Thanks everyone!
At the moment, most of my internet activity is conducted through my smartphone, so sometimes it's hard to keep up with being active on a forum. This is actually the first forum I've ever joined! So I'm still figuring out just how to do things. For one thing, when I try to use the advanced search feature, it tells me to narrow my search as it is bringing up the whole database. I haven't messed with it too much, but just googling topics with "Autoflower.net" has always done well.
It'll be a few weeks before I begin my journal as I've just moved to a new state and job. I'm just establishing my roots, so to speak.
This part is particularly fun, shopping around, trying to put a complete grow together from the ground up. I've been drooling over all the different pieces of gear available for years, especially when it comes to lighting.
(Warning: what follows is a long summation of my ideas concerning lights to use in MY situation. I still have no idea what is "best." Im just trying to logically weigh all the relevant factors of lighting as they pertain to my desired growing approach. Any thoughts are of course welcome)
When it comes to my research and opinions on lighting, I feel like I've come around full circle. Years ago, LEDs were my favorite, as I've always admired the technology. I even convinced my brother to go the LED route when he began his first grows. I didn't get a chance to advise him on what product I thought would work best, and he just went on ahead and bought some Chinese panel. It really surprised the both of us in its performance. LED was especially well suited for us back then, being in the desert and growing indoors in the summer. AC was already killing us on our electric bill, so having a light that wasn't going to contribute to our cooling needs and didn't take much electricity of its own to operate made perfect sense.
Now in considering my own future grow for quite some time, I realized that I really didn't know a whole lot about HID lighting in the first place, so my favoring of LEDs felt a little empty. So I started reading up on the topic. In some ways, HID lighting turned out to be more confusing for me. It really took a good month of obsessive reading to put together an understanding of HID lighting. I knew they were hot, and took more electricity, and that the bulbs would need periodic replacement. Those were things that made it easy for me to favor LEDs. But then I started looking at loads of grow journals. People have always seemed to do well with the MH and HPS lights and have been swearing by their use for years. I was really starting to consider their use in my future operations. In researching them, I got a feel for the general consensus on spectra and the more I went into it, I started liking the idea of ceramic metal halide, aka CMH. I loved that they were "full spectrum" and included some pretty high levels of UV on certain bulbs. But then I saw how they only ran on heavy magnetic ballasts, which were unattractive to me. I didn't want to take up more floor space, and didn't want to worry about them wearing out and/or buzzing like an old parking lot lamp.
So I decided to go back to the idea of MH and HPS running on a digital ballast. I still think they're great, but their high frequency operation and potential RF and cable interference worried me a bit. When I contacted a few companies on digital ballasts, there wasn't much certainty in the department of RF interference. The most honest reply I received explained that he's heard of it happening and that it even happened to him. His cable supplier sent somebody over to rewire his cable to avoid the interference. I'd like to avoid unexpected visitors if I can help it.
I had a brief fascination with fluorescent lighting too. I read into T5's and CFLs, which I still think are pretty cool, and definitely have their niche uses. I'll probably end up grabbing a few CFLs just to be gentle when starting seeds. Perhaps I'll even use them later in the grow in order to provide a broad spectrum and to add some heat to the airspace above the roots.
LEDs were starting to look really good again for my situation. I went back into reading up on the tech, the brands, and user experiences. I really liked what I saw with some of the high-end brands like Hydro Grow and California Light Works. To me, they seem like the Ferraris and Lamborghinis of lights: awesome, but expensive. So I decided to just keep looking.
Then I remembered my brother. That kid never researches anything. He was growing a huge Skywalker OG from a clone in DWC. I asked him the relevant questions, PH, EC, PPM, light schedule, nutes, etc. He just frowned and was like, "well the dude at the store said I want my PH test color to look like this. Idk what EC or PPM are. I bought these nutes cuz they had a monkey on it and I just add what it says to." He had some killer results and didn't know anything. A guy like myself chalks that up to luck and good guidance. Definitely not my approach, as I absolutely have to know just how and why stuff happens (Science, bitch! Lol)
Those plants back then absolutely loved that nameless LED panel. And it couldn't of been simpler to setup: open the box, pull off the wrap, plug it in, and, in my brother's case, attach shoe strings to hang it from the rack in the closet.
Eventually, I came across a sponsor of another forum selling some lights "direct from the Chinese manufacturer." They had plenty of grow journals and people raving about their experiences with both the performance and the price of these Mars II units. After trying to find out as much as I could about them, they still seemed to be a great choice. I could even afford to go overkill on lighting in my space, and that was what I wanted to shoot for in the first place. I've been trying to find some information here on Autoflower.net about the Mars II series LEDs, but so far I've only found a failed journal and a journal that has barely started, and no real reviews.
From what I can tell, they seem legit. They list their potential wattage as well as a range of their actual wattage draw. They are using 5 watt LEDs driven somewhere around 60ish %. I like that because they'll run cooler, for a longer time, and apparently they'll be more efficient at converting electricity into usable light at those capacities. I've read that driving LEDs closer to their maximum capacity does yield more light output, but there are diminishing returns. So while you may be supplying it with twice the power, you may only be getting something like 50% more light. This means less efficiency and more heat, thus necessitating the use of large heatsinks and fans to keep those LEDs cool and safe.
So now I'm currently wondering why the high-end LED manufacturers are advocating their tech as better because they drive their LEDs harder. My only guess is it has to do with light intensity. Maybe what makes driving LEDs harder isn't simply the small increase in overall light energy, but that the light energy can be supplied from fewer diodes, meaning each individual diode is more intense.
So here's a hypothetical scenario I'm wondering about:
There are two LED panels, same physical size, both using 5 watt LEDs, same spectra, same manufacturers, same actual power draw in watts and amps. Both panels are equipped with parts to sufficiently cool themselves. The wattage of the cooling fans won't be taken into account to keep the numbers clean. Also pretend there are no fancy LED lenses, just the primary lenses on the diodes themselves, same angles, etc.
Here's the difference:
LED panel A has *100* 5 watt LEDs driven at 50%, which gives it an actual draw of 250 watts.
LED panel B has *50* 5 watt LEDs driven at 100%, giving it an actual draw of 250 watts.
So, which would be better?
In my opinion, I'd say panel A would be better, and here's why: while both panels draw an identical 250 watts, the LEDs in panel A are closer to each individual LED's efficiency sweet spot, meaning that more of those 250 watts are being turned into usable light. Panel B on the other hand would have more light *per* diode, but possibly less light *overall* due to efficiency dropping at higher wattages. This also means panel B would need a better method of cooling the diodes.
My question still lingers: Is there an advantage to driving LEDs at higher wattages? Or can you get the same or better results using more LEDs driven at more efficent wattages?
Sorry for such a long post. Just trying to sort out ideas before I commit to anything. Any ideas and feedback are always welcome. ^_^
Good luck! :smokebuds:
