So if I'm hearing you right, you think the 600 is a bit too much to handle for this space, and you would have opted for stacked 400's?
B
B. Self Reliant
Yup.
Problem 1: The 5-gallon containers I'll be using next time are 1.5' tall. A 600 covers roughly 3'x3', so when you flip in vertical it covers a height of roughly 3' to 3.5'. That means I have 5' of height accounted for, with about 2' of height currently being wasted. Heat restrictions prevent me from simply adding a second 600.
Problem 2: The 600 demand too much dead space around the bulb. It's not that the room becomes too warm, I have a fan right below the bulb and a 6" vortex sucking up the breeze right above that, it's just that there needs to be more space between the bulb and the plants. In order to finish at around 7' these aren't small plants, and their canopy is constantly encroaching on the bulb's space. How thin can I stretch a 7' tall plants canopy, even with extensive training, ya know?
My solution is probably going to be stacked 400's. In order to adequately light a donut of that height, without adding much wattage to the room as a whole, that seems like my best bet. I've always liked the results of overlapping light sources anyways, so it seems like my only option really. I think the product will be good despite the heat from the bulb, but I'd rather run a couple 400's and not worry about it. Plus yield wise, I'm not sure the increased intensity of the 600 is going to make up for the wasted canopy space up top.
L
LouDog420
Sounds like you need yourself some individual v-scrog screens or a large circular screen around your bulbs. This will help with training big time, otherwise they just want to stretch towards that light!
The doughnut is looking tasty though bro!!!!
If the 400s are running too hot also, you could probably get away with throwing a 250w on the bottom and using the 400 or 600 up for those top primo buds
The doughnut is looking tasty though bro!!!!
If the 400s are running too hot also, you could probably get away with throwing a 250w on the bottom and using the 400 or 600 up for those top primo buds
My biggest problem with my old 250W setup wasn't light intensity but distribution. I found that the light would stripe the center of the plants in a very limited way, and that top of my plants would often be excluded. It's pretty silly to train the heck out of vertical plants to accomodate the light when vertical space is at a premium.
I can see why you're interested in stacking and I think that's the approach I'll take as well with my upcoming Homebox L project. I've still got my 250 from the last grow I'll likely use. Probably 400 on the bottom, 250 on the top.
I can see why you're interested in stacking and I think that's the approach I'll take as well with my upcoming Homebox L project. I've still got my 250 from the last grow I'll likely use. Probably 400 on the bottom, 250 on the top.
Inverse square law says other way round ...... base of upper lamp upwards to optimise light
B
B. Self Reliant
Yeah, a 250 on the bottom and a 400 up top would be just about perfect for a Homebox L. Like was already mentioned, put the base of the 250 watt bulb facing down and the base of the 400 watt bulb facing up.
B
B. Self Reliant
Day 52 of Flowering
Day 52 of Flowering
Come on in. . .
For better or for worse, this is what I'm greeted with on a daily basis, along with a blast of sweet & spicy sativa-ish scent.
Coming along nicely considering the heat.
My donut. We'll call it a mini-donut!
Very sativa-ish features with the bud structure.
Chunky is the only word that could accurately describe these buds. i hope they're as potent as they are large.
Foxtails! These things are everywhere. I'd love some insight on this . . . could this be because of the heat, or is it a genetic trait that will more than likely always be there? Is foxtailing a bad thing? Help please. . .
Day 52 of Flowering
Come on in. . .
For better or for worse, this is what I'm greeted with on a daily basis, along with a blast of sweet & spicy sativa-ish scent.
Coming along nicely considering the heat.
My donut. We'll call it a mini-donut!
Very sativa-ish features with the bud structure.
Chunky is the only word that could accurately describe these buds. i hope they're as potent as they are large.
Foxtails! These things are everywhere. I'd love some insight on this . . . could this be because of the heat, or is it a genetic trait that will more than likely always be there? Is foxtailing a bad thing? Help please. . .
awesomw B.....urr rawking it broseph!
B
B. Self Reliant
Good to know. It seems to be more prevalent on the branches close to the bare bulb than on the branches that are a little further away. The buds aren't fluffy at all, so if that's all I need to watch out for then I guess I'm good so far. I could see where it would be a problem if it got to be severe.
My room runs at 81 degrees F. The heat in the room itself isn't that bad, it's just that the bulb is too close to the inner branches.
