Does LEDs really yield the same as their "HPS equivalent"

[gladysvjubb]

Been growing under lights since "Gardening under Lights" came out in the '70's. Been through them all. These are the most economical, powerful, people and plant friendly I have seen since that time.
You all fucking debate the BULLSHIT while I grow like hell.

Jesus Christ, most of you folks can not take advice without going in to paralyisis from analysis. Just like when I started the crypto thread back in March telling everyone how to get more than wealthy on future events.
I have a few followers who are reaping the benefit of being an early investor. It is getting better everyday for us.

 

[gladysvjubb]

This is what I was talking about:

[URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=78032&pictureid=2047754&thumb=1]View Image[/URL] [URL=https://www.icmag.com/ic/picture.php?albumid=78032&pictureid=2047752&thumb=1]View Image[/URL]

They are dirt cheap, but there's definitely better lights out there. They definitely do the job though, but they could be more efficient. I made 450W of actual output for less than 50 dollars including all the cooling and other stuff. The COBs themselves were under 15 dollars for 600W worth of them. I'm definitely interested in their new generation COBs(they have constant current drivers, higher efficiency, can be dimmed, and are generally better).

That is an exciting piece of antiquity you have there.

 

[Horselover Fat]

Been growing under lights since "Gardening under Lights" came out in the '70's. Been through them all. These are the most economical, powerful, people and plant friendly I have seen since that time.
You all fucking debate the BULLSHIT while I grow like hell.

Jesus Christ, most of you folks can not take advice without going in to paralyisis from analysis. Just like when I started the crypto thread back in March telling everyone how to get more than wealthy on future events.
I have a few followers who are reaping the benefit of being an early investor. It is getting better everyday for us.

Wow, touchy, aren't you? The lights are a good substitute for led bulbs. Same efficacy, but needs fewer sockets. Makes for a good cheap and easy to setup light. Best leds make almost twice as much light for a watt though. If you could dim them you might get better mileage.

 

[SuperBadGrower]

The lumens will shatter your fucking mind.

So it seems... I heard they are so bright they will "blind" you to reason!

...


Dude, it just goes to show that any light will work to grow plants. Stop getting all up in arms about it. This is not kindergarten. People talk bullshit, as you call it, because they are interested in quantitative facts about lights they are purchasing. It is demonstrably true that the light you are recommending is nothing special. In fact, it is worse or on par (pun intended) with similar lights in its price class. So fucking what? My dick is demonstrably shorter than a porn star's, do you see me throwing a tantrum?

 

[Klompen]

Its really sad to see these sort of discussions degrade because someone has a piss poor attitude and some sort of chip on their shoulder. Its unclear why it matters so much that people need to get all hostile and emotional about things. We're talking about something like an apples to pears comparison here and some folks act like their pick is the only right choice. Its tiring how such attitudes bring down otherwise good discussions.

 

[Koondense]

gladysvjubb,
do you realize your claims would need some support like some pictures perhaps?
To me it sounds like BS, to be honest.
I get you're happy with your plants but I may not be happy with the same plants, you get what I'm saying?

Cheers

 

[Horselover Fat]

^ well the specs show 15000 lumens which probably means ~220 umol. In a 2x4 three or four of them would certainly grow a lot of bud. How much and how good would depend on the grower like always. The lights would not be holding the grow back. You could always add some good red leds to bring down the colour temp and gain a bit of efficacy.

 

[Koondense]

Yeah but it exactly shows how these lights are not so good, at least in my view.

Cheers

 

[TychoMonolyth]

When it comes to quality, do LEDs compare to cmh or hps yet?

 

[Medfinder]

using bare bulb metal halide can be dangerous because of non shielded eyes.

plus the heat must be dealt with.

switched over to led 4 years ago.. sold most of my hps ml...

 

[Horselover Fat]

Yeah but it exactly shows how these lights are not so good, at least in my view.

Cheers

Sure. All comes down to cost of setup vs saving electricity. I paid 500€ for the diy light for my 2x4. Kinda expensive right? Gladysvjubb's lights would cost only 20% of that and I bet you could grow just as much using either light. Mine would use ~330w and gladysvjubb's 600w for the same ammount of photons.

 

[TakenByTheSky]

When it comes to quality, do LEDs compare to cmh or hps yet?

I did some research on a few different brands before I ordered mine.

From what I've seen not all LEDs are created equal.

The commonality amongst most of them seems to be the drivers, most use a mean well driver.

Where they differ is the style of LED.

I have looked at buds grown under a few different brands and I'd say the bud quality can 100% be just as good, and the claim the yield can be the same with half the wattage seems to hold true. Altho I'm not sure how the under growth buds compare from led to hps as the hps canopy penetration is very well established.

The other focus point I looked at was getting the perfect balance of light wattage vs price.

Some led grow lights cost a fortune but only use like 200w and claim to replace a 1000w hps. I dont buy that for a second.

