Theory on LEDs - Why they need CFLs to perform

[boricuapuffer]

i cant wait to see rumple's grow using that prosource LED, this is def MJ history in the making if the lights turn out to be the real deal. if rumple's grow goes well, im buying 3 x 318w units that hydro-grow -led sell asap.

[irishboy]

cant wait to see that grow to,

[whatuthinkin]

im in for the ride.

[Cult101]

how come he got one for free i want one jealousy

[punjammer]

Originally Posted by boricuapuffer

i cant wait to see rumple's grow using that prosource LED, this is def MJ history in the making if the lights turn out to be the real deal. if rumple's grow goes well, im buying 3 x 318w units that hydro-grow -led sell asap.

I missed this one, if rumple's grow goes good with prosources led 350W, why would you buy a light from hydro-grow?

[gir]

this will be a great comparison, though i think LEDs still need much improvement till they can be compared to HID lighting. i thought NASA or something has been doing much research on this and even they confirmed they can't yet compete with HID lamps on efficiency to yield size.

[boricuapuffer]

Originally Posted by punjammer

I missed this one, if rumple's grow goes good with prosources led 350W, why would you buy a light from hydro-grow?

cause i think she deserves the business better......and hers are cheaper

bp

[Hydro-Grow-LED]

Originally Posted by gir

this will be a great comparison, though i think LEDs still need much improvement till they can be compared to HID lighting. i thought NASA or something has been doing much research on this and even they confirmed they can't yet compete with HID lamps on efficiency to yield size.

NASA used cheap (though not in terms of cost, as they're one of the highest) LED-Grow-Master products in space. The original research was done by a company called SolarOasis. They combined a bunch of low wattage LED's, with high intensity viewing angles, into small clusters. Their original design used 660nm red, 612nm orange, and 465nm blue. There are obvious reasons as to why their lights were unable to compete, as they didn't even cover half of the photosynthesis peaks... Every LED grow light (more or less) is different. You can't base the results on one test, as being conclusive to all LED's.

[boricuapuffer]

Originally Posted by Hydro-Grow-LED

NASA used cheap (though not in terms of cost, as they're one of the highest) LED-Grow-Master products in space. The original research was done by a company called SolarOasis. They combined a bunch of low wattage LED's, with high intensity viewing angles, into small clusters. Their original design used 660nm red, 612nm orange, and 465nm blue. There are obvious reasons as to why their lights were unable to compete, as they didn't even cover half of the photosynthesis peaks... Every LED grow light (more or less) is different. You can't base the results on one test, as being conclusive to all LED's.

pwned

[punjammer]

Originally Posted by boricuapuffer

cause i think she deserves the business better......and hers are cheaper

bp

checked out your pc grow, nice setup you have there. I take it you're under the impression that all LEDs are the same? If this is the case, you can either find out for yourself (which could be very costly) or watch what rumple does with his grow coming up under the 350W. If they're all the same then you might as well buy the cheapest one you can find on ebay and really save yourself some money, but I think we all know better then that.

[RooRTokeage]

I gottta see this ish!!! Rumple I hope they give you the LED. I want to see this thing perform because right now I say CFLS beat LEDS. My boys plant is the same age as mine and twice the width, hieght and mass. I have the glow panel 45, and he has 150 watts of CFLS.

I seen Ups and downs with LED Grows, Sum good and some bad. Most people do tho use CFLs with the LEDS. I am just using LEDS. Reason is because it is only 1.5 inches thick and it saves me alot of space.

I dont know who can compare Rumples Indoor plant he shows of those MASSIVE, not Huge, but MASSIVE Cola's. I wish I could get a plant to do that. +rep for Rumple and I hope he gets that LED.

[Hydro-Grow-LED]

Originally Posted by punjammer

checked out your pc grow, nice setup you have there. I take it you're under the impression that all LEDs are the same? If this is the case, you can either find out for yourself (which could be very costly) or watch what rumple does with his grow coming up under the 350W. If they're all the same then you might as well buy the cheapest one you can find on ebay and really save yourself some money, but I think we all know better then that.

ProSource doesn't list their specs...like just about every other company out there using Red/Blue/Orange, so realistically, their light is very similar the stuff you find on eBay, with a much higher price tag. The only difference between them, is that they might use a slightly different ratio of each color, and they mix in some 90 degree LED's with the 120's. As they hide that date from you anyhow, they make it impossible to compare their light to anyone else, which makes them like everyone else. Companies who play these games are usually waiting for other companies (like HIDHut or Myself) to come along and post our specs, so their future lights can copy it. I must say, they've made quite a name for themselves out of selling gimmicks and copied designs. For example, their website currently states over 100 years of PHD research, yet on one of IRISH's threads, they stated only 60 something. Amazing how in just a few weeks, they've managed to add 40 years more reserach to their lights, yet their products are still the same... What a great gimmick to sell you their product! If I compiled all of the research I have, and look at the different people who worked on it, I could sell you on the same gimmick, but I'm honest.

Another thing - they say buyer beware of companies who list lumen values on LED lights. Do me a favor, visit CREE | XLamp XP-E LEDs, leading the revolution in LED lighting or LUXEON Rebel Color LEDs | Compact Color Power LEDs Luxeon and Cree, are the two leading US manufacturers of LED's. They rate ALL of their products in lumens, so is ProSource saying they're wrong? I mean we're talking about pinpointed wavelengths of light that are vital to photosynthesis! Anyone can determine that a blue at 40lm is going to be better for plants than a blue at 18lm, so why do they hide their lumen values? Hell, why don't they give you an alternative method of measuring their lights, if they think lumens are bad? The least they could do is supply you, THE CONSUMER, with a valid value on their light, so you can make an informed decision vs their competitors... It's apparent they don't want you to have that choice...

