Defoliation the first few leafs

rkymtnman said:

thank you for finally admitting your are full of shit you plunker.

my work here is done.

adios! enjoy your trickle.

Click to expand...

Strangely enough added nutrient to the right hand tank this morning. EC 12 hrs later Like just now is 1.8/2.0
As the left tank has had plenty of root rest have added nutrient now about enough to bring it up to close to the same. Will take a reading in two hours then again in the morning.
Will take a picture for you so you can work out my terrible maths apparently but from what I see is plants drinking nutrient. And a fairly stable PH next day down from nutrient addition something your dickhead mate did not consider
Yes a shockingly low PH. Just why I do not know
But I will get some soft water PH buffered as it contains less acid to see if it makes a difference even though am in a hard water area.

It's a couple of hours later left tank added nutrient reading a couple of hours like now 1.6/1.8 EC 5.3 Ph will do another reading 10 hours on as it will fully settle come the morning as you will see on other readings

harrythehat said:

You were the one throwing challenges earlier weren't you? pH 4.0 amongst other crap And someone stated 0.6 EC for veg.
I mean if you are going to argue come up with the facts
If NFT was nutrient Flow Technique you would have an argument but it's not.
It's FILM as it's scientifically impossible put put a film in a pipe.
It cannot be NFT..
Now the square section pipe they grow lettuce
That is NFT
But you wouldn't dare grow weed in it.
As root rot will abound

Quite surprising you guys aren't using a Ganga grid to get bigger crops as your on the cutting edge

Click to expand...

Based on your own logic, DWC can not be deep water culture, because it takes place in a bucket, and by definition buckets are not deep water. Do you see the error in your logic yet?

PJ Diaz said:

Based on your own logic, DWC can not be deep water culture, because it takes place in a bucket, and by definition buckets are not deep water. Do you see the error in your logic yet?

Click to expand...

Here we go again have never mentioned nothing about DWC. Changing the goalposts yet again even a simple question cannot be answered by you lot (explain NFT in a tube) seems none of you can. Which goes to show it doesn't exist just you lot falsely renaming a technique
In a square profile tube yes it can be NFT and they grow lettuce in them. but not in a round one
Try it yourself with a tube and you will see it makes a little River or stream in the lowest part of the tube gravity has a good deal to do with it.

harrythehat said:

(explain NFT in a tube)

Click to expand...

Easy. It's NFT in a tube.

harrythehat said:

Here we go again have never mentioned nothing about DWC. Changing the goalposts yet again even a simple question cannot be answered by you lot (explain NFT in a tube) seems none of you can. Which goes to show it doesn't exist just you lot falsely renaming a technique
In a square profile tube yes it can be NFT and they grow lettuce in them. but not in a round one
Try it yourself with a tube and you will see it makes a little River or stream in the lowest part of the tube gravity has a good deal to do with it.

Click to expand...

Harry, you do realize that when you grow in "potting soil" it's also not really soil right? It's just a soilless mix with organic amendments, but it's not soil. It's parallel to your situation, just like DWC is as I mentioned before. You are taking these terms too literally, and somehow thinking that if you tweak the principles slightly, that you've suddenly discovered a completely new technique deserving of its own name. It isn't. If anything you are running a "modified NFT style". Does that make you happier now?

PJ Diaz said:

Easy. It's NFT in a tube.

Click to expand...

appears ole hairy got us on a technicality:

A non-fungible token (NFT) is a unit of data stored on a digital ledger, called a blockchain, that certifies a digital asset to be unique and therefore not interchangeable.

so yes, Non fungible tokens can't be in a tube. lmao.

harry, i called your bluff a few months ago. you told me that you'd show me what was up. and you most certainly have.

i think you'll make a fortune selling NTT to the masses. good luck M8

PJ Diaz said:

Harry, you do realize that when you grow in "potting soil" it's also not really soil right? It's just a soilless mix with organic amendments, but it's not soil. It's parallel to your situation, just like DWC is as I mentioned before. You are taking these terms too literally, and somehow thinking that if you tweak the principles slightly, that you've suddenly discovered a completely new technique deserving of its own name. It isn't. If anything you are running a "modified NFT style". Does that make you happier now?

Click to expand...

If that satisfies your wonderlust you call it that.
which is not surprising when YOU can have NFT in a fucking tube FFS
But if you actually take a look at how it is assembled it bears no semblance to NFT So really a little difficult to call it NFT
That's OK carry on in your blinkered vision world your safe in there

harrythehat said:

Strangely enough added nutrient to the right hand tank this morning. EC 12 hrs later Like just now is 1.8/2.0
As the left tank has had plenty of root rest have added nutrient now about enough to bring it up to close to the same. Will take a reading in two hours then again in the morning.
Will take a picture for you so you can work out my terrible maths apparently but from what I see is plants drinking nutrient. And a fairly stable PH next day down from nutrient addition something your dickhead mate did not consider
Yes a shockingly low PH. Just why I do not know
But I will get some soft water PH buffered as it contains less acid to see if it makes a difference even though am in a hard water area.

It's a couple of hours later left tank added nutrient reading a couple of hours like now 1.6/1.8 EC 5.3 Ph will do another reading 10 hours on as it will fully settle come the morning as you will see on other readings

Click to expand...

Good morning you lucky chap
See if your grey matter can take this in.

Over this past week I have been raising my EC levels from remidial to close to normal 1.8/2.0 on the way up you can see at each stage the plant has drank the nutrient as the EC number has moved down.
So I have increased EC each time I have seen it use the nutrient.
Simple enough so far? Are you still with me?.

Getting my EC up as you can see the PH in the right tank is now extremely low.
Am I worried am I fuck.

