IF you are new to LED and want help choosing what to buy, POST HERE!

Alright guess ill just toss it unless you have some suggestion for I.

If you have it, you might as well use it. I missed the part where you said they sent it to you anyways. Just don't expect it to perform anything other than what 14W can do. I think it was on RIU, but somebody built a box with those panels on all five sides(not the floor/bottom) and did ok with it (size of the box limit).

Maybe make a clone/seedling chamber with it. Use 2x 2ft florescents (one on either side, 6500K) and it should help keep the seedlings short(red bias).

Yeah I have a 4 tube T5 running on top of the seedlings right now. Was worried that LED wouldnt be enough light to keep them happy so I just did the T5 only right now as I read that you shouldnt strain them at the beginning. Is this true? Sorry first time grower.

plants grow in response to strains, some are good, some are bad.

Some people top the plant after the first node (see Mainlining), that's a strain but yields improve.
Some people just bend the plant where the want it (see LST or Low Stress Training), definitely easy to do, and helps allow the plant to fully develop.
There are half a dozen other "techniques" or variations of cutting, crimping, bending, etc but the goal is to improve output from a single rooted plant.

Train them as soon as you feel comfortable with it.

Hiya, Does anyone have any experience, thoughts to share on these cheap 150Watt LED's please?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/150W-Led-Grow-Light-Flower-Veg-Switch-Reflector-Increase-Yields-Grow-Lamp-Panel-/151041264530?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item232ac2cb92

Tazbud said:

Hiya, Does anyone have any experience, thoughts to share on these cheap 150Watt LED's please?
http://www.ebay.com/itm/150W-Led-Grow-Light-Flower-Veg-Switch-Reflector-Increase-Yields-Grow-Lamp-Panel-/151041264530?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item232ac2cb92

Click to expand...

IDK , this design has been around for awhile now, but have seen zero grows with it. If you can get it for $1 a watt why not and don't expect more than a 1.5x1.5 ft flower area. I do like the fact of no secondary lenses and wide lens angle/reflector BUT make sure you keep your girl short(scrog/lst).

Personally I would save a some money and get a better quality led panel with PROVEN results..........your going into uncharted territory with ^^ that panel

1 watt per leds for growing is about the same as filling a swimming pool 1 teaspoon at a time. 3 watts per minimum IMO.

Alexander Supertramp said:

1 watt per leds for growing is about the same as filling a swimming pool 1 teaspoon at a time. 3 watts per minimum IMO.

Click to expand...

Not if the 1 watt diodes are putting out as much lumens/watt as a 3 watt diodes. 1 watt with higher efficacy will blow away 3 or 5 watt diodes. An Apache running 150 watts will kill my LED Star 240 watt panel with "5 watt" diodes in yield all the while using less electricity. Check it out.

http://www.apachetechinc.com/cms.php?id_cms=4

Remember Lumens are just a guide designed to represent what the human eye sees.

We are interested in radiometric output in milliwatts (mW)

Theres a good explanation of why from SDS, I think, in green surfer or SupraSPL's thread (cant remember which)

The gist of it is that measuring in lumens gives the blue end of the spectrum an "advantage" - because blue and green are easier to see than red (for the human eye).

SnotBoogie said:

Remember Lumens are just a guide designed to represent what the human eye sees.

We are interested in radiometric output in milliwatts (mW)

Theres a good explanation of why from SDS, I think, in green surfer or SupraSPL's thread (cant remember which)

The gist of it is that measuring in lumens gives the blue end of the spectrum an "advantage" - because blue and green are easier to see than red (for the human eye).

Click to expand...

Lumens are a weighted measurement adjusted for the humans eye's sensitivity to certain light wavelengths/colors...the problem with it is that the wavelengths that are worth more(like yellow/green/orange) are the exact opposite of what plants are sensitive to and thus are a very poor way to describe the amount of usable and effective light coming from a source.

