LED lighting (was aroid recommendations)

From: Steve Marak <samarak at gizmoworks.com> on 2009.01.20 at 06:23:37(18936) Bonaventure, thanks for posting this. I'm very interested in LED lighting, and though I try to keep up on what's out there I hadn't seen this one. Though these sound expensive, for LED lighting on standard bases that can run directly on wall power it's really quite reasonable. Have you actually measured the PAR output from these lights yet? Steve +More On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, bonaventure@optonline.net wrote: > I got a good deal with these: ... > The Par 38 is a super bright light that is powered by 120 high intensity > LED's. LED lights are energy efficient and use extremely low watts. This > will result in money saved by lowered utility costs. The lifespan of > this bulb can reach up to 100,000 hours. This bulb emits no UV radiation > and will remain cool to the touch. The voltage of this light is > 110/220/24, uses 8 watts of power and has a standard E27 base. LED > lights -- Steve Marak -- samarak@gizmoworks.com _______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Franck R." <fradnai at free.fr> on 2009.01.20 at 08:56:03(18937) Hello Steve, After some researches about this method to give light to plants, it seems that a lighting only by led is not very well to spectrum level (problems to red levels and without these ray the plants have not a beautiful growth ; I had the same problem in my system http://fradnai.free.fr/GB/vitrineV2.htm). I have done these researches because I use artificial lighting for my indoor greenhouse. In more, obtain a large surface of light by led is not easy and it seems that to obtain these conditions, the price of install becomes then expensive (for me here in France with the price of materials). But it is also a very interesting method, perhaps a little difficult to use to a personal use out of professional in reason of price to have an optimal tool (material / spectrum / cost). So after these observations, and for me, I have decided to use fluocompact light and grolux tubs with electronical ballast, more easy to use and cheaper for me (I had tried Envirolite light too, but the results were no very good to my opinion, and now with fluocompact light and grolux tubs it is better, without etiolation and plants make flowers. Build of my indoor greenhouse http://picasaweb.google.fr/Franck54280/MaSerreDIntRieurMyIndoorGreenhouse#, and aspect of my lighting installation http://picasaweb.google.fr/Franck54280/MaSerreDIntRieurMyIndoorGreenhouse#5 243292884071621698. I must place one grolux tubs in more. There is 2 fluocompact light in 6500°K/23W, 2 grolux tubs in 18W and I must add 1 grolux tub in 36W). See you Franck +More Steve Marak a écrit : > Bonaventure, thanks for posting this. I'm very interested in LED lighting , > and though I try to keep up on what's out there I hadn't seen this one. > Though these sound expensive, for LED lighting on standard bases that can > run directly on wall power it's really quite reasonable. > > Have you actually measured the PAR output from these lights yet? > > Steve -- -------------------------------------------------- Franck RADNAI - Climate Zone 7 Web site : http://fradnai.free.fr/ Photos : http://picasaweb.google.fr/Franck54280 La eRevue des naturalistes en herbe : http://groups.google.fr/group/publi-n at Le projet S.O.S Epiphytes : http://www.sos-epiphytes.info/index.php _______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: "Elizabeth Campbell" <desinadora at mail2designer.com> on 2009.01.21 at 11:29:53(18944) Hi Steve, I'm a professional lighting designer, among other things, so I can maybe help with your question about LED vs Incandescent. I can't speak to the PAR output of the LEDs vs standard incandescent PARs, but I can speak to the lumen level at 5 feet, which is equal or better with LEDs than with incandescent PARs (at least, according to my light meter, and as with all lights, depending on the age of the lamps.) The main difference between the two is the colour and quality of the light - incandescents swing heavy to the yellow end of the spectrum, while LED light is a more balanced full-spectrum white. This makes LED light a better choice for plants, actually, because you're not overloading them with too much of a single spectrum. This said, LED lamps are a bit more expensive than standard incandescent lamps, however you get about 10x the lamp-life out of them and use a significant amount less power so the savings is actually there in the long run. The only drawback I've found with LED is that they don't have the same throw distance as incandescent when you get into higher wattages (or equivalent wattages) - this limits my use for them in the theatres and on outdoor stages to small specials, however for your purposes they are ideal since the light doesn't have to go terribly far. HTH, Beth HTML +More ------------------------ Message: 1 Date: Tue, 20 Jan 2009 00:23:37 -0600 (CST) From: Steve Marak Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] LED lighting (was aroid recommendations) To: Discussion of aroids Message-ID:

From: bonaventure at optonline.net on 2009.01.23 at 16:38:20(18953) Hi Steve, In reply, I do not have a light meter to ascertain the intensity of the light (not sure what PAR means). The 3 plants I put in my small diningroom where I had replaced the standard bulbs in a 3-bulb fixture with the LED spotlights, appear to be doing well (did you get the phone camera photos I had e-mailed to you?). I angled the bulbs together a bit, so they converge on an approx. 3 x 3 foot area at plant level. There is a 12 inch pot of Alocasia 'Lime Zinger' that refused to go dormant after being frost-pruned and brought into the basement, Aristolochia fimbriata that unexpectedly broke dormancy with a cutting of a cool Acanthaceae family vine (I'll find name later), and Miltassia Royal Robe 'Jerry's Pick' that really filled up its 8 inch pot, bloomed nicely, but now shows symptoms of virus in new growths so is being isolated and is expendable for this "experiment". Will let you know more later. Bonaventure

From: bonaventure at optonline.net on 2009.01.23 at 19:22:11(18957) Hi its Bonaventure again, talking about LED lighting and why I chose the bulbs I did. The red and blue wavelengths are what is most efficiently absorbed by chlorophyll and is standard in many plant lights. These bulbs were less expensive from Home Depot than the next best, what I found here http://www.ledgrowlights.com/sales_retail.htm Don't buy the "growbars' or Gromaster, 3 or 5 small spots of LEDs mounted in a bar. Its a ripoff.

From: Steve Marak <samarak at gizmoworks.com> on 2009.01.23 at 21:25:17(18959) Hi Bonaventure, PAR is just the acronym for "photosynthetically active radiation", i.e., that in the frequency ranges which plants actually use (400-700 nm or so). Since LEDs are by nature monochromatic (the "white" ones either use multiple colors together, or have a phosphor which re-emits broader spectrum light), plant growers very quickly hit on the idea of using only LEDs which emit near the peak absorption frequencies of the two higher plant chlorophylls (430-455 nm in the blue, 640-665 in the red). It's not clear to me whether that really improves things or not, since my understanding was that other pigments present in leaves, acting with chlorophyll, tended to spread out the range of frequencies which plants could use across that 400-700 nm range. So I bought a PAR meter, even though it wasn't cheap and it uses funky non-SI units (microeinsteins, or often microeinsteins/meter squared/second) that have to be converted to and from *everything*. I don't know if I've really learned much or not (except that in the end, you still have to just try things and see if the plants grow well), but I can sling a lot more numbers now when I talk about it! Steve +More On Fri, 23 Jan 2009, bonaventure@optonline.net wrote: > Hi Steve, > In reply, I do not have a light meter to ascertain the intensity of the > light (not sure what PAR means). The 3 plants I put in my small > diningroom where I had replaced the standard bulbs in a 3-bulb fixture > with the LED spotlights, appear to be doing well (did you get the phone > camera photos I had e-mailed to you?). I angled the bulbs together a > bit, so they converge on an approx. 3 x 3 foot area at plant level. > There is a 12 inch pot of Alocasia 'Lime Zinger' that refused to go > dormant after being frost-pruned and brought into the basement, > Aristolochia fimbriata that unexpectedly broke dormancy with a cutting > of a cool Acanthaceae family vine (I'll find name later), and Miltassia > Royal Robe 'Jerry's Pick' that really filled up its 8 inch pot, bloomed > nicely, but now shows symptoms of virus in new growths so is being > isolated and is expendable for this "experiment". Will let you know more > later. > Bonaventure > >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> > Bonaventure, thanks for posting this. I'm very interested in LED lighting, > and though I try to keep up on what's out there I hadn't seen this one. > Though these sound expensive, for LED lighting on standard bases that can > run directly on wall power it's really quite reasonable. > > Have you actually measured the PAR output from these lights yet? > > Steve > > > On Mon, 12 Jan 2009, bonaventure@optonline.net wrote: > > > I got a good deal with these: > > ... > > > The Par 38 is a super bright light that is powered by 120 high intensity > > LED's. LED lights are energy efficient and use extremely low watts. This > > will result in money saved by lowered utility costs. The lifespan of > > this bulb can reach up to 100,000 hours. This bulb emits no UV radiation > > and will remain cool to the touch. The voltage of this light is > > 110/220/24, uses 8 watts of power and has a standard E27 base. LED > > lights > -- Steve Marak -- samarak@gizmoworks.com _______________________________________________ Aroid-L mailing list Aroid-L@www.gizmoworks.com http://www.gizmoworks.com/mailman/listinfo/aroid-l

