'Three A Light' Grow Book.... $500!!!!

I spoke with a representative from 3alight last year at The Denver downtown smoke out.

I asked how the program would work with various cultivars. I spoke with the rep for at least 20 min. I tried to get specific answers, but honestly the rep was pretty elusive and vague.

I did not purchase the product.

why not spend that money on equipment and eventually youll learn all the ins and outs of growing. Definately just someone trying to capitalize on the movement so to speak. Mel frank's book worked fine for me for 22 bux. Ultimately it was trial and error that made me a better grower- not a 500 dollar book. Geesh.

Overgrow and ICmag worked just fine for me.

And it has been free.



dank.Frank

I bought quite a few books when I first started ,the best book I've used was by jorge Cervantes it's about 5-600 pages and covers alot of shit ,Im not sure the title of this book because mine has lost the first few pages (and the cover)over the last decade ,but it helped me out greatly ,I haven't pulled it out in a while mainly from the wealth of information here at icmag ,but I'd recommend it to anyone just getting Into growing

Quality over quantity any day.

Anyone who says you can have both, is lying to themselves.

Give me a break... the Amazon page itself is filled with reviews saying it's crap, but a nice picture book!

Scams come and go everyday... remember Kramer's Coffee Table Book about Coffee Tables with folding legs?

.....Or............you can grow by the Kilo outdoors........#3 for Free lol

I just watched the commercial. I'm still laughing.

Payaso said:

Scams come and go everyday... remember Kramer's Coffee Table Book about Coffee Tables with folding legs?

Click to expand...

amazon review

This is a $75 book, maybe. The book is extremely well packaged and produced however there is no detail and no scientific basis for any claims. This is a very simple presentation of one style of growing, with a set of techniques that are established. There is some useful information, but nothing we didn't know from other sources that are free. There are high quality photos and but no details or explanations for them. For example, one line says 'put your soil in the pot' but does not mention anything about the type of medium specifications... Potting soil from Home Depot could be interpreted as 'soil' and only an experienced grower would understand not to use that.

Not enough information overall. Concepts that we understand well, he puts into a rule as opposed to explaining why it is or what the outside limits and parameters are for any given information. Simply stating that humidity should be 55% is over-simplistic and not really teaching anything.

Great photos! Clear photos that show specific examples and specific processes. The photos will really help gear an inexperienced grower towards what they should be looking at at any phase.

For the very absolute beginner who doesn't want to scour through forums and sift through mis-information online, there are a lot of great photos and step-by-step instructions.

Click to expand...

I bet they've made the money back from production of book though from straight idiots, silly price for what seems like a useless book.

I'd pay decent money for a really really nice large coffee table book on cannabis with nice pictures, but not $500.

The internet has it all these days.

Book review

Book review

I had a copy of the book given to me. I know a couple medical growers using aspects of the method in multi-light rooms. I'll update when I've discussed this method with them, and witnessed results. The below is my review of the book.

Pretty much the video advert shows 99.9% of their defoliation and caging method. The rest is a bit of advice on trimming and drying, nutrients and CO2 levels.

They do two defoliations of large fan leaves. Leaving the smaller fan leaves on the growing meristems intact. This is done at day one of going into flower, and again at day 20 (18-21).

The plants are caged with bamboo and netting. It all looks just like the video. With the defoliations, they can squeeze more flower stems in the cage. This, and the greater light penetration is IMO the key to any advantage of this method, if indeed an advantage exists. It could of course also hurt yields.

The nice part of the caging is one can move the plants around, and access them during the defoliations. Their set up has multiple 4X8 tables, long side to long side without aisles, which alone could increase the canopy and thus increase the yield similar to rolling/floating benches. But I wonder how they reach in 8 feet to access a plant? A long shepherd’s hook perhaps? They also use a watering wand which is clearly not 8 feet long that also makes me wonder why the book has such obvious disconnects with the pictures, and so little detail.

