# The "full spectrum" LED gimmick



## OVT

Imho, a good informational post, a good step towards regaining some sanity, and a good topic to mess with.

The TPT community is fortunate to have such breadth and depth of knowledge. This is not a compliment targeted towards a specific individual but rather recognition of expertise and brain power of a larger group of our members.

The "full spectrum" is a facinating subject to me and I will throw out two comments, one on each side of the debate:

Arguably, the plants in our tanks 'look better' under our artificial lights then in nature under the "full spectrum" Sun, with the humanly visible spectrum, UV, and all.

Assuming the "photosynthesis graphs" are close enough, I am still bugged by the idea that they might be missing that obscure X nm to X + 10 nm range that, say, might be responsible for the root development in aquatic plants.

Not to kill the whole back and forth at the start, we still cannot explicitly quantify what constitutes a 'healthy plant': is it the brightest color? the plant mass? the nutritional content? survivability / adaptability / fertility? Some combination of the above + other 'characteristics'?

Hopefully, some food for thought.

v3


----------



## Solcielo lawrencia

For our application, it's not good enough to have lights that grow plants. We also need them to make plants (and fish) look good, which means adding green light for the plants to reflect back to our eyes. It's still a cost:benefit and marketing issue for companies. So whatever gimmick can reel in the ignorant masses with the most money to spend is the one that stays.

The full spectrum isn't a gimmick, though. It may not grow plants any better but when it's coupled with a controller, can offer various lighting possibilities such as the sunrise/sunset option. This allows for a more natural scenes and may make fish happier/less stressed than an instant ON! OFF!


----------



## Onyx165

I think the premade fixtures are always a few years behind the DIY hobbyists. A few years ago, the full-spectrum led craze hit, and everybody was slapping on OCWs, reds, cyans...just about any random color was suddenly "supplemental" to their flat "cool white" lights. Then everybody got tired of their tanks looking like discoballs and having to solder a million connections, and started looking into larger emitters/more efficient/ simpler arrays. 

All the premade fixtures are still keying in to this, using every wavelength led to supplement their cheap, low CRI white diodes.

Soon enough we'll see some fixtures running 90+ CRI using bridgelux vero technology, and we'll all wonder what took them so long :wink:.

Sidenote: The folks at nano seem to really be impressed with the lime leds, as they apparently add a lot of high-quality visual light to the tank. Looking at their output, it seems to be encompassed by the vero 2700k decors though...


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> I started to look at the colored LEDs that exist in the horticulture world and they all seem to be based around these 3 colors:
> 
> red
> blue
> purple
> 
> Kessil's horticulture division sells only those 3 lights and a magenta which is a combination of red and purple. Where is the cyan, deep blue, far red, etc.? It doesn't exist and this is why:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Those 3 colors match the highest peaks of the photosynthetic spectrum. Of course a tank with those LEDs would look horrible and we want our tanks to be aesthetically pleasing. Well we can get those 3 peaks in our tanks while keeping a great look with 3 LEDs:
> 
> 1. Cool white 5500-6500K
> These LEDs have a big spike in the 450nm region because they are nothing but a 450nm diode with a yellow phosphor on top.
> 
> 2. Warm white 2700-3000K
> These LEDs have a big spike in the 600-700nm red region. They look yellow/orange but when mixed with cool white it is very easy to balance the color.
> 
> 3. 400-425nm Violet
> Last year this wavelength was not that common but SemiLEDs have now come out with diodes that cover 400-410nm and 410-420nm. Both rapidled and reefll sell LEDs with 4 of these diodes on one star so one covers the entire range of 400-425nm. Funny how none of these new lights that are coming out contain zero of these LEDs and it is never mentioned in DIY threads. As for this wavelength being hazardous, it is false information as it falls under near-uv and harmful wavelengths are <400nm.
> 
> Human vision is not very sensitive to 400-425nm wavelength so when you combine a purple LED with a white LED it would take quite a lot of purple to overpower the white. Another advantage is this wavelength has very good penetration so it puts out good PAR with less of it.
> 
> My reason for this post is because we get countless of threads with people asking what color LEDs or which white LED to go with on their fixtures and a plethora of different colors get mentioned. In the end there are only 3 LED's that are needed which can be easily mixed to provide a very pleasing look.


Well as mentioned there are two COMPLETELY oppposite factors involved.. 1)Human perception and visual acuity which centers around "green"

2)Plant "perception and needs" which is "centered" around red on one end and blue on the other (inc. purple)

So balancing the 2 is a goal

As to research and science.. 1)Plant physiology is not a done deal. Science even debates teh role of "green" in plant physiology. Stating sometimes it is meaningless, other times a major factor..