Theory examples(not real/actual values)
Each photons value for lumens colors: blue=1 yellow=3 green=2 orange=1.5 and red=1 for a par reading...PAR colors:blue=1 yellow=1 green=1 orange=1 and red=1

Par light is an unbiased/unweighted measurement. All wavelengths from 400nm-700nm are given the same value and measured. PAR light readings in umols will tell how many light photons are coming from the source regardless of wavelength/color.
There is still a problem with PAR too...it does still take in to account the useless wavelengths. So to know how much of each wavelength there is you need a spectroradiometer which are $5000. But with led's we know(trust the company) the wavelengths put out by the unit and don't have to worry about inefficient colors(based on chlorophyll absorption rate curve).
I'm surprised someone hasn't come out with a light meter that is bias(like lumens) towards plant growth wavelengths(red and blue).

Unfortunately most companies, even led companies, don't advertise or show PAR umol readings. So we have to quote the lumens as a way to compare. On day when led's and science finally take over this industry people will know the truth about lighting and plant growth... and some other myths that aren't for this topic.

Hey guys. New to this forum and to growing. Thinking about investing in a 300 watt Diamond series. Here is the link: http://www.advancedledlights.com/3w-led-grow-lights/new-diamond-series-leds-extreme-3w-led-technology/

Wondering if the website is a trustworthy source. Also wondering if the light is even worth it and if can handle the whole grow. Also wondering how many plants that 300w light could handle. Alright thank you guys. Excited to hear your answers.

.it does still take in to account the useless wavelengths..

Which are ? From the PAR range (~ 400-700 nm ),which are those wavelengths that are useless ?
In what way useless ?

Just to remind you also ,that green wls ,usually are yielding more ,than blue ones ,regarding Photosynthesis ....
Also that plants are not green ...We see them as green ...That small detail " makes the difference " ,you see ...
.....
So ....

Can anyone point me out,at last ,the exact nms of these " useless " light wls ?
Cause modern science says otherwise ...

It's merely a ..MYTH .

ColoradoClone said:

• I have recently purchased 4 led 14 watt duel led which I had later on discovered are crap and anything below a 90 watt for a single plant is pushing it so I have since then ordered a 135 watt UFO from blackstar wasn't cheap wasn't crazy.I have a 36inch wide x 38 inch tall x 13inch deep box for vegging. My question is does anyone know if all 4 LED panels on one plant would do any justice for a 29inch tall plant? two of the led panels are two red spectrum with a blue spectrum i would put on sides of box and the all blue panels i have two of would hang above at an angle to shower the plant with light? Any thoughts? My 135 watt UFO is going to be growing one or two plants not sure if it can grow two or not. But it will Be used for flowering only on a 12 12 cycle in an inclosed area of about 36in wide 68 inch tall and 15 inch deep. these lights are all on order by the way awaiting delivery.​

Click to expand...

Well, if you want my opinion, refuse delivery of the 4x14 watts. Take that money and buy some 30 to 50 watt spotlights and add those to the Blackstar and do a SCRoG or grow in a way to keep a very short and even canopy. Those 14 watters need to be so close that they become very ineffective once the plant gets too big. You'll get weed but a lot of it will be popcorn and such. The UFO won't do 2 plants but if you supplement it with some spotlights and do some training, you could do 2.

bluntzmagee said:

Hey guys. New to this forum and to growing. Thinking about investing in a 300 watt Diamond series. Here is the link: http://www.advancedledlights.com/3w-led-grow-lights/new-diamond-series-leds-extreme-3w-led-technology/

Wondering if the website is a trustworthy source. Also wondering if the light is even worth it and if can handle the whole grow. Also wondering how many plants that 300w light could handle. Alright thank you guys. Excited to hear your answers.

Click to expand...