They feed with the Success line of nutrients. Adding the Success Sugar during the flowering stage. They vary from pH 6 to pH 6.5.
Rockwool cube to block, then into a soilless mix. IMO this mix would give lower yields than a lighter medium, such as rockwool, perlite, stones, etc. as they are fertigating every few days, up to once a day in flower. I can’t see how this would equal the growth rates of fertigating several times a day.

I find it curious that they recommend the extreme importance of measuring TDS in PPM, without mentioning what conversion factor they are using. It strikes me as amateurish in such an expensive book to not use EC, or at least mention the conversion factor.

There are some silly statements. Here is an excerpt that made me chuckle. “Having efficient CO2 levels throughout the Flowering cycle is mandatory to achieve a strain’s full potential. An oxygen-rich environment will act as an “all you can eat” buffet for the Flowers.”

They also say about both cloning through vegetative growth that “CO2 is not needed during this stage of growth.” Should we assume the author forgot the words “enrichment beyond ambient”? Clearly the author is clueless that even maintaining ambient CO2 levels in a densely packed indoor grow room requires either ventilation with outside air or CO2 enrichment.

The book recommends 1500 ppm CO2 during daytime flowering, but that it must return to 400 ppm in the dark cycle to “allow your plants to breathe naturally while they sleep”. Stating leaving the room enriched during the dark period will “choke your plants”. Presumably they vent the room with outside air to achieve this? Typically leaving the reader guessing and wondering.

It's obvious they don't have plant count issues as there are multiple plants per light. Trying to achieve 1 plant per light would negate the cage suggestion IMO, as it is easier to spread evenly sideways with a horizontal net.

If there is an advantage to this method, it would have to come down to light penetration. Removing so many fan leaves would deprive the plant of much of its photosynthesis IMO. But I have read comments from one grower who uses this, or a similar method of defoliation and caging and claims it gives him higher yields having done comparisons.
If there is an advantage to this method IMO, it would have to come down to light penetration. Removing so many fan leaves would deprive the plant of much of its photosynthesis.

Coir said:

I had a copy of the book given to me. I know a couple medical growers using aspects of the method in multi-light rooms. I'll update when I've discussed this method with them, and witnessed results. The below is my review of the book.

Pretty much the video advert shows 99.9% of their defoliation and caging method. The rest is a bit of advice on trimming and drying, nutrients and CO2 levels.

They do two defoliations of large fan leaves. Leaving the smaller fan leaves on the growing meristems intact. This is done at day one of going into flower, and again at day 20 (18-21).

The plants are caged with bamboo and netting. It all looks just like the video. With the defoliations, they can squeeze more flower stems in the cage. This, and the greater light penetration is IMO the key to any advantage of this method, if indeed an advantage exists. It could of course also hurt yields.

The nice part of the caging is one can move the plants around, and access them during the defoliations. Their set up has multiple 4X8 tables, long side to long side without aisles, which alone could increase the canopy and thus increase the yield similar to rolling/floating benches. But I wonder how they reach in 8 feet to access a plant? A long shepherd’s hook perhaps? They also use a watering wand which is clearly not 8 feet long that also makes me wonder why the book has such obvious disconnects with the pictures, and so little detail.

They feed with the Success line of nutrients. Adding the Success Sugar during the flowering stage. They vary from pH 6 to pH 6.5.
Rockwool cube to block, then into a soilless mix. IMO this mix would give lower yields than a lighter medium, such as rockwool, perlite, stones, etc. as they are fertigating every few days, up to once a day in flower. I can’t see how this would equal the growth rates of fertigating several times a day.

I find it curious that they recommend the extreme importance of measuring TDS in PPM, without mentioning what conversion factor they are using. It strikes me as amateurish in such an expensive book to not use EC, or at least mention the conversion factor.

There are some silly statements. Here is an excerpt that made me chuckle. “Having efficient CO2 levels throughout the Flowering cycle is mandatory to achieve a strain’s full potential. An oxygen-rich environment will act as an “all you can eat” buffet for the Flowers.”