2)Human perception in the "light industry" is still an open science w/ CRI ect.That is why you get "lime" and "pc amber" and even an oddly phosphored Bridgelux "Decor"..
It is not just marketing, it is awareness of the "cyan gap" and the "non-linearity" of the LED world..all non-black body sources have this issue.
And even blackbody.. Take MH plus HPS to make a more "natural spectrum..One was never enough

Add LED's wonderful ease of automation and you have .. maybe not a need for colors .. but certainly a desire to go beyond a static "one color fits all" environment..

To be honest all you need is RGB.. which is white...

violet is more of a why not color.. "science" doesn't even know what pigments use it.. much less its full impact on the complete physiology chain.

It is only now (w/ the ease of obtaining specific spectrum LEDs) that "science" is beginning to understand all of the complexity of plants.. not to mention species differences.. from algae vs higher plants to tomato vs lettuce ..... In the reef world you have the complication of "animals" producing pigments in response to light.. not just plants.. so it is EVEN messier... 

On normalization .. only WW and CW would be really "needed".(everything from blue to red in a fairly balanced proprtion) This isn't apparently even good enough for "interior lighting" as mentioned re: the false reliance on CRI (CCT) which lies due to it being a "standard" based on a limited sample set of pastel tones... "industry" would not spend millions on finding the sweet CRI spot if there was not a need....Of course some of this is market forces and human error.. Some low CRI are arguably better in rendering some "tones" to match human perception than a high cRI light.. but you can't "sell" a low CRI light in an area that "believes" CRI is king.. without know exactly what it means.. 

As to an addition to make "full spectrum" you'd need to add violet, blue/cyan and even 700nm and above red...and call it a day.... 

The "decor" was an attempt to at least partially extend filling the gap..

bottom line: Do we "need' all these colors.. well never really had to.. from 6500K flour. to "growlight" tubes it has been really more a part of "perception" ..

The more things change the more they stay the same.. 
In my own world I enjoy watching my tanks go from ruby red through orange to orange white to white to green white and back again.. Do the fish and plants sit in chairs and watch the "sunrise"? Certainly not..

I continually question color choices.. from the use of royal blue to some "peoples" insistence (w/ AFAICT zero proof) that 660nm red is not wanted in a fw tank because it encourages algae and 625 red is a good enough" addition (even though there is a fair amount in WW LED's and has a shortage of 660nm in all "white" LED). I can find competing scientifically based charts showing "actual growth" (metabolic products/dry weight) occurs at either 630 or 660nm red light..different scientists different conclusions.. 

Some days I even question my own "judgement". Some days I like a warm tank others a cool tank.. I can change it w/ the push of a button.. as they say........... "Brilliant"!!!! 

As for all this....

YMMV..........


----------



## O2surplus

I almost fell for the "Full Spectrum" craze with my latest DIY build, but luckily for me I found the BridgeLux Vero's before pulling the trigger. I settled on running only 2 different color temps of "white" leds over my tank and couldn't be happier with the resulting coloration of my plants and fish. The combination of a 5000k 70 CRI "cool"white and a 2700K 97 CRI "Decor"white, along with the ability to dim each color separately,was all that was needed to achieve "Full Spectrum" in my book.


----------



## MEandYouPhoto

You DIY'ers should really consider offering your services to folks who don't have the tools or know how to create these better LED lighting systems. I myself would rather give my money to someone who made the product and put a lot of time and research into it's effectiveness versus a company who only mass produces for profit. 

If anyone wants to quote me a LED set up for a 10 gallon tank please feel free to send me a PM


----------



## MeCasa

gus6464 said:


> My reason for this post is because we get countless of threads with people asking what color LEDs or which white LED to go with on their fixtures and a plethora of different colors get mentioned. In the end there are only 3 LED's that are needed which can be easily mixed to provide a very pleasing look.


Gus, no disrespect intended but the very reason why this is discussed so much is because the cosmetic issues are subjective and the science is incomplete. 

If a wavelength is in sunlight then we have to assume that it may be beneficial or at least have purpose, we may not understand the how or why and that's when the issue changes to necessity and you cannot state what is necessary with any authority.

The real reason for your thread is because you made your choice with the Bridgelux and you want to be right.

Not saying you're wrong but not saying your right either

Currently I'm leaning towards the evil cluster, this method seems to cover all bases.

.


----------



## jeffkrol

O2surplus said:


> I almost fell for the "Full Spectrum" craze with my latest DIY build, but luckily for me I found the BridgeLux Vero's before pulling the trigger. I settled on running only 2 different color temps of "white" leds over my tank and couldn't be happier with the resulting coloration of my plants and fish. The combination of a 5000k 70 CRI "cool"white and a 2700K 97 CRI "Decor"white, along with the ability to dim each color separately,was all that was needed to achieve "Full Spectrum" in my book.



Maybe you can sell that to the reefers.. 
Oh btw: lets see your sunset:.. 
This is a part of mine.. 









Your Veros still have a "gap"...... 











I FREELY ADMIT.. one size does not fit all.........


