ciratac

Thanks for taking the time to do a science project, Jose, even if it's not a
strictly controlled, double-blind study.

One thing we often hear is that the blue light during veg results in tighter node
spacing. You were keeping track of number of nodes earlier, but I didn't see any graphs
for that. Care to report on that aspect? I'd actually be more interested in node spacing
than growth rate, since each new node means more bud sites. A high growth rate might
just mean that the plant is growing a lot of stem.

From your last photo, it does appear that the vegetation is a little denser on the MH
side. Can you comment?

__________________
Answers to all your basic growing questions are right here: Grow Guide

JoseHempSeed

well, ciratac, you got me on that one... i can't get anything by anymore...

yes, i did start by counting the number of leaves. and that turned out to be a silly idea - there are way too many leaves to count.

so then i started counting nodes. that should be a lot simpler, right? well, no. there are nodes and sub-nodes (?) everywhere. it's pretty much impossible to count them accurately.

i agree with you, the internode spacing is very important. just how to measure it with 8 plants...accurately.

i was thinking about just using the weight of the plants, say something like overall grams per cm in height to quantify it - but of course that would be only at the end of the experiment...destructive testing, as it is...and it's not really a direct indication of the internode spacing...only an approximation...got any ideas?

right about the mh looking a little denser. i'm seeing the same thing; it looks like they have noticeably more foliage. just need to figure out a decent way to quantify it...

Xzoomd

of the nodes would be helpful...the lenght between internodes.

JoseHempSeed

that's just the problem. i've tried measuring the internode spacing directly too, that just made me cross-eyed

it's really hard to tell what's there...some of the nodes are packed tight, so you're counting or measuring on one side, you turn the pot around to continue on the other side, so you're looking real close, and "jeeze, that leaf looks just like the other one...lemme see, i think that's the same one, no, no, i'm sure i've seen that leaf already" thoughts come on, so you turn the pot to the other side to check, then it's about a half hour later, then you realize that you've already counted them 5 times. so, now i'm SURE of what leaf is where, you feel like you know each leaf individually by this time, why not just start over? i mean, you CAN'T make the same stupid mistake TWICE, right?
so then an hour has passed, and the buzz is getting a little thinner...and then you remember the vanilla ice cream in the freezer...

i don't think it's possible to count leaves or nodes.

Biker

lol.. fuggin stoneball

Xzoomd

Not count...measure the distance between the internodes. Like maybe the 3rd or 4th internode down from the top...or just eyeball ( ) the node spacing and report if the MH has tighter nodes.
Oh! ..and just in case you havnt had enough sh;t slung at you....the sun looks to be shining on the hps side. ::ducks:: Quack-Quack!!

Take Care m' Man
The zoomified monkey

ciratac

> there are nodes and sub-nodes

Can you measure the distance between nodes only along the mainstem? Would
that simplify it?

> right about the mh looking a little denser. i'm seeing the same thing; it looks like they
> have noticeably more foliage.

Yeah, but is it the same amount of plant matter packed into less height (tighter
node spacing) or is there really more?

But you hit on what is of course the important question: final yield. I'd
say one also needs to link potency into it somehow. But right, how do we
quantify it?

I guess we'd need to establish a potency scale, then measure yield in equivalent potency-weight.

How about this: with the final product, measure the number of hits it takes before
you can't get through a sentence without forgetting what you are talking about
(standard-sized hits, of course). Divide the weight in ounces by this number to get
potency-weight.

I'd rather have a plant that yields 1 oz of 1-hit weed (one potency-ounce) than 2 oz of
3-hit weed (2/3 of a potency oz).

MH vs HPS probably doesn't affect potency though. So it comes down to weight again.

Wow, now I have lots of ideas for experiments and measurement scales:
how about we do a lumens-potency-weight yield correlation...say, isn't there some
ice cream in the freezer?

-ciratac-

__________________
Answers to all your basic growing questions are right here: Grow Guide

JoseHempSeed

EXACTLY

JoseHempSeed

jeeze, what, you gonna change your nick to MR. FREEKIN EAGLE EYES or what???

nope, the curtain was open only to let in a little (indirect) light. otherwise i wouldn't have been able to get such a phenomenal, phantastic and phabulous photo.

Xzoomd

well peeps were being so fastidious and I felt alittle frisky..so I jumped aboard.
Bro...I was just ribbing ya!

beagle eak