My remedy for this will be tomorrow go to hydro shop and get soft water PH buffered nutrient
Change the nutrient and see what the difference is.
With it containing less acid. This should give a better PH

PH
Take a look at the day between each rise in EC
The PH is within a couple of . Each day I call that pretty stable.
If you cannot understand the chart let someone with a little more intelligence have a look see what they make of it

rkymtnman said:

appears ole hairy got us on a technicality:

A non-fungible token (NFT) is a unit of data stored on a digital ledger, called a blockchain, that certifies a digital asset to be unique and therefore not interchangeable.

Click to expand...

Yawn

Have you tried lst to get them to branch out? Leaf tucking is good practice. Even though we think we need to take fans off, really we dont. They are there for a reason. Light pennetration not as important in veg as flower imo,only! Plant requires less light in veg as about dli and changes at onset of 12x12. Ever tried monstercropping clones? Bushes but take a long time. Nice grow btw even with defol.

Southernontariogrower said:

Have you tried lst to get them to branch out? Leaf tucking is good practice. Even though we think we need to take fans off, really we dont. They are there for a reason. Light pennetration not as important in veg as flower imo,only! Plant requires less light in veg as about dli and changes at onset of 12x12. Ever tried monstercropping clones? Bushes but take a long time. Nice grow btw even with defol.

Click to expand...

Thank you for the compliment. Makes a change LOL
Normally I just go straight through do tuck the occasional leaf in the beginning but it just grows so much leaf it is a case of defoliation they get a bit of LST and HST later if they get too tall
Never gone for monster cropping or anything like that generally left the whole plant where I should get in there and take away the smaller branches. Will do more of that as they get going cos am only using 150 watts of led

harrythehat said:

Thank you for the compliment. Makes a change LOL
Normally I just go straight through do tuck the occasional leaf in the beginning but it just grows so much leaf it is a case of defoliation they get a bit of LST and HST later if they get too tall
Never gone for monster cropping or anything like that generally left the whole plant where I should get in there and take away the smaller branches. Will do more of that as they get going cos am only using 150 watts of led

Click to expand...

150w is what l have for veg, it works very well. Will only flower a few. But for 2x2 itll rock em. I find lst best as once dominance is broken all growth uniform and big imo. I dont really veg, put em in at 6-8 inches, end up 2-4 or 5 feet. Even larf is reputable. These are all over time wise, was trying to put one a week but some males got into the mix, screwed me up. One at back right l stripped all budsites but top 3 or 4 seems iternodal spacing in sites has decreased, did 2nd week of 12x12. Used to stealth growing, close light, run everything hot. They arent anything special but lm happy!

Southernontariogrower said:

150w is what l have for veg, it works very well. Will only flower a few. But for 2x2 itll rock em. I find lst best as once dominance is broken all growth uniform and big imo. I dont really veg, put em in at 6-8 inches, end up 2-4 or 5 feet. Even larf is reputable. These are all over time wise, was trying to put one a week but some males got into the mix, screwed me up. One at back right l stripped all budsites but top 3 or 4 seems iternodal spacing in sites has decreased, did 2nd week of 12x12. Used to stealth growing, close light, run everything hot. They arent anything special but lm happy!

Click to expand...

They look good and your right to be happy
Have kept my area as close as possible it's about 30x36 inches with 5 plants @30 watts per plant should be ok for a reasonable yield

harrythehat said:

They look good and your right to be happy
Have kept my area as close as possible it's about 30x36 inches with 5 plants @30 watts per plant should be ok for a reasonable yield

Click to expand...

Per plant or square foot?

harrythehat said:

They look good and your right to be happy
Have kept my area as close as possible it's about 30x36 inches with 5 plants @30 watts per plant should be ok for a reasonable yield

Click to expand...

40watts per square foot, pretty good lighting imo lm running 37.5w per sq ft, and happy with grow, if had more watts would give, homemade co2 in 4x4. Learning curve from hps, wouldnt go back to hid now. 2nd flower cycle with light. Doing well so far. Found higher temp and rh with co2 makes for lots of growth 90 degrees and 80rh. No pm like l used to grow at 65%rh.

Southernontariogrower said:

Per plant or square foot?

Click to expand...

Per plant
I just divided 150 by 5 = 30 watts per plant
But then according to others my math is bad guess there spelling bis also.
Seems the most logical way to me. Then i suppose you could break it down to watts per sq foot.
At the end
My preference is GPW another simple division until you start chucking in veg period light hours etc then you need to not oops make a mistake and extend the veg a month ana bit

“I can still tend the plants, George? I didn't mean no harm, George.”
― John Steinbeck, Of Mice and Marijuana

harrythehat said:

Per plant
I just divided 150 by 5 = 30 watts per plant
But then according to others my math is bad guess there spelling bis also.
Seems the most logical way to me. Then i suppose you could break it down to watts per sq foot.
At the end
My preference is GPW another simple division until you start chucking in veg period light hours etc then you need to not oops make a mistake and extend the veg a month ana bit

Click to expand...

According to everyone else watts per plant doesn't tell you anything. It's how many photons is actually hitting the plants and what's usuable of it for photosynthesis. Watts per square feet, LUX and PPFD is what everyone else use to measure actual coverage and light intensity.

GPW is a totally worthless measure. If you veg a plant for 6 month and get 2 GPW you're still only harvesting 300g in 6 months. That's way less than me an my 10 friends consume in that time period.

harrythehat said:

How am I being obtuse Nutrient FILM technique is exactly what it says a film.
Since it is not physically possible to get a film in a tube
It cannot be NFT. Simples.

Ok the sheet is there please explain my numbers and how they are terrible
This I want to hear

Click to expand...

Isn't this NFT with tubes?