----------



## O2surplus

MeCasa said:


> Gus, no disrespect intended but the very reason why this is discussed so much is because the cosmetic issues are subjective and the science is incomplete.
> 
> If a wavelength is in sunlight then we have to assume that it may be beneficial or at least have purpose, we may not understand the how or why and that's when the issue changes to necessity and you cannot state what is necessary with any authority.
> 
> However the real reason for your thread is to do so because you made your choice and you want to be right.
> 
> Not saying you're not but damn sure ain't blindly following either.


The Term "Full Spectrum" that's being thrown around is subjective in and of itself. I.E. Light from the Sun contains plenty of wavelengths that would never be included included in artificial light sources designed for plant growth and human visual perception- UVa, UVb, Infrared, Xray,Gamma ray ect... As far as my own experience goes, I've been able to successfully grow any plant species that I've tried, without the need for anything more complicated than a "standard" cool white led (Notice I said plants, Reef Inverts are a different story). Plenty of others have done the same thing. The problem is- cool white leds are not visually appealing to the human eye. Certain colors appear washed out and unnatural. Once enough people became dissatisfied with the "appearance" of their led lighting, the quest began to fill those missing wavelength gaps to correct the visual appearance of "plant" tanks & to provide missing wavelengths that may be beneficial to "Reef" Tank residents. Thus we have the "Full Spectrum" craze seen today.
The Science may still be incomplete and the jury's still out, but Gus's point was that "full spectrum" builds using multiple different wavelength leds may be over complicating matters. You can grow plants and have a visually appealing tank, without the hassle of multiple led colors, using a few of the newer "white" leds instead.


----------



## jeffkrol

O2surplus said:


> The Term "Full Spectrum" that's being thrown around is subjective in and of itself. I.E. Light from the Sun contains plenty of wavelengths that would never be included included in artificial light sources designed for plant growth and human visual perception- UVa, UVb, Infrared, Xray,Gamma ray ect... As far as my own experience goes, I've been able to successfully grow any plant species that I've tried, without the need for anything more complicated than a "standard" cool white led (Notice I said plants, Reef Inverts are a different story). Plenty of others have done the same thing. The problem is- cool white leds are not visually appealing to the human eye. Certain colors appear washed out and unnatural. Once enough people became dissatisfied with the "appearance" of their led lighting, the quest began to fill those missing wavelength gaps to correct the visual appearance of "plant" tanks & to provide missing wavelengths that may be beneficial to "Reef" Tank residents. Thus we have the "Full Spectrum" craze seen today.
> The Science may still be incomplete and the jury's still out, but Gus's point was that "full spectrum" builds using multiple different wavelength leds may be over complicating matters. You can grow plants and have a visually appealing tank, without the hassle of multiple led colors, using a few of the newer "white" leds instead.


Lighting is no more overcomplicated than adding CO2, or fertilizer for that matter.............. 

But I completely agree you can successfully have a planted tank that uses nothing but ww/cw...... but then what exactly is the LED difference to a t5 setup??? Only dimming... or ease of DIY... Since DIY is "easier"..well that opens the playing field..

Using a simple Typhon gives you 4 channels.. to do w/ as you choose.. at a relatively cheap price..even if all it controls is flavors of "white"...but why???
The only Vero advantage is in efficiency, not spectrum. 
There is* nothing* unusual there.. Throw a bunch of chinese LED's on a board, and except for the "decor" you will get close to the exact same spectrum.......
You can "successfully" grow plants and have a successful tank under a few 100 watts of "lightbulbs"..
boiling it down to that the only difference between LED's and all other light sources is heat.. 
Either way it is a personal choice..

http://www.digikey.com/en/articles/...duce-cost-and-save-energy-in-lighting-designs
Not seeing "great for plants"......


> Here are the key specs:
> 
> Lumen output performance ranges from 240 to 16,400 lumens
> CCT options from 2,700 to 5,000 K
> CRI options include 70, 80, 90, and 97 CRI Decor products
> Three SDCM standard for 2,700 K to 4,000 K CCT with two SDCM options
> Reliable operation at up to 2x rated drive current
> Radial die pattern improves lumen density and beam control
> Thermally-isolated solder pads
> Solder-less connector port for plug-and-play connectivity and field upgradability
> Top-side product marking and 2D bar code
> 
> Other benefits include compatibility with a variety of standard drivers (350 mA increments) and optical components, which provides greater design flexibility and more options, contributing to shorter product development cycles, reduced costs, and fewer inventory headaches.


Again.. I have no doubt (personally or scientifically) that a combination of WW and CW is successful both at growing plants and maintaining a visual aesthetic..I have issues w/ "the gap" and as to why restrict yourself considering the ease and advancement of the "technology"..... No more no less........
reminds me of the old Ford motto.. "you can have any color you like.. as long as it is black" 

As to Gus.. why even add violet? Does that just not assume the "not quite" right spectrum effect.. 660nm red is JUST as lacking.. and the "gap" is just as lacking.. as 700nm Red is just as lacking.. 
WHO draws the line???


