Can grow lights have an effect on positive 'effect'?

Hunting around for a grow light and wondering if there's any variables that affect the actual 'effect' of the weed?

ie. Could growing with a light at 3000k be more likely to cause paranoia? Stuff like that

Or maybe adding UVB could help make a more positive effect maybe?

I grow for effect over yields or anything else, so just wanted to ask if the light could influence that in any way.

The only thing that is said to affect potency is UVB, search for Dr Bruce Bugbee on youtube for info about spectrum and cannabis.

Harvest once all trichomes are cloudy.
Don't wait for amber.
Don't over dry, take your time curing in the dark.
Yes UVB will stimulate secondary metabolites, so will flushing with Epsom salt, so will increasing your potassium after the first half of flower, beneficial microbes and mycorizal fungus in the rizosphere also stimulates secondary metabolites. And fish emulsions during veg brings the dank.
Go forth and grow the dank with this knowledge.

I've grown clones of landraces at the same time both indoors and outdoors. It was Mazari and Chirali. LED indoors. Mostly low odor and discreet outdoors. I found outdoors harvest bigger and the effects I preferred much more. I'm not sure why but I hope that helps somewhat.

Plantguy said:

I've grown clones of landraces at the same time both indoors and outdoors. It was Mazari and Chirali. LED indoors. Mostly low odor and discreet outdoors. I found outdoors harvest bigger and the effects I preferred much more. I'm not sure why but I hope that helps somewhat.

Click to expand...

Thanks, that is actually a really good data point to know... good experiment you ran there.

Curious about learning more - what differences in effect did you note with the outdoor? What effects were better and how much?

RenaissanceBrah said:

Hunting around for a grow light and wondering if there's any variables that affect the actual 'effect' of the weed?

ie. Could growing with a light at 3000k be more likely to cause paranoia? Stuff like that

Or maybe adding UVB could help make a more positive effect maybe?

I grow for effect over yields or anything else, so just wanted to ask if the light could influence that in any way.

Click to expand...

IMO no, Genetics will play the biggest role in the type of high. I've used most lights available. For me I went from HPS, CMH, LED. CMH crushed in quality vs HPS from the added UV A. I've used CMH since the new CMH version got released, I love it. I just started testing LED. Its missing UV A/B. UV A should be added when using LED.

• Ultraviolet A (UVA) is from 320-400nm and comprises about 3% of the photons in natural sunlight that make it through Earth's atmosphere. UVA lights for plants do not damage DNA. Has the most benefit for plants.
• Ultraviolet B (UVB) is from 290-320nm and makes up less than 0.15% -- less than 1/5th of 1% -- of total natural sunlight. UVB light is energetic enough to cause damage to DNA, including inducing cancer in animals. Luckily for us, the Earth's ozone layer blocks almost all of the sun's UVB light. Its useless for plants.

In Cannabis plants, exposure to UVA increases the production of THC and CBD. There is some confusion caused by a 1987 study by John Lydon, Alan Teramura and C. Benjamin Coffman titled "UV-B Radiation Effects on Photosynthesis, Growth and Cannabinoid Production of two Cannabis sativa Chemotypes". The study grew Cannabis plants and exposed some to UVB light and others to no UV light at all, finding increased THC concentrations for the plants exposed to UVB compared to the plants not exposed to UV lights for plants at all.

Some people have interpreted this to mean that only UVB light increases the production of THC in Cannabis plants, but this study does not demonstrate that. So the original study only showed that exposure to both UVA and UVB light increased THC production compared to no UV, but not whether UVA or UVB (or the combination) was responsible. We now know UV A is the most beneficial increasing THC/CBD in cannabis plants.

Bugbee says from 350nm (so within UVA as Hammer says) gives benefit, with ‘lower’ than this causing damage. Valoya uses PBAR (photo biologically active radiation) which includes PAR + some UV and some IR.

Hammerhead said:

IMO no, Genetics will play the biggest role in the type of high. I've used most lights available. For me I went from HPS, CMH, LED. CMH crushed in quality vs HPS from the added UV A. I've used CMH since the new CMH version got released, I love it. I just started testing LED. Its missing UV A/B. UV A should be added when using LED.

• Ultraviolet A (UVA) is from 320-400nm and comprises about 3% of the photons in natural sunlight that make it through Earth's atmosphere. UVA lights for plants do not damage DNA. Has the most benefit for plants.
• Ultraviolet B (UVB) is from 290-320nm and makes up less than 0.15% -- less than 1/5th of 1% -- of total natural sunlight. UVB light is energetic enough to cause damage to DNA, including inducing cancer in animals. Luckily for us, the Earth's ozone layer blocks almost all of the sun's UVB light. Its useless for plants.

In Cannabis plants, exposure to UVA increases the production of THC and CBD. There is some confusion caused by a 1987 study by John Lydon, Alan Teramura and C. Benjamin Coffman titled "UV-B Radiation Effects on Photosynthesis, Growth and Cannabinoid Production of two Cannabis sativa Chemotypes". The study grew Cannabis plants and exposed some to UVB light and others to no UV light at all, finding increased THC concentrations for the plants exposed to UVB compared to the plants not exposed to UV lights for plants at all.

