View Single Post
Old 08-30-2002, 12:23 PM   #156
powercow9
Senior Gardener
 
powercow9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: leafreader
Posts: 521
Thanks: 1
Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts
powercow9 has blossomed.powercow9 has blossomed.powercow9 has blossomed.powercow9 has blossomed.powercow9 has blossomed.

damn I shouldn't start posting till after my morning coffee. This disclaimer is on the Lights of america fluorex box.. dont know about the EVL. But I can almost say for certain that lights of america uses the same bulbs as the EVL but at 65 watts not 95 watts. I'm still working on the proof.. but have yet to hear from ANSI the makers of the bulb in the fluorex..

Sorry fro the confussion but I think it still applies.

JoséHempSeed you can get a PAR meter from here.http://www.specmeters.com/Quantum_PA...t_Measurement/

Problems with PAR. It was orginally developed for light penetration in water (oceans and lakes and such) where the main lumens of light are filtered out by the ocean. I guess this is why aquarium enthusiast picked up on it first. Also true PAR is different for every plant.. obviously red roses are going to reflect more red.. than white roses. But of course lumens are different per person becuase all our eyes have unique rod to cone ratio. And finally PAR gives too much weight to the blue spectrum hencemost hps come out worce in PAR than MH's but from experimental experience, HPS produces more biomass than MH.. sure there is elongation but there is also more plant matter. I'll bet those evl have an awesome PAR per watt value.. becuase of their high CRI and extreme blue kelvin.

So yes I dislike PAR as well as lumens but I hate lumens more.
__________________
My hamburgerification has been greatly exagerated. Back in the herd.
powercow9 is offline