----------



## O2surplus

jeffkrol said:


> Maybe you can sell that to the reefers..
> Oh btw: lets see your sunset:..
> This is a part of mine..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Your Veros still have a "gap"......
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I FREELY ADMIT.. one size does not fit all.........




LOL- I honestly don't care or lose sleep over _any_ gaps in my lighting spectrum. All I do care about is- whether or not the lighting appears beautiful to _my _eyes. It does... and all of my plants reward me with vigorous growth. I don't need a deep understanding of "the science behind it all"- to be happy with the results.


----------



## jeffkrol

Addendum Cree vs Vero


----------



## MABJ

For a low tech guy like me, I don't need any of this multiple color nonsense. I get 6500k Chinese LEDs, and they serve my tanks and shrimp beautifully.


----------



## jeffkrol

O2surplus said:


> LOL- I honestly don't care or lose sleep over _any_ gaps in my lighting spectrum. All I do care about is- whether or not the lighting appears beautiful to _my _eyes. It does... and all of my plants reward me with vigorous growth. I don't need a deep understanding of "the science behind it all"- to be happy with the results.


The "gap" is in the visual appeal range.. has nothing to do w/ photosynthesis directly (though it does hit in the carotenoid absorption band..
What it does impact visually is the nuance shades of green.. and human perception.. 
You got the tech and time.. throw in a "cyan" channel and look at your greens.. 
I always enjoy another opinion...
I graciously accept( and appreciate) your conclusion.. 
http://www.mouser.com/applications/lighting-cri/


----------



## gus6464

Warm and cool white have more than enough green and yellow to make the plants look good. As far as lime is concerned it's sole purpose is to make the lights look brighter. This makes sense as human vision is most sensitive to green.

Why purple Jeff? Because if you look at indoor grow farms it's the main color they use in the initial growth phase and it's the spectrum that plants absorb the most. Why is this color completely ignored in planted tanks but widely used in reefs? If you want to compare modern reef lights it's easy to see there are 3 dominant LEDs:

neutral/warm white - for the red spike
royal blue
purple

Why is it not ok to ignore the cyan gap but completely ok to ignore purple?


----------



## MeCasa

MABJ said:


> For a low tech guy like me, I don't need any of this multiple color nonsense. I get 6500k Chinese LEDs, and they serve my tanks and shrimp beautifully.


The word NEED has very little to do with the word hobby. In general we are a group of overachievers who design and build complex lighting/CO2/etc. systems because it beats the hell out of watching Law and Order reruns

For some people discussing those builds is part of this enjoyment

Live and Let Live ;-)


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> The "gap" is in the visual appeal range.. has nothing to do w/ photosynthesis directly (though it does hit in the carotenoid absorption band..
> What it does impact visually is the nuance shades of green.. and human perception..
> You got the tech and time.. throw in a "cyan" channel and look at your greens..
> I always enjoy another opinion...
> I graciously accept( and appreciate) your conclusion..
> http://www.mouser.com/applications/lighting-cri/


So what you are saying is that you can't take a cool white, warm white, and purple LED and make it look good?


----------



## talontsiawd

I don't think it's that different than T5's, the difference is we usually only have 2 to 4 bulbs, maybe 6, but rarely more. With 4 bulbs, you likely will want 2 of them to be in the 6,500-10,000k range. On top of that, going with a crazy color will be very apparent as each bulb will make up abut 25% of the output, obviously some look brighter than others but it's all the same idea. So it's hard to get into greens and cyans because of that. 

Of course, I have very little experience with LED's, mainly because my first LED fixture was so bothersome at first with a very blue color. Ironically, I used to have the 3 blue LED's covered up but now I don't and like it better, simply because they don't add enough blue to the actual color of the tank, but look cool on the surface among the white.

However, I have played around with RGB LED strips and on either tank at the time, probably provided close to half the total output if on full blast. I could only control all to be one color, can't mix it up with the simple setup I have but I always tended to like a purple or cyan color most. 

I guess my point is, for me, lighting is rarely about imitating anything. It's a combination of making the green plants, red plants, iridescent fish and non iridescent fish look good. Cooler whites that start to get into the blues, can make greens and iridescent fish look good but may not work well for non iridescent fish, not very good for reds. Red lights make your red plants pop, will compliment non iridescent fish if they are in that color spectrum but not much else. 

After that, you start bridging the gap between what compliments what is in the tank and what color you like. 

I think the only downside of LED's, compared to trying the same with T5's is that you see a lot more on the surface if you are open top. Plus, it seems that T5's "blend" together better than LED's (though higher end Reef LED's that share optics with multiple color LED's seem to blend really well, possibly better than T5's). Obviously, LED's give you huge advantages, you can use way less of one color much more easily, can be made to be extremely adjustable, etc, but at the end of the day, I feel it's chasing the same thing. 

