Original StinkyG
Well-Known Member
Why just uvb ? From the studies I've read uv a and b are needed. Most uvb only are repurposed reptile tubes. The way to go is sunbed tubes, if they are sold for plants we pay twice ! Just like everything eh !
New grower needing a confidence boost
- Thread starter Rsooooo
- Start date
Original StinkyG
Well-Known Member
I likes me some porn, bud porn ! Pretty lady for sure !
Southside112
Well-Known Member
Just happened that my light was uvb only. Uva is supposed to be beneficial as well but uvb seems to illicit the response you are looking for. Uvb is what gives us sun burn and damages the plants to get a response.
Wastei
Well-Known Member
UV-A is the most usable of the two and doesn't affect final yield. That being said small amounts of UV-B is beneficial in terms of potency.
Supplemental UV-A is the safe bet.
Original StinkyG
Well-Known Member
If it ain't both I wouldn't bother. Supplementary I agree with, I'm gonna throw some tubes in tomorrow for 2 hours middle of lights on. Naturally UV is high an hour or so either side of midday so I'll use same timing sort of ! This whole situation arose because of plants being close to equator are higher in resin content. Makes sense logically ! I know logic falls short in some places !
bk78
Well-Known Member
Why not start a thread with pics for comparison reasons?
Original StinkyG
Well-Known Member
I would but I only have a single bloom room and comparison wouldn't mean much without comparing to something ! My word don't mean much in science ! If I had two rooms I would happily use uv tubes and hps and straight hps in other. There are studies on it, not simple ones either . I'm a stoner so remembering who wrote what is laughable for me. The last one I read with weights,% etc but using high out put tubes of uv a and b the thc went from 21% to 24% or there abouts and they expected cbd to go down but it also went up but not as significantly. I cannot remember the rest of the kit used. I think I only remember it due to the cbd thing as they explained why they expected it to go down. I've read so much it's a mess in my melon and memory for me is really fragmented. I have a couple of high output 100w tubes with ballasts just sat around. The closest I could do is use one tube over the back and none up front and see how they do. Not scientific in the slightest as there will be overlap with uv light but something 5 foot away should be less affected than plants within a foot or so ! I think without a lab or testing kit things would not be clear. Not noticeable by eye !
bk78
Well-Known Member
Any pics of your room will do
Original StinkyG
Well-Known Member
you've seen pics of my room , just before lights on I'll snap a few. 5 hours ! I do not disturb my girls when their sleeping! I brew some coffee and bake croissants and allow the smell to wake them gently before getting blinded by the lights ! Had a deficiency recently which shocked me, nutrients I hadn't used before "mills" and not impressed. I've never been hit with a pk deficiency so fast ! Had burn, dialled back and 48 hours later it was everywhere over lower growth"mobile element" and one plant up top ! . Never seen anything so fast ! It's sorted now, but I'll pay for it, only a little bit but I will pay ! Thought I'd give you my fuck up for free. Does not happen often to me but newb mistake it was. I've never had a deficiency when feeding before ! Smaller plants yeah but not deficient like that ! Apart from that the girls are early in bloom doing nice now. Fixed in 36 hours ! Shame about the necrotic leaves, the ones it hit hardest, the colour came back fast in the rest. Plants are efficient, need nutrient from lower leaves, takes it, if damage is too far gone, eat its nutes and drop that bitch. Damage is not too far I'll fix it ! Efficient ! Sorry I'm writing a book for no reason. I'm bored ..... SHit, sorryAny pics of your room will do
yummy fur
Well-Known Member
Look rereading the first part, I agree the OP went a bit hair trigger, I'll give you that. However my original experience here confirmed for me what i say. However I was in the Australian thread at the time and maybe they are particularly moronic down there.
On the subject of whether it's possible to tell if a young vegging plant is healthy or not under purple, well we'll have to agree to disagree, because to me anyone could tell the plant below is healthy. But sure, it's best to not post purple photos, unless it's purposely lit to make them pretty.
Attachments
twentyeight.threefive
Well-Known Member
I don't know anything about your original experience here or what it confirmed.
It looks healthy but the blurple can hide deficiencies. Full spectrum white lights can hide deficiencies too. Blurple picture just much more so.