Some people have interpreted this to mean that only UVB light increases the production of THC in Cannabis plants, but this study does not demonstrate that. So the original study only showed that exposure to both UVA and UVB light increased THC production compared to no UV, but not whether UVA or UVB (or the combination) was responsible. We now know UV A is the most beneficial increasing THC/CBD in cannabis plants.

Click to expand...

Thanks Hammerhead for that info, interesting to hear about the CMH, I hadn't considered it.

Have you tried also growing outdoors, and if so, did you see any marked difference in effect?

(Regarding UV, I was looking at the 2021 Kingbrite LED lights with "UV IR". Do you think it could be promising?

I can't link here, but in google the search term for that model will be "KingBrite led grow light 240W SF2000 QB288 samsung LM301H QB board 3000K/3500K mix Epistar 660 UV IR led grow light ")

RenaissanceBrah said:

Thanks Hammerhead for that info, interesting to hear about the CMH, I hadn't considered it.

Have you tried also growing outdoors, and if so, did you see any marked difference in effect?

(Regarding UV, I was looking at the 2021 Kingbrite LED lights with "UV IR". Do you think it could be promising?

I can't link here, but in google the search term for that model will be "KingBrite led grow light 240W SF2000 QB288 samsung LM301H QB board 3000K/3500K mix Epistar 660 UV IR led grow light ")

Click to expand...

I have not grown outdoor since the 80's. What I grow now is better only because I grow better.

I'm not familiar with Kingbrite. It should do fine using those diodes. The top 3 LEDS lights IMO are Growers Choice, HLG and Luxx. These all use Samsung top bin Diodes. These are whats in most commercial grow rooms today.

RenaissanceBrah said:

Thanks, that is actually a really good data point to know... good experiment you ran there.

Curious about learning more - what differences in effect did you note with the outdoor? What effects were better and how much?

Click to expand...

I would describe outdoors as overall more rounded, full and alive. But honestly, I don't have the time or funds for a good quality indoors garden. Indoors for me is a winter hobby, seed making whatnot. Low key and discreet. Indoors is a lot of effort I've found vs outdoors very little. Cannabis is tough and takes care of itself outdoors. But I'm not looking for "high yield etc whatnot". Just a connection with the most amazing plant humanity has been using since recorded history. And I have a big vegetable garden that cannabis can sorta blend into. Odor is of course a major concern. There's always a stinker who can be identified from a long ways away. And I have to find him and either take him inside or juice him. It's always sad because I like the skunkiness, but it's not urban compatibile for me.

Plantguy said:

I would describe outdoors as overall more rounded, full and alive. But honestly, I don't have the time or funds for a good quality indoors garden. Indoors for me is a winter hobby, seed making whatnot. Low key and discreet. Indoors is a lot of effort I've found vs outdoors very little. Cannabis is tough and takes care of itself outdoors. But I'm not looking for "high yield etc whatnot". Just a connection with the most amazing plant humanity has been using since recorded history. And I have a big vegetable garden that cannabis can sorta blend into. Odor is of course a major concern. There's always a stinker who can be identified from a long ways away. And I have to find him and either take him inside or juice him. It's always sad because I like the skunkiness, but it's not urban compatibile for me.

Click to expand...

Thanks Plantguy, your approach sounds similar to mine, I don't care about yields, just happy to grow some good herb outside.

The best stuff I've smoked was always outdoors stuff as well. Just that access to an outdoors spot is difficult for me here (I grow at a friends house, but it's a far drive aways).

I got lucky and haven't had an issue with the skunkiness growing outside (3 plants typically). How far away can you usually smell it, when it does happen?

Hammerhead said:

IMO no, Genetics will play the biggest role in the type of high. I've used most lights available. For me I went from HPS, CMH, LED. CMH crushed in quality vs HPS from the added UV A. I've used CMH since the new CMH version got released, I love it. I just started testing LED. Its missing UV A/B. UV A should be added when using LED.

Click to expand...

Btw, I've gotten some anecdotal evidence that using higher K numbers (5000K), closer mimics the light in high elevations in tropical areas... and for growing landrace sativas (which is what I grow), it leads to better effects.

I believe 3000-3500K is recommended for flower because it leads to higher yields. But if I don't care about yields, and purely effect, could 5000K be the best option if I can only afford to get 1 type of light?

@renaissancebrah
I use 5000k strips with Nichia optisolis 757 diodes as they have a little bit more near uv (down to 420nm or so).
The response drops off after about 630nm or so though and as such requires supplementing the deep red/far red spectrum which I use a broadband red with the peak centered at 660nm.



I have a smol 40w veg board I made up with 2 strips each of these spectrums and it seems to have worked nicely.


And a handy little reminder of phytochrome response points.

bleepboop said:

I have a smol 40w veg board I made up with 2 strips each of these spectrums and it seems to have worked nicely.
View Image

Click to expand...

Forgot to mention the blue line on the right is D50 spectrum aka actual 5000k midday sun.

