All Done With Mirrors....

[Chronmasta]

I think its in Jeorge Cervantes book 'Indoor Marijuana Horticulture' where it says you lose a certain percentage of lumens due to the light having to pass through the glass b4 hitting the reflective surface then back through on the rebound

hope that makes sense .... way bent atm

 

 

 

[MongyMan]

Yes you are right. The world needs people who 'look outside the normal', but have you considered that maby people who post with 'constructive critisim' have been there before and are just stating their experience? Taking the stand of "I'm better than you because I'm the first to actually try this so who are you to comment ?" just makes you look like a wanka

 

Ive experimented with rooms that were mirrors on the shades, walls, roof and floor with fluro's and Hid lights. There is plenty of scientific research if you look, that explain what I saw. Mirrors don't reflect light that is useful to plants as efficiently as one might think.

 

Anyway knock yourself out going over old ground if you want. I predict when you post the pic's of the comparison grow you have compered to this one they will speak for themselves.

.

 

Peace MongyMan

[Frazz]

SeahippieS just for the record, bufo marinus would have grown more plants than you have had hot dinners mate , so give some credit where it is due .. pple here are not trying to argue the point with you they just sharing their views and the experience they have gained through trial and error ...

 

your knowledge is appreciated too and we are not de-riding your theories or experience, its just that everyone has a different story to tell

 

and here @ OzStoners NO one is the most clever of them all

 

[SeaHiPPieS]

BTW i beleive mirrors reflect 99.7% available light .. by comparison flat white paint reflects 97.3% available light and will not create hot spots ..

 

The 'exactness' of measuring reflected light includes doing it in a complete vacuum. White paint has so many variables that this figure 97.3% is a 'pie in the sky' by someone who has no understanding of research. (not you, but the people you quoted)

The variables are infinite (and mirrors have variables also)

20 cans of white paint on 20 flat surfaces will give thousands of variable results alone.

 

I was also guilty of 'perpetuating myths' - 1 classic which I sprouted was the one about our Australian 'daddy long legs' spider being the most deadly in the world but it cant bite us coz it's fangs are too tiny... That turned out to be bullshit that many people take as gospel... Neither is true - The do bight people (though not often) and they are not very venomous (less you're a tiny insect or grub) I've also heard that you'll never see sharks around dolphins - The feed together behind trawlers, I've seen this as have many fisherfolk...

 

So we should take care to look at the big picture - In a world full of TV educated 'experts' we can take the time to have a smoke, log on to Google and find what is hidden in the bullshit.

 

By the way the mirrors vary substantially also, even according to humidity, location of the reflective metal coating, the surface smoothness of the glass, and the crap we are too lazy to clean off the mirror surface.

Bit very simply when we look at the photos on this post (this works differently with HID) you can se only 1 fluro without the mirror, and with the mirror - multiple sources - multiple light sources = more light than 1 source - this is not rocket science

Cheers

[MongyMan]

No worries seahippies...as I said knock yourself out going over old ground if you want. I predict when you post the pic's of the comparison grow you have compered to this one they will speak for themselves.

[SeaHiPPieS]

and here @ OzStoners NO one is the most clever of them all

 

This my friend is your concept - I am sharing with the OS community - At the hit of the 'Fuck You' key I just make this experiment a selfish exercise. What I am looking for here is not statistics on who has grown more plants than i have had dinners but intelligent input and research based debate - Because someone has grown a million plants doesn't mean they've been doing it as well as can possibly be done saving HUGE amounts of energy - Which is what this is about... Less energy - Higher efficiency

Anybody can grow under HID. This is an alternative to 'how it's always been done' ...dig it?

Edited November 12, 2009 by Frazz

[SeaHiPPieS]

No worries seahippies...as I said knock yourself out going over old ground if you want. I predict when you post the pic's of the comparison grow you have compered to this one they will speak for themselves.

 

Now this is an intelligent comment - The proof is in the eating, smoking, weighing, - But If we can get the same results and end up with a lower power bill it's gotta be worth it huh?

[SeaHiPPieS]

I think its in Jeorge Cervantes book 'Indoor Marijuana Horticulture' where it says you lose a certain percentage of lumens due to the light having to pass through the glass b4 hitting the reflective surface then back through on the rebound

hope that makes sense .... way bent atm

 

Ha ha ha - I'll be with ya in a minute

This is absolutely correct - That's why mirrors used in scientific application have the reflective material on the front (which makes em way prone to damage and fucking expensive into the bargain)

What we're looking at is what we can use that's not on the ridiculous side of expensive and use less power to produce 'enough light' - Ballast n lights don't come cheap brother (some of us are less cashed up than others)

Cheers -

Edited November 12, 2009 by MongyMan

[MongyMan]

But If we can get the same results and end up with a lower power bill it's gotta be worth it huh?

 

No one could argue there for sure. I just don't think you will from my exp. If I'm wrong I'll be surprised.

 

Peace MongyMan

 

 

Ps Don't get me wrong...I'm not taking the piss in any way.....just giving my input based on my experience. Experiment away. It is the best way to learn if anything.

 

 

Peace MongyMan

[Pure]

What we're looking at is what we can use that's not on the ridiculous side of expensive and use less power to produce 'enough light' - Ballast n lights don't come cheap brother (some of us are less cashed up than others)

 

 

COrrect me if I am wrong but you already spent 140 dollars on each fluro .... when we can pick a HID up for 160 where is the upfront saving really sure you save the initial 20 bux but in turn you just bought a shitty chinnese copy instead of a designer product

 

I have watched people grow with fluro's led's and every other brilliant light source they could think of for the last 15-20 years and one thing never ever ever changes ... neither fluro's or led's have the penetration power to grow decent buds , sure you have some fluro growers throwing literally thousands into their systems that are doing ok , but the truth of it is , sat next to a HID grow with all other factors where the same the fluro' led grows look like wispy crap.

 

The reality is you can bounce this light off of whatever you want to and it will still make sweet fuck all difference when it comes to forming flowers the weak and dispirst light won't provide you with what you need for decent buds.

 

Now I know everyone talks long term savings when deciding to use fluro's but often fluro growers grow in the red , what they spend on their grow and setup often FAR outweighs the savings gained from the harvest savings , to me that makes the whole excersise although interesting pointless, you will spend less keeping a 400 or 600 watt light running a quarter than you will spend on a few quarters in that timeframe cept with the HID's you can at least to pull a few oz a harvest instead of a few grams of wispy buds

 

Some people like yourself though are clearly thik as shit and have to see things for themselfs enjoy your 3 gram harvest and don't let the door hit your ass on the way out , the way you have spoken to some people ain't gonna be tolerated from you or any other piece of shit like you .