Lastly, if anyone thinks carotenoids absorb orange light (like ProSource maintains), look up carotenoids on Google. A quick reference of several pages, will tell you that carotenoids absorb BLUE light. The max I've found anyone post a value for carotenoids is 505nm...which is basically cyan. So if they have 100 years of PHD research, how come their PHD's haven't figured out yet that carotenoids don't absorb orange? I mean, they claim it on their site?

So when Rumple does his ProSource grow, make sure to follow the ProSource vs Hydro-Grow test. We're planning on matching their yield, or beating it with 30% less wattage. So yay, if RUmple does good, but that doesn't tell you who has the best LED Grow Light.

[halitzor]

Thats a damn good post. Once a little more perfection is applied to these lights, I will be looking to buy from your company. (assuming these tests show good results)

[punjammer]

Originally Posted by Hydro-Grow-LED

ProSource doesn't list their specs...like just about every other company out there using Red/Blue/Orange, so realistically, their light is very similar the stuff you find on eBay, with a much higher price tag. The only difference between them, is that they might use a slightly different ratio of each color, and they mix in some 90 degree LED's with the 120's. As they hide that date from you anyhow, they make it impossible to compare their light to anyone else, which makes them like everyone else. Companies who play these games are usually waiting for other companies (like HIDHut or Myself) to come along and post our specs, so their future lights can copy it. I must say, they've made quite a name for themselves out of selling gimmicks and copied designs. For example, their website currently states over 100 years of PHD research, yet on one of IRISH's threads, they stated only 60 something. Amazing how in just a few weeks, they've managed to add 40 years more reserach to their lights, yet their products are still the same... What a great gimmick to sell you their product! If I compiled all of the research I have, and look at the different people who worked on it, I could sell you on the same gimmick, but I'm honest.

Another thing - they say buyer beware of companies who list lumen values on LED lights. Do me a favor, visit CREE | XLamp XP-E LEDs, leading the revolution in LED lighting or LUXEON Rebel Color LEDs | Compact Color Power LEDs Luxeon and Cree, are the two leading US manufacturers of LED's. They rate ALL of their products in lumens, so is ProSource saying they're wrong? I mean we're talking about pinpointed wavelengths of light that are vital to photosynthesis! Anyone can determine that a blue at 40lm is going to be better for plants than a blue at 18lm, so why do they hide their lumen values? Hell, why don't they give you an alternative method of measuring their lights, if they think lumens are bad? The least they could do is supply you, THE CONSUMER, with a valid value on their light, so you can make an informed decision vs their competitors... It's apparent they don't want you to have that choice...

Lastly, if anyone thinks carotenoids absorb orange light (like ProSource maintains), look up carotenoids on Google. A quick reference of several pages, will tell you that carotenoids absorb BLUE light. The max I've found anyone post a value for carotenoids is 505nm...which is basically cyan. So if they have 100 years of PHD research, how come their PHD's haven't figured out yet that carotenoids don't absorb orange? I mean, they claim it on their site?

So when Rumple does his ProSource grow, make sure to follow the ProSource vs Hydro-Grow test. We're planning on matching their yield, or beating it with 30% less wattage. So yay, if RUmple does good, but that doesn't tell you who has the best LED.

I read what you had to say about prosource and looked over their website and I think you have some misstatments here:
1st you said they added 40 years of Phd research in just a few weeks. This is what's on their website:
Only a small number of manufacturers use the proper values of LEDs that produce the exact frequencies of light that plants use best, but very few actually use them in the exact right proportions at which photosynthetic and non-photosynthetic processes occur. ProSource Worldwide has incorporated 100 years of PhD-level plant research to find these precise proportions, so that our lamps simultaneously produce the maximum amount of plant-useable light, and in the exact quantities plants need. (Just by using the proper proportions of light, without increasing power, a grow lamp’s efficiency can increase by a factor of 3 or more!) We know of no other manufacturer who has devoted and invested this much time and effort in this area.

They are saying they incorporated 100 years of Phd level plant research into their lights, and on Irishboys thread they said they have 2 Phd's with 60 years of experience that developed their lights. That's not the same point you just made to me.

2nd: The point about companies listing the lumen values of their lights and then citing companies like cree and luxeon. Here again is what is on their site about that:

Some manufacturers claim that their lamps are the brightest, and offer their specifications in lumens. A lumen, however, is a measure of light which is based upon human perception, and not a true, accurate measure of the photosynthetic power of light at all. Indeed, while their light may appear to be bright to us, it might not be bright to plants at all, if the light does not consist of all the precision values plants need to thrive. If a manufacturer advertises their light specifications in lumens, lux or candlepower, beware!

This makes sense to me and if a company does state their lumen output and it doesn't really tranlate into plant growth, this would be more of a gimmick to fool the public into thinking that brighter is better.

Lastly, I don't really care about what specs a company uses, all I care about is when i put my hard earned money down to buy a light, it better grow my shit pretty good.

P.S. why do u have such a bug up your ass with prosource anyhow? shoot all you need to do is prove you have a better light that grows more bud then they do and you'll get business. It doesn't look good for you when you keep hammering away at other company's..Just some friendly advice for ya...

[boricuapuffer]

Originally Posted by punjammer

checked out your pc grow, nice setup you have there. I take it you're under the impression that all LEDs are the same? If this is the case, you can either find out for yourself (which could be very costly) or watch what rumple does with his grow coming up under the 350W. If they're all the same then you might as well buy the cheapest one you can find on ebay and really save yourself some money, but I think we all know better then that.

i'd rather wait to see rumple finish his grow before i pull the trigger and buy those LED panels for $3000

thanks for the compliment on the pc grow

Bp