RenaissanceBrah said:

Btw, I've gotten some anecdotal evidence that using higher K numbers (5000K), closer mimics the light in high elevations in tropical areas... and for growing landrace sativas (which is what I grow), it leads to better effects.

I believe 3000-3500K is recommended for flower because it leads to higher yields. But if I don't care about yields, and purely effect, could 5000K be the best option if I can only afford to get 1 type of light?

Click to expand...

I use a mix of 4k/3.5k CMH bulbs in flower. Veg is all 4k CMH. I never got the same quality using HPS. Lots of variables can impact yields. Quality should be the priority..
I just replaced the center 1kw CMH for a HLG Diablo 650 led. I will get a UVA led bar for it soon. The other CMH in the room should cover the UV needed. I dont grow any pure land race genetics. Everything I grow is a poly hybrid. At least in the USA most do as well.

I tell it again here:

there are two differences:
1: Equator has stronger Sun overall. Lets call it same Balance FOR NOW cause in Point two i describe it further. Thats cause further North for the same amount of Surface there come more Lightrays per Squaremeter. Lets call it 100 Lightrays touch the parallel to the Sun Equatorsurface in a 1 Squaremeter. Now think of further North where the Surface is 45 Degree... the Same Amount of Rays , namely 100 Rays will cover a much wider Surface. Cause its 45 Degree to the Sun those 1 Square meter Rays will cover a enlongated Surface.. Cause its 45 Degree..
So, there is less Energy Provided to a longer Surface at North. Therefore Sun is simply weaker at North, about 30 Percent..

2: There is a shift thowards the Blue Spectrum at equator, opposed to a shift thowards the Red Spectrum at North. In otherwords, abit more Blue / Red Amounts in the overall Lightcomposition .
How strong that is, i couldnt find out, it could be very minimal, or slightly important..
I only know that it is, but really could be very minim given that a different Lightbalance would probably look very obvious to human Eyes, and i never recognized that difference.

Also there might be more Ozoneleaks at equator, and a Map showed it, but how strong the difference is is also unknown to me, aswell as people still not agree wether uv has a special impact on cannabis. Uv is also just lightrays, the purple part of spectrum, like all other colors are, might have speciall importance, but really is just light.

If you ask my Guess, its important to provide the full Composition of the full Spectrum. Some Lights are so uneven, that i just feel it could affect your Outcome.

Same important is the Lightintensity i guess.

If you go now so far and try to even imitated that Northern Color Shift of UNKNOWN TO ME amount, then i am first thinking over the said Colorbalynce and Intensity of wich the Colorbalance is so hard to imitate.
I show you why, cause there is literally no Light that is super close to overall Earths Sunlightcomposition on the Market.. This possibly little Lightshift might be little problem compared...

So: You would be well of just imitating the overall Light on Earth. And like said its anyway nothing on the market to my Knowledge that is exactly like Sunlight...

I show you now multiple Graphs, of Sunlight and different Lamps. Goal is to imitate this Sunlight.

-----------------------------

Sunlight not know where its measured:


----------------

Metal Halyde:


------------------------------

Lep plasma Lights:


----------------------------

Hps:



---------------------------

A very rare Led, i never found sold here just in China:

So, we see per example the Hps Lights has huge spikes, yes it contains all Colors, but the Balance is so different too Sunlight..

The Plasma Lights look very balanced, no huge Spikes, just tiny ones.

I also have to say, the Lights seem to improove over the Years, and those are just some representative Examples of unknown models.

The Plasma most often look very close to Sunlight, also Metalhalyde i found some newer Models with a more Flat Balance, like this Model:



And that Led i showed looked nearly perfect, its just not aviable here....

So, you seee, those are still all easily distinguishable to sunlight, thats why you also see Photos on Forums discolored. Would they be like Sunlight the Photos would look perfectly fine.. Like a photo taken at Noon.

After you managed to get the best of those Lights, you need the Right Intensity, thats all i would care fore at first.

I dont know anyone that uses MH anymore, we all use CMH now. Its a far superior light than MH.. There's a lot of bulb vendors that tweak there spectrum's for both CMH and LED now. Many are mixing HPS/CMH or CMH/LED.

This is what I use

This is HLG 650 led. It can be different from LED vendor to vendor.




This is CMH. It can be different from vendor to vendor.

ok then call it ceramicmetalhalyde, im no expert in Indoorgrows, but im scietntifically engaged, thats why i misspelled (secound graph) it and i think it actually showed ceramic ones on graph

Summ it up: you can type into google: "Type or name of Light" plus "frquency spectrum" go to google pics, so you can compare yourselve. The main message i made is what i wanted to say in my last two Posts.

Thanks for the correction

That gap in the green Spectrum is what doesent look perfect to me aswell.

Yes it's called Ceramic MH now. CMH is not the same as the old MH. The spectrum's very different, far better.. CMH tech today lets them tweak the spectrum's to match the sun as best they can. When I swapped from HPS to CMH it was night and day differences. There is no bulb that will be a perfect sun replacement. Its a lot better using CMH thats for sure. My opinion on LED is still out. I just started testing these. I know many killing it using LED. If the topic has changed to sun grown weed I cant add much since I dont grow outdoor