[mrwags]

Alright guys were getting some heat regarding posts about these new led's and would like to ask that ALL OF YOU keep an open mind about this new technology until the test that are coming up are ran.

This business lady paid good money to be here and we don't need anymore hating until we know what they are all about. She has been kind enough to select a few LOCAL folks to test them to show YOU THE GROUP if they work or not. Let's be civil let's be nice and embrace what's about to happen as compared to wasting space with BS rants.


Thank You
And Have A Nice Day
Mr.Wags

[Tropical Rain]

LED is not new to the point as never being ran / and / or tested on MJ.

IF you do not stray from IC than that is where the confusion is.

But has the tech changed drastically within the last 8 months?

Research has lead to the general idea that as far as VEG goes, they are great.

But in flowering? that is a different topic altogether.

Even custom built units with top end LED bulbs ....

do not see slandering just a lot of curious people with interest.

LED is the future, but how long is the wait?

Comparing xxx WATT LED vs xxx WATT HID is dumb.

It would make more sense to say LED will yeild xxx amount of grams in xxx amount of space with xxx amount of plants in xxx amount of days.

Simple.

Micro / Cab growers are already hip to LED replacing CFLs and t5.

To dethrone HIDs you are speaking to people who think in the terms of Lbs.
These people are more than likely not cab growers so they utilize multiple HIDS, for multiple Lbs.

These people are the most curious, have the most questions and want real straight forward answers and not bullshit propaganda and speculation.

Again, LED is the future but only when it is time.

Thanks,

TR

[In no way is this an attack on LEDgirl Hydro grow LED lights or any affiliates. THe information is available to all.]

personally I do not believe there has been enough use of the lights or have a firm handle upon the situation as the price is high and most people's thoughts are if it ain't broke don't fix it>?

[LEDGirl]

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

But has the tech changed drastically within the last 8 months?

Every company selling LED's, is responsible for developing their lights for growing plants above and beyond the basic design that China gives you. Most Chinese MFR's give you the option of white or orange LED's on top of red and blue, and that's it: 3 colors. Most companies go with the basic models from China, or copy another company's specs that they found online and then resell their units. My educated guess (from the amount of research I've done) is that less than 10% of companies selling LED's do any real development with them. They are simply trying to spin a profit.

What changed in the last 8 months was the person developing the technology: me. I've been at this for over 2 years, doing research, development, and testing on LED grow lights for my own garden. I analyzed the common denominators (otherwise known as inefficiencies) of all the LED grow lights I could find on the market, and designed my light to eliminate those issues. This has literally been a religion of mine for quite some time now, and all of my research was conducted on the plants we all grow, not to mention the spectrum was arranged specifically for them. So what you had was a dedicated medical patient with a lot of time on her hands to develop a new technology, and came up with something spectacular then decided to share it with the world.

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

Comparing xxx WATT LED vs xxx WATT HID is dumb.

It would make more sense to say LED will yeild xxx amount of grams in xxx amount of space with xxx amount of plants in xxx amount of days.

While I respect your opinion, the only way people will be able to see a true difference is with a watt to watt comparison. It allows you to establish a baseline of the equivalency of the two light systems. For example, if you yield 9 ounces under a 400W HID, and 32 ounces with 400W LED, it tells you that LED is approximately 3-4x more efficient watt for watt. Therefore our 126W unit would be comparable or better than a 400W HID.

Realistically though, all you need is a single grow with any of our lights to show xxx grams with xxx watts in xxx space. The only problem is that each garden is going to be different: soil vs hydro, gh vs advanced, co2 vs atmospheric, low yield strain vs high yield strain, etc... So while light has a lot to do with yield, it's only 1 part of the total equation, and equal environments with equal wattage should be tested to get a true equivalency.

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

To dethrone HIDs you are speaking to people who think in the terms of Lbs. These people are more than likely not cab growers so they utilize multiple HIDS, for multiple Lbs.

