yes i said in a later post that they have a great spectrum but absolutely no penetration so for sole use they are a joke. Theyre potential is poor. But yes good supplement
lol ya dude I just reread this thread a little less blazed and can see that the supplemental idea had already been covered my bad. But I still think you underestimate cfl's, go take a look at some of the cfl grow journals on here, also at the university I go to all the greenhouses use cfls (as supplement but still this just shows botanists do recognize there is a utility to cfls). Personally im with you, and would not use cfls alone but I cant take that away from someone else if they are getting good results and there are indeed good results. On a side note, what do you think of T5's?
for what it's worth I just had my first grow starting in Nov. Harvested in January. I grew some purple ak-47 (one plant) under 3 42 watt cfl's, and I yielded slightly over 1 oz. I'm pretty sure I also did not have the best soil, venting, air circulation, or light reflection.
I'm starting to get annoyed at this fallacy being introduced to the LED vs HPS vs CFL vs Candle vs Torch arguments, its such a load of bullshit. If 3 light sources each produce 100 Lumens per m² at the range of 1 meter, say a HPS, a CFL and a giant Candle, how is the light energy from the CFL "penetrating less" than the candle or the HPS? Would you argue that the different spectrums of light produced by the lights somehow have different "penetration values"? Would you argue that the light from the HPS is traveling faster, or with more energy than from the other two light sources? Perhaps you will argue that the HPS light is "denser", and therefore contains more mass and can "penetrate" the leaves better? Seriously, what is the actual scientific explanation that the HPS fanbois use to justify the fallacy of "Light penetration", and its use to dismiss other light sources producing the exact same Lumens per m² at the same distance? the internet is full of people mimicking the same old fallacys and rhetoric over and over again, I'd love to track down the original poster of this HPS propaganda, I'm sure it originated in the Anti-LED "argeuments"
I worked in a University greenhouse a few years back, most often the flouros a greenhouse uses is to extend the light period for photosensitive plants (such as pot but many other flowers, fruiting trees, vegetables, and even to signal dormancy) So if the period of light is only 13 hours a greenhouse will often turn on flouros to extend it to 16-18, these flouros arent used for their growing ability since they are not even close to powerful enough to aid in growth (unless they have em close to isolated plants/ seedlings, some greenhouses use flouros for that purpose) yet they still fool the plant to believe the day is longer. I love t-5's. Even when used for supplement they are much superior to CFLs in that aspect too...They are also wonderful for seedlings, clones, young plants less than 3 weeks old, and mothers. I especially like what they do for mothers. Often your mothers are not the same height as your other plants in the vegging room, and rasing and lowering plants is a pain. So in my vegging room ill stick a T-5 over my mothers a few inches above and it keeps them in great health with its full spectrum and causes no stretching, which is very vital for good mothers. See thats my main point, I dont have a problem with flouros I have a problem with people being so ignorant (its not even cheaper to buy a bunch of CFLs instead of a t-5 (ya can find em at Menards they arent as expensive as the "grow" t-5 fixtures they charge a few hundred bucks for)) that they choose a household item like a CFL it is not made for growing it works but not efficiently, bars are much more efficient for plants than coiled CFLs. I can understand that people cant afford HIDs and they dont have the room to support the heat or distance neccessary with HIDs. Then thats why ya buy T-5! because they work well, and work wonderfully compared to CFLs and they are easier to use since they are already a light fixture, rather than a bunch of CFLs plugged into work lights all ghetto rigged. And shit if ya can get a t-5 for some sad reason I would still pcik t-12 (very very common) over CFL use any day. Peace.
LOL its a joke? I didnt say the light moves faster to get to the plants, that has nothing to do with penetration. Where are you pulling your non-sense from? Your ass or brain? Same difference? Penetration involves the intensity of the light being produced (such as the sun is more intense than a candle therefore has much more penetration) Flouros are not intense, you cant make em more intense. They use mercury and low pressure to produce light (thats just how flouros are made) this explains why they are so cost efficient and "green". An HPS and MH are High INTENSITY Discharge lights. They are much more intense, much more penetration...ya get this simple concept? An example...How big is a 1000 watt HPS bulb? How Big is a 1000 watt CFL...hmm a 43 watt is pretty big I bet it would be about the size of a TV. That means there is more power in a smaller area in an HPS right...in other word more intensity? LED propaganda? People knew that HID systems were more intense than an LED before LEDs were ever used for growing. What the hell are you talking about? HPS "propaganda" came from simple physics...sorry that physics fucks up your beliefs. Apparently the internet is full of people not mimicking rather making up their own non-sense. Penetration has nothing to do with how far the light can travel (all light travels at the same speed and distance...obviously) it has to do with the intensity of the light at 3" at 6" at 12" and so one...relative to the size and energy the light uses.