I would likely add a full spectrum bulb if someone could make one, or an LED bulb in it's place, even with T5's, even with me not being totally convinced LED's are the way for me to go at this point.


----------



## MABJ

MeCasa said:


> The word NEED has very little to do with the word hobby. In general we are a group of overachievers who design and build complex lighting/CO2/etc. systems because it beats the hell out of watching Law and Order reruns
> 
> For some people discussing those builds is part of this enjoyment
> 
> Live and Let Live ;-)


I suppose you're right, but to those of us who just try to understand, let alone comprehend the building aspect of LEDs, we have to do what we can to get good lighting. The 6500k lighting is my recommendation to just about everybody looking for inexpensive lighting for nanos.


----------



## O2surplus

MeCasa said:


> The word NEED has very little to do with the word hobby. In general we are a group of overachievers who design and build complex lighting/CO2/etc. systems because it beats the hell out of watching Law and Order reruns
> 
> For some people discussing those builds is part of this enjoyment
> 
> Live and Let Live ;-)



Amen to that- Well said! LOL- Some of us just suffer from a little more OCD than others. :wink:


----------



## gus6464

talontsiawd said:


> I don't think it's that different than T5's, the difference is we usually only have 2 to 4 bulbs, maybe 6, but rarely more. With 4 bulbs, you likely will want 2 of them to be in the 6,500-10,000k range. On top of that, going with a crazy color will be very apparent as each bulb will make up abut 25% of the output, obviously some look brighter than others but it's all the same idea. So it's hard to get into greens and cyans because of that.
> 
> Of course, I have very little experience with LED's, mainly because my first LED fixture was so bothersome at first with a very blue color. Ironically, I used to have the 3 blue LED's covered up but now I don't and like it better, simply because they don't add enough blue to the actual color of the tank, but look cool on the surface among the white.
> 
> However, I have played around with RGB LED strips and on either tank at the time, probably provided close to half the total output if on full blast. I could only control all to be one color, can't mix it up with the simple setup I have but I always tended to like a purple or cyan color most.
> 
> I guess my point is, for me, lighting is rarely about imitating anything. It's a combination of making the green plants, red plants, iridescent fish and non iridescent fish look good. Cooler whites that start to get into the blues, can make greens and iridescent fish look good but may not work well for non iridescent fish, not very good for reds. Red lights make your red plants pop, will compliment non iridescent fish if they are in that color spectrum but not much else.
> 
> After that, you start bridging the gap between what compliments what is in the tank and what color you like.
> 
> I think the only downside of LED's, compared to trying the same with T5's is that you see a lot more on the surface if you are open top. Plus, it seems that T5's "blend" together better than LED's (though higher end Reef LED's that share optics with multiple color LED's seem to blend really well, possibly better than T5's). Obviously, LED's give you huge advantages, you can use way less of one color much more easily, can be made to be extremely adjustable, etc, but at the end of the day, I feel it's chasing the same thing.
> 
> I would likely add a full spectrum bulb if someone could make one, or an LED bulb in it's place, even with T5's, even with me not being totally convinced LED's are the way for me to go at this point.


The reason multiple colored LEDs in planted tanks do not blend well is because manufacturers and hobbyists are still adamant about having light bars instead of clustering. A properly designed cluster can cover a big area with even light spread. Tons more options open up when you cluster but people like their light bars.


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> Warm and cool white have more than enough green and yellow to make the plants look good. As far as lime is concerned it's sole purpose is to make the lights look brighter. This makes sense as human vision is most sensitive to green.
> 
> Why purple Jeff? Because if you look at indoor grow farms it's the main color they use in the initial growth phase and it's the spectrum that plants absorb the most.
> Why is it not ok to ignore the cyan gap but completely ok to ignore purple?


I wasn't "ignoring" purple.. I was pointing out why stop at purple.. there are other deficient bandwidths. WHY STOP at purple? 
As to Reefs.. not important at this point

Hort. LED's suffer the same anal thinking.. Why go beyond RB/660nm Red they "need " nothing else..


