CFL's (again)

[vertexx]

Hi,

I'm new to this group but have been growing for too many years to admit to!

 

I've used both HID's and HPS's with much glee and success.

 

I've seen reference to these compact fluro's here and there and also I've

seen photo's of very healthy plants that were vege'd with a CFL or three.

 

As they seem ideal in many ways for indoor I would have thought that

they would have been looked upon as a real revolution in growing under lights.

 

From what I can gather from this forum, the general opinion is that while

these lights might be Ok during the vegetative stage, they somehow fall

down as far as being an effective source of light during the flowering stage....

 

Now, I wonder, why is this so?

These lights can be purchased in various temps and wattage's.

It appears quite possible to equal the lumens out that HID has..or at least

I think that's right..some of these lights are big and mean.

 

Could some of you here let me know what your experience/opinion is and

why these CFL's are sometimes regarded as, well. less than cool.., especially

for flowering ?

 

Thanks from a newie to this group !!

[Gazza2001au]

im all for these fluros i just bought a couple a week ago they do the job there liked in the UK and US for both veg and flower

[jimbojones5678]

I agree with Gazza, they get some pretty good results overseas with them and all I can guess is that using one HID is about the same as a few CFL's or Envirolites so most people opt for the one bulb?? And they don't throw their light as far.

 

Australians are pretty slow to change or progression anyhow generally...

 

Jimbo

[Al B. Fuct]

As they seem ideal in many ways for indoor I would have thought that

they would have been looked upon as a real revolution in growing under lights.

 

From what I can gather from this forum, the general opinion is that while

these lights might be Ok during the vegetative stage, they somehow fall

down as far as being an effective source of light during the flowering stage....

 

Now, I wonder, why is this so?

These lights can be purchased in various temps and wattage's.

It appears quite possible to equal the lumens out that HID has.

 

CFLs are still fluorescents, despite being physically smaller than the traditional long tubes. Fluoros make low intensity light; the intensity drops dramatically only a few inches away from the lamp tube. This is generally OK for slow-veg of small plants. However, good bud development requires the high-intensity light you only get from HID lighting.

 

CFLs as such are not revolutionary nor in any way 'the next big thing.' They DO have some good applications with clones and early vegging, though. Even the big 100-300W CFLs as used in Envirolites and other fixtures, while brighter (more intense) than their small grocery-store cousins, still produce low-intensity light. These big CFLs will do better with flowering than the small ones but simply can't produce the same results as even a small HPS. A 150W HPS will kick the pants off a 150W CFL in flowering due to the difference in luminous intensity.

 

One point that even long-experienced growers miss is that lumens don't 'add.' Lumens are a measure of light intensity, which the human eye interprets as brightness. If you have a 1500 lumen CFL and you put another 1500 lumen CFL beside it, the total luminous output in the effective coverage area near your two CFLs is- wait for it- 1500 lumens. Just because you put one CFL next to another does not make either lamp any brighter or more intense.

 

 

For the above image, I set up two 20W CFLs in two fixtures, let them warm up for about 5 mins and measured the luminous output around them at a distance of 50mm. The lux meter read around 63-65K lux from the sides of either CFL by itself. When the lux meter sensor is placed so that it is as close as practicable to within 50mm of both tubes, the meter still reads 63-65K lux.

 

Luminous intensity from multiple sources acts like voltages in parallel. If you put two 1.5V batteries in parallel, you get 1.5V. Same with luminous intensity. As said previously, if you put two 1500 lumen lamps next to one another, you have... 1500 lumens. Neither lamp gets any brighter just because they are next to one another. Luminous intensity is not a measure of the volume or number of photons being thrown at a given point but rather the energy pushing them, analogous to voltage in an electrical circuit.

 

Consequently, you can put all the 1500 lumen CFLs you want in a grow but the luminous intensity will remain at 1500 lumens. If you need more intensity, you need a more intense (brighter) light, not more low-intensity lights.

[SukonmiSkunk]

if you can show me anything that can compare with this... ANYTHING... then i might be persuaded to throw my HID's away...

 

 

 

and this was only under a 600HPS

[freddie]

if you can show me anything that can compare with this... ANYTHING... then i might be persuaded to throw my HID's away...

 

Thats a beautiful bud SS. I haven't seen a CFL grow as good as that however the fact is you see some really good results on some overseas sites. Good solid buds and a decent yeild produced in tiny areas. While they aren't as good as HPS they often don't seem all that far behind. A CFL grow would suit some situations where height or stealth or heat is a consideration. Also some of those long tube shelf grows are an outstanding use of space.

 

good bud development requires the high-intensity light you only get from HID lighting.

 

You make a good point about light intensity but the fact remains you can get good solid buds from flouros. Check out some of the grows on other sites.

 

http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=51381

[Gazza2001au]

i will get the read outs of my 130w cfl today when i get around to it

[Al B. Fuct]

You make a good point about light intensity but the fact remains you can get good solid buds from flouros. Check out some of the grows on other sites.

http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=51381

 

Sure, if you put a ring of 20W CFLs around a top cola, you'll get one good, dense top, but the effective coverage range of a CFL is only about 50-100mm. Anything much further than that from the CFL will be sparse and weedy. When you consider plant growth, you're also moving CFLs daily to keep them at optimum spacing.

 

By the time you have enough CFLs to cover a modest sized plant and give decent density, you could have been running an HID for the same or less power cost and be able to light a significantly larger area to boot.

 

CFLs do have some uses in grow ops- flowering just isn't one of their strong suits.

[Al B. Fuct]

if you can show me anything that can compare with this... ANYTHING... then i might be persuaded to throw my HID's away...

 

Nice work, SS. 600 HPSs are fine lights.

 

Mind, I sure can show you something that will compare to your 600HPS- but only in daytime.

[vertexx]

Many thanks to you all, so far..

 

A special mention to Al B Fuct for his/her effort and time

 

I'm not so sure about comparing lights with batteries in parallel though..

 

I know that two fully driven fifty watt speakers output a much louder noise than one and I guess

a room full of 20watt cfl's would look brighter than a room with one or two.

 

But, knowing me, I've completely missed the point

 

Anyway I'm not throwing away my HPS's yet.

 

Am I right in gathering from all of this, that the reason Cfl's are inferior to

Hid's is because the light doesn't "reach" as far...??

 

For some reason the light intensity falls much more dramatically with distance

than it does with Mh or Hps's, even though it starts off the same...

 

Hmm..I know I'm not to technically savvy but that sounds a bit suss.

 

Please explain more fully to this lumen challenged human.

 

Thanks all !!