Bluntz I'm not a fan of Advanced so take this with that in mind. They seem to have their fans but who around here or elsewhere uses them? You really should find some grows before you invest. $800 bucks for a 300 watter? You could get 3 Vipar 100s right now for less than that. I think there are better panels for growing weed for the price. And how big is your grow space? That will dictate how many plants you can grow too.

just so people know i am not just blowing wind, these are the lights i use, only use this type and a few 14w panels, these ones are 50w, i use 2 20w in my veg room and 1 50w per plant in flower, 2-3 week of flower are the buds you see in the picsView attachment 2651289View attachment 2651291

stardustsailor said:

.it does still take in to account the useless wavelengths..

Which are ? From the PAR range (~ 400-700 nm ),which are those wavelengths that are useless ?
In what way useless ?

Just to remind you also ,that green wls ,usually are yielding more ,than blue ones ,regarding Photosynthesis ....
Also that plants are not green ...We see them as green ...That small detail " makes the difference " ,you see ...
.....
So ....

Can anyone point me out,at last ,the exact nms of these " useless " light wls ?
Cause modern science says otherwise ...

It's merely a ..MYTH .

Click to expand...

The point of my comment is that lumens are not a fair or true measurement of how much light is actually being emitted...and that PAR readings are fair but not all telling. So are you defending lumens or just picking on my details... because I know you already know the absorption rates and what I was talking about. So okay sorry, I should have said less usable and/or efficiently absorbed and converted by the plants. I don't know the exact(I'm sure you do) WL but it has been shown that within 500-600 range has far less absorption/quantum yield than the targeted peak ranges(430,450,640,660) used by led's. Even whites(full spectrum) follow the absorption rate curve somewhat with a large blue peak and lower green/yellow with a peaks again near the red 650nm range.

Nothing is actually any color if you want to get picky about it. And as for myths...the growing community is filled with all different kinds, don't act like it's not. But I blame legal status, and thus lack of research support, as main reasons for uneducated practices and theories stuck over time.

If you have something to share or teach then by all mean go ahead(cause you haven't yet) but next time don't wait for the most minor of poor word choices to get your opening.

tags420 said:

... I don't know the exact(I'm sure you do) WL but it has been shown that within 500-600 range has far less absorption/quantum yield than the targeted peak ranges(430,450,640,660) used by led's. ...

Click to expand...

there is quite a difference between the absorption/action -spectrum and the quantum yield.
if we look at quantum yield,.no wavelenght is sort out by plants.
the loss in the green/yellow(500-575nm) range is not more then 20% (mostly reflection).in some parts.


View attachment 2651726
http://plantphys.info/plant_physiology/light.shtml

tags420 said:

The point of my comment is that lumens are not a fair or true measurement of how much light is actually being emitted...and that PAR readings are fair but not all telling. So are you defending lumens or just picking on my details... because I know you already know the absorption rates and what I was talking about. So okay sorry, I should have said less usable and/or efficiently absorbed and converted by the plants. I don't know the exact(I'm sure you do) WL but it has been shown that within 500-600 range has far less absorption/quantum yield than the targeted peak ranges(430,450,640,660) used by led's. Even whites(full spectrum) follow the absorption rate curve somewhat with a large blue peak and lower green/yellow with a peaks again near the red 650nm range.

Nothing is actually any color if you want to get picky about it. And as for myths...the growing community is filled with all different kinds, don't act like it's not. But I blame legal status, and thus lack of research support, as main reasons for uneducated practices and theories stuck over time.

If you have something to share or teach then by all mean go ahead(cause you haven't yet) but next time don't wait for the most minor of poor word choices to get your opening.

Click to expand...

Don't be so sure about that ......Generally speakin' ...

Anyway ...As Guod stated ,they are two different things the Absorption and the " Action " (Relative Quantum yield ,more precisely ) spectras ...

Thing is that most of higher green plants ,they absorb & use every single photon they get in their leaves ,from ~ 360 nm up to ~ 730-740 nm ....
(At least for driving photosynthesis ) ...

There's not such a thing as wasted light ....

Once more ,from the swedish scene of grow leds ...A rather simplified ,but nevertheless ,a great piece of info ...
http://www.heliospectra.com/sites/www.heliospectra.com/files/field_page_attachments/what_light_do_plants_need_2012-10-05.pdf