These people are the most curious, have the most questions and want real straight forward answers and not bullshit propaganda and speculation

I think in terms of lbs. I ran 4,000W HID over a 5' x 6' canopy prior to switching to 1512W of LED. I no longer run my A/C unit, have no ventilation installed, and my power bill is $160 less a month. I also save $700 a year on Hortilux bulbs, making my total yearly savings over $2k! So for me it's not just about getting my pounds, it's also about saving money year after year on electricity, and running my garden with more simplicity (ie: no heat stress).

[asde]

the mentioned wavelengths let me guess, considering the amount of lumens the grow light puts out, its efficiency is like 15%, tell me if im wrong ledgirl, tell me in showing the real spd (numbers or graph, anything serious), or manufacturs and model of led, anything beside plain advertising would help - any SERIOUS company offers such informations, i hope you follow soon and clear up things

and sorry for beeing rude, i should have give you a chance at first

[LEDGirl]

If I were on my other computer right now, I could send post a HPS graph for reference, which shows less than 15% of the total light output being available for photosynthesis. When I get the chance, I'll post it up later when I switch machines.

Its no secret that HID's emit a lot more light than is needed for plant growth. The reason they are so bright to us, is simply their spectral output (puts out the colors we see the brightest). So even though a 1000W HPS emits say 145,000 lumens, the plant is receiving 20,000 for photosynthesis at best, and realistically it is receiving closer to 14,500 lumens (10%), although this is only the case with a brand new bulb. HID's lose efficiency very quickly compared to LED's, so if the bulb is 4 months old, your plants may only be getting 12,000 lumens...

Of course, lumens aren't the most beneficial way of determining a light source for plant growth, PAR is a much better way of doing this, yet most people are unfamiliar with it. This is the reason I use lumens as a reference (and because LED MFR's list the light output in lumens), although when my new site is up, we will be talking mainly about PAR, light saturation, and how many micromoles of light energy you need in your indoor environment to max out your plants. There will be a full article discussing all the information above, so people can understand the ratings once they get to them.

Anyhow, the reason why LED Grow Lights have the ability to beat HID with less wattage, is simply that they emit only the spectrum that plants absorb. Again, if I had the graph it would be a bit easier to explain, but HID's put out very little energy in the blue and red spectrum, whereas those colors are literally all our light contains.

Now, not all LED Grow Lights are efficient (in fact, most are pretty crappy to tell the truth). Going back to my first prototype (2 red, 2 blue, orange), it couldn't grow a plant to save it's life!!! There are many reasons other LED Grow Lights don't add up, the two biggest ones are light intensity and spectral output. A lot of companies think "oh what's the big deal if the red peak is 642, I'll just throw in a 630 and it should cover it", whereas I think "if the peak is 642, I need to get as close to it as possible, to ensure the highest transfer of light energy to plant energy." Having your specs off by even 10nm, can have a dramatic effect on the % of light your plant can absorb. A 630nm for example, emits VERY little light at 642nm, making it very inefficient at powering one stage of Chlorophyll. Filling your grow light with them in hopes to hit the 642 peak, is useless. Secondly is intensity. Most companies give you a 120 degree lens in their product. This shoots light out in all directions, causing the light to become dim. It's the same concept as shining a flashlight on a wall 10' away and switching from low beam to high beam. Low beam is wide and dim, high beam is narrow and bright. We use 60 degree LED's to achieve penetration, which is something all other LED grow lights have an issue with.

So when you combine all the pieces together properly (and it took me 2 years to do), it is possible to create a LED Grow Light that is truly amazing. I was a HID nut for years, but after I saw what my final design could do, I knew the new technology was ready. Again if you remember, not all of my designs worked... but one of them worked EXTREMELY well

[Tropical Rain]

Originally Posted by British_Hempire

They might have a small benefit as side lighting, but I can't see them having much use on their own, all four together gives you about the same number of photons as you would get from a 250W HPS. A 250W HPS outputs almost 250uE of photons, the people who sell the UFO don't state the output of the UFO, but it will be 50-75uE at most, so you are gonna need 3 of them to come close to matching a 250. The low output is supposed to be compensated for somewhat by having a more correct spectrum than a HPS or fluoro,, but the UFO has a poorly designed spectrum.