Me personally I wanted to replace a 600w hps and wouldn't go with anything less than 300w.

 

[DARKSIDER]

using bare bulb metal halide can be dangerous because of non shielded eyes.

plus the heat must be dealt with.

switched over to led 4 years ago.. sold most of my hps ml...


View Image

And what a good job you have done with the switch medfinder.

 

[indagroove]

Been growing under lights since "Gardening under Lights" came out in the '70's. Been through them all. These are the most economical, powerful, people and plant friendly I have seen since that time.
You all fucking debate the BULLSHIT while I grow like hell.

Jesus Christ, most of you folks can not take advice without going in to paralyisis from analysis. Just like when I started the crypto thread back in March telling everyone how to get more than wealthy on future events.
I have a few followers who are reaping the benefit of being an early investor. It is getting better everyday for us.

Calm down dude. No one said they won't grow weed, just questioning the spectrum and efficiency numbers. Quality LEDs will be twice as efficient with a better spectrum, and while they will be more expensive, they will also pay for themselves over time.

Anyway, I'm sure we'd love to see some pics of your grow under these lights you are using.

 

[roybart]

I wonder how close Moore's law is relative to LED's?

Moore's law is the observation that the number of transistors in a dense integrated circuit (IC) doubles about every two years. Moore's law is an observation and projection of a historical trend. Rather than a law of physics, it is an empirical relationship linked to gains from experience in production.

 

[Koondense]

Moore's law works with information, leds work on pure physics. There's a limit of course.

Cheers

 

[Klompen]

Moores law would only apply to COB lights, as the number of integrated circuits can't increase on a single diode....

 

[indagroove]

Moores law would only apply to COB lights, as the number of integrated circuits can't increase on a single diode....

Except that HLG's newest quantum boards (HLG Diablo) have 666 diodes packed into the same space they used to fit 288 diodes into.

 

[Klompen]

Except that HLG's newest quantum boards (HLG Diablo) have 666 diodes packed into the same space they used to fit 288 diodes into.

From some perspectives that might qualify. Moore was very specifically talking transistor count, but diode density has some similar logic. Cooler diodes of today can be packed tighter with less cooling, so it is sort of analogous. I know my 50W driverless COBs run hot as hell even though they do create a lot of light.

 

[roybart]

huh someone beat me to it
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Haitz's_law
Haitz's law is an observation and forecast about the steady improvement, over many years, of light-emitting diodes (LEDs).
It claims that every decade, the cost per lumen (unit of useful light emitted) falls by a factor of 10, and the amount of light generated per LED package increases by a factor of 20, for a given wavelength (color) of light. It is considered the LED counterpart to Moore's law, which states that the number of transistors in a given integrated circuit doubles every 18 to 24 months.[1] Both laws rely on the process optimization of the production of semiconductor devices.
Haitz's law is named after Roland Haitz (1935–2015),[2] a scientist at Agilent Technologies among others. It was first presented to the larger public at Strategies in Light 2000, the first of a series of annual conferences organized by Strategies Unlimited.[3] Besides the forecast of exponential development of cost per lumen and amount of light per package, the publication also forecast that the luminous efficacy of LED-based lighting could reach 200 lm/W (lumen per Watt) in 2020, crossing 100 lm/W in 2010. This would be the case if enough industrial and government resources were spent for research on LED-lighting. More than 50% of the electricity consumption for lighting (20% of the totally consumed electrical energy) would be saved reaching 200 lm/W. This prospect and other stepping-stone applications of LEDs (e.g. mobile phone flash and LCD-backlighting) led to a massive investment in LED-research so that the LED efficacy did indeed cross 100 lm/W in 2010. If this trend continues, LEDs will become the most efficient light source by 2020.
The theoretical maximum for a continuous wavelength (as opposed to one made up of a combination of discrete-wavelength sources) white light source (at 5800K colour temperature with wavelengths restricted to the visible band of between 400nm and 700nm) is 251 lm/W.[4] However, some non-continuous wavelength composite "white" LEDs have achieved efficacies of over 300 lm/W.[5][6]
In 2010, Cree Inc., developed and marketed the XM-L LED that claimed 1000 lumens at 100 lm/W efficacy and 160 lm/W at 350 mA and 150 lm/W at 700 mA.[7] They also claimed to have broken the 200 lm/W barrier in R&D with a prototype producing 208 lm at 350 mA.[8] In May 2011, Cree announced another prototype with 231 lm/W efficacy at 350 mA.[9] In March 2014, Cree announced another prototype with a record breaking 303 lm/W efficacy at 350 mA.[5]
In 2017, Philips Lighting started offering consumer LED lights with 200 lm/W efficacy in Dubai[10] using LED filament technology, 3 years before what Haitz's law predicted


My law says stay 2 years behind in Technology and you can get much more for much less