> One is the ability to control
> the spectral output of the lighting system,
> something not easily done with broad-
> spectrum sources. The spectral output of an
> LED lighting system can be matched to plant
> photoreceptors and optimized to provide
> maximum production without wasting ener-
> gy on nonproductive wavelengths (Dougher
> and Bugbee, 2001; Sager et al., 1982). The
> ability to dynamically control the spectral
> output can also be used to influence plant
> morphology (Heo et al., 2002). Spectra can
> be customized for specific crops or produc-
> tion protocols and the output even modified
> over the course of a photoperiod or growth
> cycle. Special lighting modes might possibly
> even be used to enhance disease or injury
> visualization (Schuerger and Richards, 2006


http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/43/7/1947.full.pdf
go tell them they are "wasting" there time and "just need" a few Veros........  and a violet..
http://www.hort.vt.edu/ghvegetables...g/High-Powered_LED_Cultivation_Study_2005.pdf


> Growth of
> lettuce and radish under illumination with the dominating
> wavelength of 640 nm supplemented by 455, 660 and 735 nm
> components were shown to surpass that under the HPS
> lamp in photosynthesis and plant morphology characteristics.
> Meanwhile, circadian shifts of the relatively weak far-red
> 735 nm component were found to strongly influence the
> photophysiological processes in plants up to a complete
> breakdown of photosynthesis


----------



## jeffkrol

O2surplus said:


> Amen to that- Well said! LOL- Some of us just suffer from a little more OCD than others. :wink:


And how do "we" judge that?? Building drivers when Meanwells do just fine??
Colored lights are no different..................
We choose our OCD..


----------



## gus6464

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> For our application, it's not good enough to have lights that grow plants. We also need them to make plants (and fish) look good, which means adding green light for the plants to reflect back to our eyes. It's still a cost:benefit and marketing issue for companies. So whatever gimmick can reel in the ignorant masses with the most money to spend is the one that stays.
> 
> The full spectrum isn't a gimmick, though. It may not grow plants any better but when it's coupled with a controller, can offer various lighting possibilities such as the sunrise/sunset option. This allows for a more natural scenes and may make fish happier/less stressed than an instant ON! OFF!


I am not saying that full spectrum is a gimmick. What I consider the gimmick is what manufacturers are calling "full-spectrum" which is throwing a bunch of colors on a light and calling it that.


----------



## talontsiawd

gus6464 said:


> The reason multiple colored LEDs in planted tanks do not blend well is because manufacturers and hobbyists are still adamant about having light bars instead of clustering. A properly designed cluster can cover a big area with even light spread. Tons more options open up when you cluster but people like their light bars.


Actually, as I said in my last post, the high end LED's I have seen that share optics over multiple LED's are basically what you are talking about. Funny you say how people don't like clusters, my friend really struggled with the idea that his LED's didn't span across his whole tank, even though he probably tripled his PAR, even though he loved the look, it took him a few weeks to get over the idea that it didn't matter, he wanted to add more. I can actually see why a manufacturer may stray away from this, I always like fixtures smaller than the tank myself and see it as a huge plus.


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> Warm and cool white have more than enough green and yellow to make the plants look good.


That is your "opinion"... I suggest you are missing subtle shades in the blue green range..
no more no less.........but maybe more..
http://www.bmlhorticulture.com/led-light-bar-505nm-cyan/


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> http://hortsci.ashspublications.org/content/43/7/1947.full.pdf
> go tell them they are "wasting" there time and "just need" a few Veros........  and a violet..


This tells me you are completely missing my point. In horticulture white lights are completely ignored because they could care less about visual aesthetics. In our world visual aesthetics is everything so we have to go with white light.

And yes a few Vero's and a violet give out more usable spectrum than a bunch of random colored LED's put together. Doesn't have to be Vero's either. Cree makes a high CRI white that peaks more in the ~650nm red wavelength as well. There is also a Luxeon Z as well.










BTW the secret sauce to all these high CRI white LEDs are red diode with yellow phosphor. That Luxeon Z puts out decent spectrum in the cyan range.


----------



## O2surplus

jeffkrol said:


> And how do "we" judge that?? Building drivers when Meanwells do just fine??
> Colored lights are no different..................
> We choose our OCD..


Ah I see- colored lights = your particular OCD. Overly complicated & feature packed drivers= My OCD. I guess we all benefit from each others quirks.:wink:


----------



## jeffkrol

O2surplus said:


> Ah I see- colored lights = your particular OCD. Overly complicated & feature packed drivers= My OCD. I guess we all benefit from each others quirks.:wink:


Yep overly complicated and feature packed lighting.........


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> This tells me you are completely missing my point. In horticulture white lights are completely ignored because they could care less about visual aesthetics. In our world visual aesthetics is everything so we have to go with white light.
> 
> And yes a few Vero's and a violet give out more usable spectrum than a bunch of random colored LED's put together. Doesn't have to be Vero's either. Cree makes a high CRI white that peaks more in the ~650nm red wavelength as well. There is also a Luxeon Z as well.


That is only a matter of quantity not quality .. like I already mentioned.. "lumen efficiency"..
(which btw is a piss poor way to measure plant efficiency)
Back to the MH way of thinking.. More watts making up for spectral deficiencies.. 

Your missing the point in the balance between the 2 where they overlap and where they don't. 
To be honest I'm not sure why you can ignore the spectrum deficiency in the blue green range (which according to BML is "high par".. see link) and "sell" a matching deficiency in the violet range on a spurious belief that violet means more than RB...

it is cheaper and more visually appealing to add PAR via "cyan" than violet.. though ALL of this statement can be arguable..