I'm not sure what to suggest a the best way to get some benefit from the UFO. The design with all the LEDs clustered together is a bad one, gives very poor light distribution, so to get a decent spread of light you have to place them a fair distance away which means low intensity light hitting the plants as with LEDs you need to keep them close to the plants as the intensity falls off fast with distance. Probably the best thing to do is put one in each corner of your tent and hope it gives you some benefit in fattening up the lower buds.

Sorry to be negative but the UFO really is a poorly designed over-priced piece of kit, you can say the same about all the other LED lights on the market. The Procyon and Lightblaze have some potential, but still suffer from the same issues - all the LEDs bunched together (moderated somewhat by the inclusion of a curved plastic panel that spread the light a little) and a low output. The manufacturers have to make such wild unsubstantiated claims as 'equivalent to a 400W HPS' to justify the huge prices they are charging, I mean, no-on would pay hundreds or thousands of dollars on their LED lights if they told th truth about how much light they are actually outputting.

Now this doesn't have anything to do directly with your tech, but you've yet to explain upon how your unit differents from the others?

We are talking lamp correct? even higher spec [more costly bulbs] are not where they are needed to be to produce.

Maybe making some data available?

Video of PAR meter comparing the LED to the comparable HPS then?
Establishing grounds to stand upon, with your tech?

If you could replace a 1kw HPS with near half the wattage and achieve 2Lb's per, without trying. Well simply that is the day LEDs have a cult backing them.

Thanks,

TR

[LEDGirl]

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

Now this doesn't have anything to do directly with your tech, but you've yet to explain upon how your unit differents from the others?

We are talking lamp correct? even higher spec [more costly bulbs] are not where they are needed to be to produce.

Mind explaining that last sentence? Higher specs are not where they need to be to produce? How can such an assessment be made, from someone who seems to have no experience using LED technology? And how is it you know so well what is needed to produce using LED's? Are you a Grow Light manufacturer or plant scientist? The way you state things has a lot to do with how other people take them. Pretending to know more about a situation than you do, is not recommended when going up against someone who is an expert on the subject.

What makes my lights different: EVERYTHING. I re-designed them from the ground up in order to beat the inefficiencies that other companies continue to implement. What I mean by this, is look online for a 120W LED Grow light and you'll see every company giving you the same product. When you look at my 126W, it's completely different: board size, wattage output, LED arrangement, etc... So why isn't my 120W LED 112W or 119W like all the others, and crammed on a tiny board? Why is it that I use their 120W board for my 63W light? It's all about re-designing the product to get rid of inefficiencies.

Other companies are lacking in their spectral output, or don't care about hitting the absorption peaks, so they throw in whichever red or blue is cheapest. We MATCH the absorption peaks with the output of our light to ensure that the most light is being converted into energy. On top of that, we increase the intensity of our LED's by using 60 degree lenses vs 120 lenses like everyone else. The 120 degrees lack the ability to penetrate, whereas the 60 degrees penetrate beautifully. So it's not what 1 thing makes us different, its that everything with us is different. We aren't some cookie-cutter Chinese copying, gimmick company trying to peddle lights. We are technology development company that fixed all the inefficiencies you still find in other grow lights. For more in depth information, please look at my website.

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

Maybe making some data available?

I already give more data and technical specifications on my lights, than ANY other LED Manufacturer in the world. One trip to my website will show you that (as it seems you haven't been there yet).

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

Video of PAR meter comparing the LED to the comparable HPS then? Establishing grounds to stand upon, with your tech?

