# HPS vs CFL:  Potency



## oldhippiedad (Dec 17, 2009)

The HPS will produce denser buds.  In terms of potency (all other variables considered equal) will the HPS produce more potent buds.  Is there a difference in terms of potency?  Thanks in advance.


----------



## ozzydiodude (Dec 17, 2009)

The strain of MJ is what determens(sp?) the potency.

IMO More dence buds = more surface area for trich gland so you will have more THC on the buds grown under the HPS lights


----------



## zipflip (Dec 17, 2009)

i started wit cfl's and now have 400hps and by far the potency is far better than under the cfl's. same strain ive grown under both so...
  like ozzy said, HID's will give ya denser buds as well as more trichome production IMO and exp.
  if you can afford and manage a 400 hps in ur space then by all means go for it.
  if nothing else go cheep even and find a refurbished HPS for round a 100$ or so and go with that til ya can get a better one.
 also just remember that if ya gonna go with like 20 or more cfl's liek i did at first then your gonna be dealling with almost equal amount of heat compared to a 400 hps imo.
  maybe not exactly but still pretty close in heat temps.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 17, 2009)

I have always heard THC/resin is produced in the dark. The light would definitely help trich growth as they said denser buds but THC is produced when the light is off. I don't know this is a touchy subject and you will hear numerous sides.


----------



## zipflip (Dec 17, 2009)

then maybe that is teh way it goes. :confused2:  either way in lamens terms i noticed i got alot higher off my buds under HPS than CFL's. also buds were denser/bigger as well under HPS so yeah that dsounds liek more accurate and technically speaking  way that cajun and ozzy put it. :aok:


----------



## DonJones (Dec 21, 2009)

Before we get too carried away about HPS versus cfls, we need to be sure are we getting the difference because of the color temperature/spectrum or because of the difference in the source?

Regardless of the source you will get different results with different color temp/spectrum even if it is from the same source.  Regardless if you use an HPS base modified to a certain spectrum and lumens, a MH modified to the same temp and lumens or a cfl modified to the same spectrum you will get virtually identical results under identical conditions other than light source, provided that they all deliver the same lumens/ PAR rating of the same color spectrum of light at the surface of the plant.

One reason I'm sure the average cfl grower will find a large difference between cfls and a HPS is that very few people know where and how to  get an HPS like spectrum in a cfl regardless of how bright their cfl array is. 

Good luck and good growing, with what ever light source you choose.

Good smoking


----------



## BBFan (Dec 21, 2009)

[email protected] said:
			
		

> *I have always heard THC/resin is produced in the dark*. The light would definitely help trich growth as they said denser buds but THC is produced when the light is off. I don't know this is a touchy subject and you will hear numerous sides.


 
Yup. Touchy subject [email protected]

So I need to ask you for a source for this, as it is something I've never heard or read.  Not from Clarke, not from Cervantes.  Nowhere.

Many plants develop trichomes fro different reasons- but I've never read about it being a dark response for them either.  Even some long day plants develop trichs.

Be interested in reading up on this.  Thanks.


----------



## Hick (Dec 21, 2009)

BBFan said:
			
		

> Yup. Touchy subject [email protected]
> 
> So I need to ask you for a source for this, as it is something I've never heard or read.  Not from Clarke, not from Cervantes.  Nowhere.
> 
> ...


Clarkes book says that according to studies conducted, "nearlly twice as much thc is produced under 12 hours of _"light"_,(12/12) than under 10 hours of light.(10/14)"  Leading me to believe that thc is NOT produced in the dark.


----------



## BBFan (Dec 21, 2009)

Thanks Brother Hick- Like I said, I can't recall seeing that anywhere.


----------



## [email protected] (Dec 21, 2009)

[email protected] said:
			
		

> I have always *heard* THC/resin is produced in the dark.



No source just what I have heard through word of mouth. Sorry for not clarifying there was no source. Like I *read* in another forum. Keeping your plant in the dark for 24 hours before harvest causes it to double produce resin. That is one persons "*theory*".
This is a touchy subject and there will be numerous opinions.



			
				Hick said:
			
		

> Clarkes book says that according to studies conducted, "nearlly twice as much thc is produced under 12 hours of "light",(12/12) than under 10 hours of light.(10/14)" Leading me to believe that thc is NOT produced in the dark.


 
This is another person's "*theory*". Another would have a different "*theory*". Until there is comparisons in scientific "*theory*" matching up it is not "*facts*". What ever works best for the individual growers.
 Therefore this is a touchy subject without stated "*facts*". Unless it is stated scientific "*fact*". *Most* of the articles read in books, magazines, newspapers, and blogs are the writers opinion. Again all that will be wrote here are personal opinions or quoted personal opinions.


----------



## LEFTHAND (Dec 24, 2009)

*i would have to say hands down HPS man... 
lumens per watt we all know the HPS wins..

this subject, is the same as to flush or not.. we all have our opinions .. lol..
but when it comes to lumens per watt.. no opinion needed..
theres my two cents..
LH*


----------



## Icex420 (Dec 26, 2009)

[email protected] said:
			
		

> No source just what I have heard through word of mouth. Sorry for not clarifying there was no source. Like I *read* in another forum. Keeping your plant in the dark for 24 hours before harvest causes it to double produce resin. That is one persons "*theory*".
> This is a touchy subject and there will be numerous opinions.
> 
> 
> ...


 


this made me lol


----------



## Hick (Dec 27, 2009)

[email protected] said:
			
		

> Originally Posted by *Hick*
> _Clarkes book says that according to studies conducted, "nearlly twice as much thc is produced under 12 hours of "light",(12/12) than under 10 hours of light.(10/14)" Leading me to believe that thc is NOT produced in the dark._
> 
> This is another person's "*theory*". Another would have a different "*theory*". Until there is comparisons in scientific "*theory*" matching up it is not "*facts*". What ever works best for the individual growers.
> Therefore this is a touchy subject without stated "*facts*". Unless it is stated scientific "*fact*". *Most* of the articles read in books, magazines, newspapers, and blogs are the writers opinion. Again all that will be wrote here are personal opinions or quoted personal opinions.



It is NOT a "theory.. but "FACT" from a *scientific study*..don't take my word for it... *READ* the book.
 from _personal, first hand experience_.. I assure you that "24" hours of darkness at harvest is not going to produce ANY discernible, visible, difference in trichome production. Let alone... "_double_ produce resin"... 
BUT, I encourage you to do as you please, see for yourself..


----------



## BlueNose (Dec 27, 2009)

Hick said:
			
		

> Clarkes book says that according to studies conducted, "nearlly twice as much thc is produced under 12 hours of _"light"_,(12/12) than under 10 hours of light.(10/14)"  Leading me to believe that thc is NOT produced in the dark.



hmmm, now I'm curious about all the folks that leave them in the dark for the last 24 hours before harvesting. I wonder if 24 hours of light would be better, it's not like it would have time to hermie before harvest and it seems like you could get some extra resin production. Not that 24 hours would net much extra but I suppose it couldn't hurt.


----------



## gourmet (Dec 27, 2009)

If you had to choose just one book, Clarkes or Cervantes, which would you recommend?


----------



## BBFan (Dec 28, 2009)

gourmet said:
			
		

> If you had to choose just one book, Clarkes or Cervantes, which would you recommend?


 
Hi Gourmet!

Two completely different books IMO.  Really depends on what you're looking for.

Clarke delves into the scientific aspect of the plant- ie: Why it does what it does in nature.

Cervantes is more growing specific- ie: How to help it do what it does in nature.

Personally, I would go for Clarke, but I'm a nerd that way.


----------



## PUFF MONKEY (Dec 28, 2009)

i don't need a book to tell me that lots of HPS @12/12 works best.....99.9% of MJ growers live by this..


----------