They also say about both cloning through vegetative growth that “CO2 is not needed during this stage of growth.” Should we assume the author forgot the words “enrichment beyond ambient”? Clearly the author is clueless that even maintaining ambient CO2 levels in a densely packed indoor grow room requires either ventilation with outside air or CO2 enrichment.

The book recommends 1500 ppm CO2 during daytime flowering, but that it must return to 400 ppm in the dark cycle to “allow your plants to breathe naturally while they sleep”. Stating leaving the room enriched during the dark period will “choke your plants”. Presumably they vent the room with outside air to achieve this? Typically leaving the reader guessing and wondering.

It's obvious they don't have plant count issues as there are multiple plants per light. Trying to achieve 1 plant per light would negate the cage suggestion IMO, as it is easier to spread evenly sideways with a horizontal net.

If there is an advantage to this method, it would have to come down to light penetration. Removing so many fan leaves would deprive the plant of much of its photosynthesis IMO. But I have read comments from one grower who uses this, or a similar method of defoliation and caging and claims it gives him higher yields having done comparisons.
If there is an advantage to this method IMO, it would have to come down to light penetration. Removing so many fan leaves would deprive the plant of much of its photosynthesis.

Click to expand...

Removing and pruning leaves is surely a high yield technique. Moderation usually works well with everything in life

"Complete" defoliation is debatable and not usually recommended.

PerfectGrower said:

Removing and pruning leaves is surely a high yield technique. Moderation usually works well with everything in life

"Complete" defoliation is debatable and not usually recommended.

Click to expand...

All the research ive conducted on mass defoliation points to it being very strain dependent. Some strains it increases yield, some it lowers. Indica seem to respond better and less stretchy plants. I like it for no other reason than less larf and way easier to trim.

Three a light...

Page one: Get a gavita ha!

Tonygreen said:

Three a light...

Page one: Get a gavita ha!

Click to expand...

Or run 3 315W CMH. But then again, that's not "a" light

GET MO said:

All the research ive conducted on mass defoliation points to it being very strain dependent. Some strains it increases yield, some it lowers. Indica seem to respond better and less stretchy plants. I like it for no other reason than less larf and way easier to trim.

Click to expand...

The bottom line for me is plant counts. I spoke with a grower who uses this tech successfully, but it was dependent on multiple caged plants per light. In that instance, he measured the PAR of the lower growth and it was obviously much higher without fan leaves blocking the light. This seems the advantage, which as you say, is also strain dependent.

For me I need one plant per light, so obviously I defoliate both fan leaves and meristems below the light level and spread the plant using a horizontal trellis, with another to support the buds. But if light is hitting it, I usually leave the fan leaves in place and remove the meristems to reduce the larf. Pretty much the opposite of the book.

But I'm open minded to other techniques which may improve my yield.

PerfectGrower said:

Or run 3 315W CMH. But then again, that's not "a" light

Click to expand...

ya well i think tonygreen ment. for 500 $.. buy the gavita.. u need like fucking 1000-1500 for 3 of those 315s.. lol not worth it then..

Has anyone actually read this book end to end, and did EXACTLY what he suggests? I have access to it, but after hearing of defoliating every fan leaf, I was dumbfounded. I understand picking some fans that block light, but this shit is ridiculous. A friend with the book is trying so hard to get 2.. I've seen 4 a light.. In a coliseum or omega grow, but not 3 per light of anything I would actually enjoy smoking.

I consider my book extremely useful information, it's only $7.20. lol I grow for extreme quality first.Yield is very important, just second in priority.

Are those rockwool cubes in buckets I saw?

Douglas

This is a $75 book, maybe.

Click to expand...

There is nothing in it worth even $100.

Click to expand...

It is a 500$ grow book

Click to expand...

Even if this book was $1000 it was the best investment I have ever made in my growing career.

Click to expand...

reversed numbers are better when they are forwarded.