So after finishing up my first grow, and during that process reading/learning alot more, I have really started to consider photo-period plants over autoflowering....which my first grow is (as well as the three babies I have started). I started, and bought, a decent amount of autoflowering feminised seeds as it seemed to be a "general consensus" that autos were easier to grow for a first timer. Since going through my first grow(which is still going by the way. She is upper 40something days old and is "scheduled" to harvest in 60 which shes looking like she is going to) I realized FOR ME there doesnt seem to be a difference in "difficulty" of growing from auto vs photo as with my grow I did EVERYTHING you need to do for a photo-period plant for my autos such as ph water, EC water, proper lighting, proper ventilation, pest managment(which I have concluded are more resistant to pests/fungus according to research, not experience obviously) etc.....so it seems the only additional step to make photo growing "harder" would be to switch my light timer from 20/4 to 12/12 whenever I felt like it...........doesn't seem too complicated. So here is where the "is this a rational timeline" question comes in......After coming to the above conclusion, and being that I only plan to grow 4 plants at a time for PERSONAL USE ONLY.....I have started to take total energy consumption into account for adding up the best "plan of attack" for my growing. Here are the numbers I came up with....there are COMPLETE generalization, and I know that but looking at "average" time lengths here it goes: Autos: I did seed to harvest as 65 days...and I run 20/4 so it would be 20(hours)*65(days) = 1300 hours for light. Photos: I figured 5 weeks for veg.....20*35 = 700 and then 9 weeks for flower......12*63 = 756........totaling 1456 hours of light.....but giving it a total of 98 days of growing....compared to the 65 days for the auto. I also seem to conclude that autos, while making drastic leaps, still don't produce quite the yield of a photo-period plant. I know that the total difference is 156 light hours which is an additional 7.8 days at 20/4 or 6.5 days running 24/0.......I say that to say this.. I will more or less be perpetual growing with 4 plants constantly going. I only took into account the light consumption as from what I can gather in my mind, that would be the only thing changing since I am continuous growing and wouldn't change my ventilation system times. Nutrients I am not quite sure of but seems that photos can take heavier doses of nutes.....maybe leading to more frequent nutrient buying..... So after allllll that, and sorry everyone who has made it this far, looking at yield per plant vs energy consumption/length of grow which seems more suitable FOR ME in your opinion? Side note....I LOVE getting my own bud for alot cheaper but I also REALLY ENJOY growing it so I am not looking to strain hunt to find a strain I absolutely love and then just grow that....I plan on buying 5 seeds of the same plant, but of different plants each time, to experience the grow of each..............as well as the end result. So although I am not STRICTLY seeking to grow the biggest, baddest, heaviest, stickiest, plant around...although that would be killer.....I am just trying to get the best yield I can, within "limits" while enjoying the grow. THANKS TO ALL who stuck through this post.......and a virtual to those who respond
this is something Iv thought about recently. when I started out I went with autos because the plan was 2 plants at a time offset by a month or so (aprox half the life cycle) so Id roughly speaking have one in veg and one in flower at all times- Id harvest one, the younger one would be at or near flowering and the next one gets germinated. Obviously with photos that would require two growing spaces, autos would happily share the same space without having to worry about shading the flowering one from too long a light time. As Iv got other things in my set up more dialed in, Im getting more per plant (less need to harvest a new plant every month- 6 weeks to cover my own smoking) and theyre getting bigger so fitting two in the space is less viable. Im currently growing my first plant that has never shared the space with its predecessor and its going well- but it does now mean my reasoning for autos no longer applys. Im quite likley to go photo once Iv used up the seeds I already have.
Cool bro, thanks. I have a few photo seeds that I got for "free" from ordering other seeds so I have actually started germ'ing one and gonna throw it under the light while my autos are doing their thing. I will try, at least once, an all photo grow after these autos are gone. As I have yet to even harvest my first plant I don't REALLY know how many plants I would need to keep my worry meter down on the running outta weed radar but I GOTTA think 4 plants....always going....would do the trick. Its actually for me and my wife but we still don't go through ALOT. I mainly want to have a little "leftover" each grow to try my hand at edibles.....baking, cooking, and especially candy, tinctures and oils
OP, go with regular photoperiod plants - there's absolutely nothing hard about it. Not sure how much space you have but I (personally) enjoy a perpetual garden at home. I keep a (smaller) veg area where I just run 24/7 lighting for cloning/vegging and keep a larger flower area. Once every 7-10 days I add the healthiest/best vegging girl into the flower area and this allows me to also harvest a plant every 7-10 days or there abouts. Good luck with your garden. J