L
LouDog420
chaingmai said:
This^^. And if the heat is enough to cause the foxtailing (as opposed to just a genetic predisposition...), and discoloration of the buds and small sugar leaves, it is most likely damaging the final product and the concentrations of THC, CBD, and terps on those closest buds. I've run my room hot where the closest buds were burned (not physically burned, but damaged from heat stress), and they were definitely lower potency and a bit harsher than the rest of the smoke
This is more FYI cause your buds are looking great even with temps! 81 for the room is probably more like 85+ near that bulb. Maybe a nice big extraction fan is called for next round, and a few vscrog screens or a big screen around the bulb, and I bet you push that yield up a bit more
Looking great bro
B
B. Self Reliant
500 grams is right around that pound mark, so I wouldn't think it would be too tough to get that from solid genetics in coco coir with a 600 watt HPS. I also don't think my grow is ideal this time around being a new space and all, so I'm not too sure about that number for this particular grow. If you look at the first pic in my last photo update you can see how much vertical canopy space is wasted because my plants didn't stretch as much as I thought they would & because I don't have (2) bulbs stacked.
It would be pretty hard to make an educated guess that was more specific than that right now. This is the first time I've grown this particular cut of AK-47 and it's much more sativa leaning in all of it's traits than the other AK cuts I've grown. Also, I've never grown vertical without using a cooltube.
We'll have to wait and see. . . Thanks for stoppin' by!
Hello B. Self Reliant. I'm trying vertical 600 for the first time and have read through your thread. Kudos on your growing ability. I have a couple of questions. When starting flower, should the bulb be higher than the plant tops or same height or what? Is it permissible to allow the plants to grow taller than the bulb as flowering progresses? With a six foot tall finishing height what can I expect from the lower buds with just one bulb? Thanks in advance.
B
B. Self Reliant
I can't comment on MH because I don't use them anymore. Personally I never found them to be a large enough advantage to warrant keeping a second bulb around. Then again I haven't played with them in at least 3 years, so who am I to say. . .
I tend to think of stretch as neither good or bad, but rather an unknown variable that needs to be compensated for. I don't so much care either way, but I do see knowing the approximate stretch of a plant as one of the main advantage of keeping mom. The more I know going in, the better I generally do when it comes to quality & quantity.
B
B. Self Reliant
Thanks for stopping by. I'm always glad to help when I can. I didn't have anyone to help me out at first and it made the learning process very hard.
This is what I know and what I did. . . The socket end of the bulb will put out very little light. When you hang it vertically you'll see that the center of the bulb isn't necessarily the center of the coverage area (height wise). I hung my bulb socket up, and next grow when I stack lights I'll mount the bottom one socket down.
My tops are currently taller than the bulb, however I still believe they're getting adequate coverage. IMHO, a 600 covers 3' very well & 4' is pushing it, so when I was vegging it was easy to have my bulb above the plants and still have adequate coverage to the top of the medium. I don't know if having them higher is good or not, but it felt natural. Now that the plants are taller than the 3-4' coverage area, I had to choose between having the bulb higher than the tops & losing coverage down at the bottom, or I could ensure adequate bottom growth coverage by moving the bulb below the tops. I chose the second option simply because as I lower my lit bulb I can see when the light intensity on the tops drop off. I have it just at the point where I can see a change.
Also, on a side note, the tops are no longer the trophy buds because they're not necessarily closest to the light. My AK's really tried to make those tops the trophy buds, but in the end the density of the side branches near the light will easily be triple the weight of the tops.
I hope that helps a little. . good luck!
Here's what I came up with. Its not perfect but it'll probably give me a good practice run. I don't mean to clutter up your thread. I'd be interested in your comments/advice. Thanks in advance.
https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=31798&pictureid=744299
https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=31798&pictureid=744300
https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=31798&pictureid=744301
https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=31798&pictureid=744299
https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=31798&pictureid=744300
https://www.icmag.com/ic/album.php?albumid=31798&pictureid=744301
B
B. Self Reliant
Clutter nothin'! Siiick!
I know quite a few peeps in SoCal who have grown for YEARS, yet have still been too lazy to refine their grow to that point, despite a climate of learning & openness
Details? Medium? Top dressings or pre-mixed?. . .
