not as efficient converting electricity to photons.
Estimated Electrical Watts 56.5
Radiometric Watts 15.5
Wall Plug Efficiency 27%
--------------
Lumens 4670
Lumens per Watt 83
CIE X-Coordinate 0.424
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.387
CCT 3059
CRI 82
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 74.70
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.3
Blue (400 – 499nm) 12%
Green (500 – 599nm) 38%
Red (600 – 699nm) 44%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 6%
And here is an almost equal number of the most efficient red (615nm) and blue (470nm) diodes focusing on the basics of what has been the industry’s approach to early LED grow light designs.
[ http://www.bmlcustom.com/custom-report-details/?partNo=PS3690S102RMRMRMRMRMRMRMR ]
They are more electrically efficient (use less electricity per radiometric watt) and they also have a higher PPF efficiency (PAR). It’s interesting to note that they are putting out much less lumens per watt, so are not as efficient for “seeing” not to mention their color rendering. I expect that although efficient and perhaps even effective the trend seems to be that plants need both wider spectrums of blue and red and some support in other areas as well. I’m pretty sure there is too little green and not enough of other spectral bands in this set either.
Estimated Electrical Watts 50.0
Radiometric Watts 20.9
Wall Plug Efficiency 42%
--------------
Lumens 3412
Lumens per Watt 68
CIE X-Coordinate 0.350
CIE Y-Coordinate 0.171
CCT 0
CRI NaN
--------------
PPF (micromoles/sec) 94.09
PPF Efficacy (mmol/joule) 1.9
Blue (400 – 499nm) 45%
Green (500 – 599nm) 4%
Red (600 – 699nm) 51%
Far Red (700 – 750nm) 0%
So one can tweak pretty well the spectrum, but it can come at the expense of efficiency which will effect how much PAR you are giving your plants and how much money you are saving on your power bill.
Wow, that’s a lot….thanks, writing this up has helped me to clarify things for myself anyway….and I hope maybe for others. But many questions remain...
What are our “spectral” goals when design ing lights for our plants?
How much “blue”, “green”, “red”, and “far red” and at what specific spectral content?
There are lot’s of manufacturers out there that are selling their current answers to this question, but it continues to evolve and some of the directions have been misguided. I still don’t know these answers. I’ve seen pieces of the puzzle but am still seeking research and the wisdom of experience. BML provides us with an opportunity to choose and research for ourselves this cutting edge technology as it develops further in a nice functional package which I find interesting.
Thanks, NC
BuddyBoy Spamer, did you bother to read the title of MY thread? Take that shill shit elsewhere
Neucoyote
When I chose my spectrums for the SPYDR 600 I went through the same hand-wringing process as you
I did several years of studying in advance of my selection, and still I sweated over the final choices, BUT...
I was charged with the task of creating one SPYDR for both veg and flower
Unlike other panels with separate o/o switches to fire up reds in flower, all 6 BML bars must be fired up so not separate reds on a couple bars, which I hoped to do
So in spite of the obvious compromises, I had a damn fine result considering a new light and new seed strain
One mistake was I kept the bars too close to the canopy, which affected the blending of the spectrums
Seeing how well the BBCC reveg is doing under the S600, I can see that starting the seedlings under lesser leds held me back as well
Here is reveg as of a couple days ago. I have since upped the ppms and it is enjoying a growth spurt
First pic was 8/9 second pic 9/10
View attachment 283911 View attachment 283912
Neucoyote
When I chose my spectrums for the SPYDR 600 I went through the same hand-wringing process as you
I did several years of studying in advance of my selection, and still I sweated over the final choices, BUT...
I was charged with the task of creating one SPYDR for both veg and flower
Unlike other panels with separate o/o switches to fire up reds in flower, all 6 BML bars must be fired up so not separate reds on a couple bars, which I hoped to do
So in spite of the obvious compromises, I had a damn fine result considering a new light and new seed strain
One mistake was I kept the bars too close to the canopy, which affected the blending of the spectrums
Seeing how well the BBCC reveg is doing under the S600, I can see that starting the seedlings under lesser leds held me back as well
Here is reveg as of a couple days ago. I have since upped the ppms and it is enjoying a growth spurt
First pic was 8/9 second pic 9/10
View attachment 283911 View attachment 283912
sammyz2646
Member
BuddyBoy Spamer, did you bother to read the title of MY thread? Take that shill shit elsewhere----Quote--PetFlora
Leave the newbie alone Fluffball!!
Thanks for your input Buddyboy!
"""I am but a lowly tester, though should you buy one, please mention me"""---PetFlora
Who's the REAL spammer??????
Leave the newbie alone Fluffball!!
Thanks for your input Buddyboy!
"""I am but a lowly tester, though should you buy one, please mention me"""---PetFlora
Who's the REAL spammer??????