A video does nothing. Why not simply provide me with the data on a 1000W HID? Go ahead and find the PAR values for a 1000W HPS and post them, then I'll give you a comparison... Besides that, my tech has plenty of ground to stand upon, and plenty of happy customers using it and posting excellent results. Posting a graph does nothing to change the fact that I'm well respected on almost every other forum, except this one cause I'm new here. Here is a link to a customer of ours who originally started as a skeptic and challenged me on the capabilities of our lights. I extended our return policy to allow him an entire cycle to decide whether or not he wanted to return the lights, so check it out:

https://www.rollitup.org/grow-journal...t-ledgirl.html

Originally Posted by Tropical Rain

If you could replace a 1kw HPS with near half the wattage and achieve 2Lb's per, without trying. Well simply that is the day LEDs have a cult backing them.

I already have a "cult" backing that's begun on many forums. This forum will be joining in on that movement soon

[asde]

what i ask you for are facts about the output of your grow light, i can calculate the remaining myself but your answer doesnt help me at all :~

[LEDGirl]

So anyhow, here is that graph I was talking about from a 1000W Hortilux Super HPS:



You can see that the blue has peaks at about 15% and 20% output, and the reds have peaks at about 15% and 10% output. The majority of the light emitted (even though it falls within PAR range) is unused by plants. The amount of red the lights emit is very little.

Here is are direct quotes from Sunmaster (a HID Bulb Manufacturer) about PAR:

"Since plant response does "spill out" beyond the 400 nanometer and 700 nanometer boundaries, some researchers refer to the 350 – 750 nanometer region as the PAR region."

So even though plants use very little light between 500nm and 600nm, it is still included in the "Photosynthetically Active Radiation" Region. And even though they use very little light outside 400nm or 700nm, some scientists expand PAR an extra 100nm, making it a less efficient measuring tool. Since the graph shows you the output of a HPS against the PAR Region, it also shows you how little light that plants use the most (blue and red), is included in their "PAR" bulbs.

"The output of a 400 watt incandescent bulb is about 25 watts of light, a 400 watt metal halide bulb emits about 140 watts of light. If PAR is considered to correspond more or less to the visible region, then a 400 watt metal halide lamp provides about 140 watts ofPAR. A 400 watt HPS lamps has less PAR, typically 120 to 128 watts, but because the light is yellow it is rated at higher lumens (for the human eye).

For example, a 400 watt HPS lamp has more lumens than a 400 watt metal halide lamp but fewer PAR Watts. Depending on the color temperature of the metal halide lamp, there can be small variations in the conversion factors."

So here they say that a 400W Metal Halide (which has more PAR watts than a HPS), only puts out about 140W of PAR light. We also know from simple plant science, that 1/3 of the light included in the PAR range (500-600nm) is more or less unused by plants for photosynthesis. So right away, the 140W gets reduced by 1/3, down to 93W usable (at best). Within a few months that number is down dramatically due to the lifespan of HID bulbs:

"Remember that these lamp ratings refer to initial light values, and all light sources depreciate over the life of the lamp. If you are designing to average or maintained light levels, start at 20% to 30% higher. Be sure to relamp before the depreciation reaches an unacceptable light level."

What would really make the reading a lot more accurate, is the amount of micromoles per square meter from a 1000W HID Since our lights don't emit hardly any of the 500-600nm range (less than 10% of our total output), and the rest of our output is locked almost dead center on the absorption peaks, not simply "PAR Range", you can rest assured that our 126W lights put out more available light energy for photosynthesis, than any 400W HID.

[LEDGirl]

Originally Posted by asde

what i ask you for are facts about the output of your grow light, i can calculate the remaining myself but your answer doesnt help me at all :~

440nm, 470nm, 640nm, 660nm 740nm, and 3000W white.

My 126W = 126W PAR Light, with less than 10% falling in the 500-600nm unused range. The peak absorption points for photosynthesis and carotenoids, are targeted with maximum intensity (over 80% of our output).

The 126W puts out approximately 5,000 lumens, if you'd like to do a conversion to micromoles (although I have the engineers working on that right now) via mathematical equations you can find online.

There's our output information, and when compared to the data in my previous post with information directly from a HID Bulb manufacturer, you can see very easily that we have more than 93W usable "PAR" light in our 126W, and the intensity won't drop off on you in 6 months...