From: ExoticRainforest <Steve at ExoticRainforest.com> on 2009.01.23 at 21:51:14(18961) I'm sure not trying to promote anybrand and I'm sure Bonaventure's choice is excellent. But let meintroduce you to another alternative which is relatively inexpensivefor aquarium plant use. These units are called Power Compact lights. They normally consist of two bulbs in a nice looking light system thateasily mounts on almost any size aquarium. The bulbs are normallyaround 130 watts which means two bulbs will give you about 260 watts ofpower. That would amount to approximately medium intensity sunlight. These are commonly used for growing soft corals which require a strongintensity light. If you use two systems at the same time you can get ahigh enough intensity to grow stony corals which are even harder togrow. The bulbs can be ordered in daylight (around 5500 degreesKelvin) which is the same as sunlight or in higher Kelvin values forplants that normally grow in the understory where the light is a bitbluer. I've grown living corals for much of the last 17 years and havefound these work great and I promise corals are harder to keep alivethan plants. I'm not trying to push any seller but just look up Power CompactAquarium lights on eBay and see who has the best system for the bestprice. Be sure and specify the color (Kelvin value) of the bulbs youwant to receive if you choose to order. If you buy these in a localaquarium store you'll pay at least double the price for the same lights. Steve Lucas HTML +More www.ExoticRainforest.com Steve Marak wrote: Hi Bonaventure,PAR is just the acronym for "photosynthetically active radiation", i.e., that in the frequency ranges which plants actually use (400-700 nm or so).Since LEDs are by nature monochromatic (the "white" ones either use multiple colors together, or have a phosphor which re-emits broader spectrum light), plant growers very quickly hit on the idea of using only LEDs which emit near the peak absorption frequencies of the two higher plant chlorophylls (430-455 nm in the blue, 640-665 in the red).It's not clear to me whether that really improves things or not, since my understanding was that other pigments present in leaves, acting with chlorophyll, tended to spread out the range of frequencies which plants could use across that 400-700 nm range. So I bought a PAR meter, even though it wasn't cheap and it uses funky non-SI units (microeinsteins, or often microeinsteins/meter squared/second) that have to be converted to and from *everything*.I don't know if I've really learned much or not (except that in the end, you still have to just try things and see if the plants grow well), but I can sling a lot more numbers now when I talk about it!SteveOn Fri, 23 Jan 2009, bonaventure@optonline.net wrote: --------------010403070604040309030807

From: "Elizabeth Campbell" <desinadora at mail2designer.com> on 2009.01.25 at 04:46:24(18966) Hi Steve, Interesting to know what PAR stand for when you're referring to a growing light - in the technical lighting business, it's an abbreviation of PARabolic reflector. So when I referred to a PAR64, I was talking about a Parabolic reflector with a 64" focal length. Beth HTML +More Message: 4 Date: Fri, 23 Jan 2009 15:25:17 -0600 (CST) From: Steve Marak Subject: Re: [Aroid-l] LED lighting (was aroid recommendations) To: Discussion of aroids Message-ID:

From: bonaventure at optonline.net on 2009.01.26 at 18:50:13(18990) Hi Steve, These are approximately the wavelengths that I have. In my experience some flourescent bulb plant lights give off a "purple" light (actually 2 peaks, 1 in red and 1 in blue) and under them, bright as they may be,  plant leaves look BLACK. I took this as a sign of efficiency. These plant tubes were expensive (not as much as LEDs) but did invariably weaken and die out (unlike LED supposed 100,000 hour life) and produce heat, unlike LEDs. Plants did grow well under them for me though. We'll see how this works. Found interesting links on youtube, and, though not my inclinations, setups and information on cannabis.com. Bonaventure   >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Bonaventure, PAR is just the acronym for "photosynthetically active radiation", i.e., that in the frequency ranges which plants actually use (400-700 nm or so). Since LEDs are by nature monochromatic (the "white" ones either use multiple colors together, or have a phosphor which re-emits broader spectrum light), plant growers very quickly hit on the idea of using only LEDs which emit near the peak absorption frequencies of the two higher plant chlorophylls (430-455 nm in the blue, 640-665 in the red). It's not clear to me whether that really improves things or not, since my understanding was that other pigments present in leaves, acting with chlorophyll, tended to spread out the range of frequencies which plants could use across that 400-700 nm range. So I bought a PAR meter, even though it wasn't cheap and it uses funky non-SI units (microeinsteins, or often microeinsteins/meter squared/second) that have to be converted to and from *everything*. I don't know if I've really learned much or not (except that in the end, you still have to just try things and see if the plants grow well), but I can sling a lot more numbers now when I talk about it! Steve HTML +More --Boundary_(ID_Woi30uibOAMmoQkxaUbYwQ)----==============88094192933910714=

From: hermine <hermine at endangeredspecies.com> on 2009.01.31 at 20:50:50(19011) my experience which is freely volunteered by all those growing Mary Jewwanna under lights, is they are way ahead of regular plant folks inknowing what artificial lights work best. Many know NOTHING about regulargardening, oddly enough, just the crop grown in the cellar orgarage. HTML +More hermine--=====================_164991656==.ALT----==============D57661259094758044=

Note: this is a very old post, so no reply function is available.