Doug Dawson
Well-Known Member
So you can tell if the plant is off color, is too light or too dark under that lighting? Personally the plants are pretty enough to me without the need to light them up like they are at a rave but to each their own. Color of a plant can indicate issues coming such as too much nitrogen causing dark green or not enough causing light. Purple lighting does not allow you to see those things properly.
yummy fur
Well-Known Member
Arrogance goes both ways, there's the arrogance of someone who knows not much or hasn't done anything themselves reacting to good advice in a bad way. However the other side of that coin is experienced growers who act as if there was not a time when they didn't know anything and cannot muster up enough empathy. Having said that, the OP did not really deserve much empathy in this particular case. By 'love' I'm not saying that we have to pretend that something shitty is good, that's just bullshit, no I mean by 'love' that things are a bit more chill a little more "yeah, I know why you say that, because I've been there..." type of thing.
Not only that but it can be a little bit more multidimensional for example, it's easy to blast a newbie who is a little arrogant, but I've learned it's much better to try and allow the target to wake up on their own. But I guess it's only human to respond harshly, but it's also human to try and rise above that.
Last edited:
Doug Dawson
Well-Known Member
The fact is that when people come here humble with their ears open they get treated well. I find most bring the arguments on themselves through their attitude. I have seen some new users with a complete horror story grow get treated very well, you tend to get back what you put out around here. Empathy is usually reserved for those who deserve it. Take some time to look around, you will find plenty of empathy for those deserving no matter what they grow with or what level they grow at.
yummy fur
Well-Known Member
Coloured LED's are for all practical purposes single wavelength light, whereas when you are given a colour temperature, that is a peak value spread out over a generally continuous spectrum. It's a very blokey thing to obsess over minutiae of the spectrum, but as you point out and as anyone can easily see, there are very many hi end lights that add coloured diodes BUT, is that just to differentiate themselves or is it based on their research, and if the latter, what about the other hi ender lights that used slightly different coloured diodes. The fact is that from what I've been able to glean, no one has really done completely unbiased totally scientific based research. Apparently this was done decades ago but instead of using plants they just used plant cells, which, ahem, don't really extrapolate well.
yummy fur
Well-Known Member
What is a new grower suppose to think when Dutch Passion themselves, who obviously know WTF they are doing, state unequivocally that topping an auto will reduce your yields. They should add to that, 'unless you know what you're doing'. But they don't and they are wrong. How arrogant is it for a newbie to argue with D.P. But they also have to believe what they see.
So experts can be wrong, many experts can be wrong. Hell, take a look at the Marilyn vos Savant, Monty Hall paradox. Hundreds of experts said she is plain wrong, as simple as that. Professors of Mathematics wrote to say that she's wrong.
Many readers of vos Savant's column refused to believe switching is beneficial despite her explanation. After the problem appeared in Parade, approximately 10,000 readers, including nearly 1,000 with PhDs, wrote to the magazine, most of them claiming vos Savant was wrong.[4] Even when given explanations, simulations, and formal mathematical proofs, many people still do not accept that switching is the best strategy.[5] Paul Erdős, one of the most prolific mathematicians in history, remained unconvinced until he was shown a computer simulation demonstrating vos Savant's predicted result.[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem
So experts can be wrong, many experts can be wrong. Hell, take a look at the Marilyn vos Savant, Monty Hall paradox. Hundreds of experts said she is plain wrong, as simple as that. Professors of Mathematics wrote to say that she's wrong.
Vos Savant's response was that the contestant should switch to the other door.[3] Under the standard assumptions, contestants who switch have a 2/3 chance of winning the car, while contestants who stick to their initial choice have only a 1/3 chance.
Many readers of vos Savant's column refused to believe switching is beneficial despite her explanation. After the problem appeared in Parade, approximately 10,000 readers, including nearly 1,000 with PhDs, wrote to the magazine, most of them claiming vos Savant was wrong.[4] Even when given explanations, simulations, and formal mathematical proofs, many people still do not accept that switching is the best strategy.[5] Paul Erdős, one of the most prolific mathematicians in history, remained unconvinced until he was shown a computer simulation demonstrating vos Savant's predicted result.[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_Hall_problem
twentyeight.threefive
Well-Known Member
A new grower should listen to DP and not top. The majority of new growers can barely get through veg nevermind flower.
By the time a grower has a handle on growing they should already have learned that topping an auto isn't the end of the world and they shouldn't be listening to a single source of information.
twentyeight.threefive
Well-Known Member
It's been over 5 hrs. Let's go.
The game show paradox confused me at first. They need to emphasize that the host is definitely removing one of the losing options, I think that would clear it up for a lot of people.
It just comes down to would you rather pick with a 33% chance or 50%.
They did an experiment where even pigeons started switching once they realized they got fed more often.
It just comes down to would you rather pick with a 33% chance or 50%.
They did an experiment where even pigeons started switching once they realized they got fed more often.