Lighting What should be on a grow light review?

[Son of Hobbes]

@Son of Hobbes,just keep it simple for the average guy.Next thing you no @Waira will be in here and start by saying how the Sun started.

I'll put together a rough draft here and if it looks good, we can go with it. It's not terribly hard to add in things to the reviews, just wanting to shoot for a little consistency

 

[Waira]

@namvet25 let me boil it way down for yah brudda!

 

[BigSm0]

We don’t buy lights to consume wattage. We buy lights to light plants.

 

[wwwillie]

We don’t buy lights to consume wattage. We buy lights to light plants.

Bingo

 

[Slater]

Great info!

So could you summarize that in a simple list of what you think should be on there?

 

[Slater]

A lot of the off the self pre built units are fudging the figures so seeing them in action is the only way I will depart with my money. Honest side by side test grows.

 

[Delta9Heavy]

We don’t buy lights to consume wattage. We buy lights to light plants.

I agree. We as a whole indoor gardening subculture need to just get watts out of the equation with leds. Plants don't see watts, watts don't really mean shit other than being one factor in its efficacy

 

[The Green Sunshine Co.]

The only thing that matters to me, or should matter to most is the most important part of the light. The actual diode, or cob and it’s efficiency. Most of the above requests are easily manipulated numbers. Par in a graph, sphere, tent, mirrored room. The type of par meter used can easily cause higher numbers, there are also correction factors all meters require you to factor in. If it’s not the readings will register higher. Lenses and reflectors can cause higher par in a smaller area. Reasons lasers are so bright. Efficiency multiplied by wattage gives you the total amount of light emitted. There isnt an easy way to compare lights besides wattage, efficiency and spectrum.


Like vehicles, gas mileage is important. Efficiency is a very similar spec. If it gets 10 miles per gallon, people need to know. If it puts out 20% light per watt people should know. The problem I see is most don’t know how to calculate efficiency.

Hope this helps, if not it can be removed.

This is actually very true in terms of light angles and light spectrum. Different light meters are more or less sensitive to light coming from multiple angles, so that is an important thing to watch out for, especially in reflective grow areas.

As far as spectrum, if you see a reviewer use the MQ-200 or "Sun System" brand par meter they will read different LEDs differently because it will weight certain colors higher than others, so it is not a true comparison. This is why Apogee released the MQ-500: https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/mq-500-full-spectrum-quantum-meter/. Even then, plants react and get enhanced growth from colors outside the accepted "PAR" range through 800nm and down to 300nm... PAR (400-700nm) isn't the whole story.

So really you need to invest into a spectrometer. So far to measure light I have invested over $3K in lighting equipment... it gets expensive quickly.

There is also 1) System efficiency (umol/J) and also 2) Environment efficiency (realized umol/J) that you can measure by taking PAR readings in a meter by meter square area and averaging them and dividing by watts, or by taking them in a 4x4 area and multiplying by 1.48. This is to convert 16 square feet (4'x4') into 10.76 Square Feet to convert to meters squared which is what umol is measured in [this last sentence took me months to figure out]. The lens type will matter in grow tent environments because without lenses, you'll lose 20-50% of light once it hits the grow tent wall, depending on angle and material.

It's a fun rabbit hole .... It's best to just test the LEDs with a "real plant" grow because theory about light can be argued for decades. We can learn to understand all the common mistakes manufacturers make when taking measurements and using that knowledge to identify the facts you want to see...

 

[BigSm0]

This is actually very true in terms of light angles and light spectrum. Different light meters are more or less sensitive to light coming from multiple angles, so that is an important thing to watch out for, especially in reflective grow areas.

As far as spectrum, if you see a reviewer use the MQ-200 or "Sun System" brand par meter they will read different LEDs differently because it will weight certain colors higher than others, so it is not a true comparison. This is why Apogee released the MQ-500: https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/mq-500-full-spectrum-quantum-meter/. Even then, plants react and get enhanced growth from colors outside the accepted "PAR" range through 800nm and down to 300nm... PAR (400-700nm) isn't the whole story.

So really you need to invest into a spectrometer. So far to measure light I have invested over $3K in lighting equipment... it gets expensive quickly.

There is also 1) System efficiency (umol/J) and also 2) Environment efficiency (realized umol/J) that you can measure by taking PAR readings in a meter by meter square area and averaging them and dividing by watts, or by taking them in a 4x4 area and multiplying by 1.48. This is to convert 16 square feet (4'x4') into 10.76 Square Feet to convert to meters squared which is what umol is measured in [this last sentence took me months to figure out]. The lens type will matter in grow tent environments because without lenses, you'll lose 20-50% of light once it hits the grow tent wall, depending on angle and material.

It's a fun rabbit hole .... It's best to just test the LEDs with a "real plant" grow because theory about light can be argued for decades. We can learn to understand all the common mistakes manufacturers make when taking measurements and using that knowledge to identify the facts you want to see...

The smart version of my dummed down version. Can’t agree with you more, well this and the above comment about disregarding “wattage”. Unfortunately there aren’t internet police enforcing BS claims meanwhile the net is filled with plenty of gullible people supporting these companies. Things are definitely changing and companies that actully care about efficacy and electrical efficiency are doing much better than those with nothing more than intelligent marketing techniques.

 

[Slater]

This is actually very true in terms of light angles and light spectrum. Different light meters are more or less sensitive to light coming from multiple angles, so that is an important thing to watch out for, especially in reflective grow areas.

As far as spectrum, if you see a reviewer use the MQ-200 or "Sun System" brand par meter they will read different LEDs differently because it will weight certain colors higher than others, so it is not a true comparison. This is why Apogee released the MQ-500: https://www.apogeeinstruments.com/mq-500-full-spectrum-quantum-meter/. Even then, plants react and get enhanced growth from colors outside the accepted "PAR" range through 800nm and down to 300nm... PAR (400-700nm) isn't the whole story.

So really you need to invest into a spectrometer. So far to measure light I have invested over $3K in lighting equipment... it gets expensive quickly.

There is also 1) System efficiency (umol/J) and also 2) Environment efficiency (realized umol/J) that you can measure by taking PAR readings in a meter by meter square area and averaging them and dividing by watts, or by taking them in a 4x4 area and multiplying by 1.48. This is to convert 16 square feet (4'x4') into 10.76 Square Feet to convert to meters squared which is what umol is measured in [this last sentence took me months to figure out]. The lens type will matter in grow tent environments because without lenses, you'll lose 20-50% of light once it hits the grow tent wall, depending on angle and material.

It's a fun rabbit hole .... It's best to just test the LEDs with a "real plant" grow because theory about light can be argued for decades. We can learn to understand all the common mistakes manufacturers make when taking measurements and using that knowledge to identify the facts you want to see...

give that man some rep