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> This tells me you are completely missing my point. In horticulture white lights are completely ignored because they could care less about visual aesthetics. In our world visual aesthetics is everything so we have to go with white light.
> 
> And yes a few Vero's and a violet give out more usable spectrum than a bunch of random colored LED's put together. Doesn't have to be Vero's either. Cree makes a high CRI white that peaks more in the ~650nm red wavelength as well. There is also a Luxeon Z as well.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> BTW the secret sauce to all these high CRI white LEDs are red diode with yellow phosphor. That Luxeon Z puts out decent spectrum in the cyan range.


you miss the point of defining a "plant light" and overlaying it w/ a human light..
And no.. anything hovering around .2 is useless light as to intensity..
at least according to the "reefers".. .. Just ask the Jedi fellow....
spectrum between 470-500 is "useless"... 


> And yes a few Vero's and a violet give out more usable spectrum than a bunch of random colored LED


Maybe rethink this in terms of well chosen LED's... There is no logic in that statement..too many variables.


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> That is only a matter of quantity not quality .. like I already mentioned.. "lumen efficiency"..
> (which btw is a piss poor way to measure plant efficiency)
> Back to the MH way of thinking.. More watts making up for spectral deficiencies..
> 
> Your missing the point in the balance between the 2 where they overlap and where they don't.
> To be honest I'm not sure why you can ignore the spectrum deficiency in the blue green range (which according to BML is "high par".. see link) and "sell" a matching deficiency in the violet range on a spurious belief that violet means more than RB...
> 
> it is cheaper and more visually appealing to add PAR via "cyan" than violet.. though ALL of this statement can be arguable..


To plants violet is worth more than RB as they absorb more of it. How is a cool white LED blue deficient? It's a RB led wearing a yellow shirt.


----------



## OVT

Do different people have different 'perceptions' of color? I think yes.

How do atmospheric conditions and water turbidity affect the light waves at the receiving end? Water depth? Seasonal variations?

What's cyan and purple? It's all black and white to me 

95% of consumers are happy with $50 DVD players. 4% cannot live without the $500 models. 1% (us?) will build our own.

v3


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> I am not saying that full spectrum is a gimmick. What I consider the gimmick is what manufacturers are calling "full-spectrum" which is throwing a bunch of colors on a light and calling it that.


Well w/ that we agree.. Better not mention it to the people at reef led lab.. or a dozen others who build reef lights and "throw a bone" to the fw people..

Actually except for a few green/yellow ALL the colored LED's are effective for plants.. 
my problem is throwing a bunch of smd5050's over a 24" tank and calling it "efficient"... 
Or overpriced pucks... 
or designer led lights using 5630's..ect.. 

Retail is retail..


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> To plants violet is worth more than RB as they absorb more of it. How is a cool white LED blue deficient? It's a RB led wearing a yellow shirt.


Barely.. and the "science" behind "violet" is not even established..
I can buy 2 RB's for every violet and achieve more "PAR"..
and that is the point as well a cool white is as good as a RB if you compensate in output.. and a rb is nearly as efficient as a violet.. thus no "need" for rb or violet.. unless you want it.


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> Barely.. and the "science" behind "violet" is not even established..
> I can buy 2 RB's for every violet and achieve more "PAR"..
> and that is the point as well a cool white is as good as a RB if you compensate in output.. and a rb is nearly as efficient as a violet.. thus no "need" for rb or violet.. unless you want it.


But this conversation is not about PAR. It's about usable spectrum. And this search has made me realize that I went wrong with high CRI 5600K as it has less of a blue peak and penetration. Should have gone with:

lowest possible CRI cool white
highest possible CRI warm white
violet

But alas I have 3x of the quad-core SemiLED stars with 60deg optics arriving today. I will soon see how much PAR they can put out.


----------



## O2surplus

gus6464 said:


> But this conversation is not about PAR. It's about usable spectrum. And this search has made me realize that I went wrong with high CRI 5600K as it has less of a blue peak and penetration. Should have gone with:
> 
> lowest possible CRI cool white
> highest possible CRI warm white
> violet


LOL- I'd been thinking that I'd screwed up by purchasing the 5000K 70CRI Vero 18's. Now with what you're saying- I got it right? I guess I'll hold off on those 90 CRI 5600K units for now.:wink:


----------



## jeffkrol

Words of wisdom:


> While it may seem like keeping high-tech tanks is a science, realize that the aquarium hobby is also an art. Sometimes certain plants just won’t grow for you, no matter what you do. Instead of driving yourself crazy, simply move on to others and focus your hobby on those that do well in your local water conditions. Part of the fun of the hobby is spending time tinkering and tweaking things until our underwater aquatic gardens — our works of art — look just right to us. Don’t get so bogged down on the technical side that you forget to enjoy! AFI


http://www.fishchannel.com/freshwat...nk/lighting-for-high-tech-aquatic-plants.aspx
and fun w/ "charts"









http://www.americanaquariumproducts.com/aquarium_lighting.html


----------



## gus6464

O2surplus said:


> LOL- I'd been thinking that I'd screwed up by purchasing the 5000K 70CRI Vero 18's. Now with what you're saying- I got it right? I guess I'll hold off on those 90 CRI 5600K units for now.:wink:


The higher the CRI white, the less blue but if you are mixing with warm white the bluish tint of the whites won't matter. Something like a 6500K 65-70CRI Luxeon K array would be awesome but Phillips doesn't make one so hopefully that will change. Reason I would like 6500K and not higher is because I find it the easiest CCT to mix with warm white to get a good color combo. Nothing is stopping anyone from using 8K or 10K but then you would need more warm white to keep the blue from taking over. PAR would go up though.

O2, you were the first one that used the Vero in a tank here so I blame and thank you at the same time .


----------



## FlyingHellFish

Solcielo lawrencia said:


> The full spectrum isn't a gimmick, though. It may not grow plants any better but when it's coupled with a controller, can offer various lighting possibilities such as the sunrise/sunset option. This allows for a more natural scenes and may make fish happier/less stressed than an instant ON! OFF!


I never thought I would agree with any of your post, but I agree with this. 

To the op - Proof is in the pudding, I seen some really good full spectrum led tanks and some really good normal T5HO. If you had a choice to get full spectrum, why not? 

One of the nice things about LEDs is the level of control, you can turn down whatever colour you don't like and blast whatever colour you do like. Why not "full spectrum" then? 

*"Do you need full spectrum? Certainly not. Does it help? I can't see how it can't help to have more "areas" of the spectrum covered."*

To everyone else - Remember, one of the best way to judge the information posted is to look at the users' tank. You like what you see? Then he must be doing something right.


----------



## OVT

FlyingHellFish said:


> To everyone else - Remember, one of the best way to judge the information posted is to look at the users' tank. You like what you see? Then he must be doing something right.


Not necessarily, as we all have different interests / focus in the many aspects of planted tanks, be it scaping, collecting, breeding, or building. Some like the trip, some like the destination.

v3


----------



## gus6464

FlyingHellFish said:


> I never thought I would agree with any of your post, but I agree with this.
> 
> To the op - Proof is in the pudding, I seen some really good full spectrum led tanks and some really good normal T5HO. If you had a choice to get full spectrum, why not?
> 
> One of the nice things about LEDs is the level of control, you can turn down whatever colour you don't like and blast whatever colour you do like. Why not "full spectrum" then?
> 
> *"Do you need full spectrum? Certainly not. Does it help? I can't see how it can't help to have more "areas" of the spectrum covered."*
> 
> To everyone else - Remember, one of the best way to judge the information posted is to look at the users' tank. You like what you see? Then he must be doing something right.


The thing is that what manufacturers are calling full spectrum is nothing but slapping a bunch of RGB LEDs with some cool white and calling it a day. That is not full spectrum. Those RGB LEDs they use have pathetic output. A cool white/warm white array is more full spectrum than those lights ever will be. Cool white puts out more than enough blue spectrum, why do you need more?


----------



## FlyingHellFish

gus6464 said:


> The thing is that what manufacturers are calling full spectrum is nothing but slapping a bunch of RGB LEDs with some cool white and calling it a day. That is not full spectrum. Those RGB LEDs they use have pathetic output. A cool white/warm white array is more full spectrum than those lights ever will be. Cool white puts out more than enough blue spectrum, why do you need more?


Oh, I thought you were saying Full Spectrum wouldn't help, but you're saying the RGB in some LED fixtures are not really needed because the white LED would have enough of the required spectrum.

I see where you're coming from, no pun intended. I think they separate the RBG in LED fixtures to give the user more control over how the tank looks. But yes, you're right, the white light will cover the required spectrum but I like having the option of going a bit red or a bit blue is great! 

For example, you get a fixture and you decide to do an iwagumi so you increase the blue to bring out the green in plants or you do a Dutch and you raise the red, it's great to have this option instead of a pure white 6500K T5 or CFL.

Some of the higher end brands of LEDs do cover the entire spectrum, there are fixtures out there that have this.


----------



## OVT

gus6464 said:


> Cool white puts out more than enough blue spectrum, why do you need more?


To fudge up PAR?
Sort of hard to do with red.
v3


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> . Those RGB LEDs they use have pathetic output.


Regardless of output those "red" LED's spectrum are 100% useable by plants.(those photons that are caught)
no underutilized "green/yellow... 



Normalize at .1= 1 









But now we are really splitting hairs.........

But if I try I can support almost any conclusion:












> Examination of the quantum yield of photons reveals that the photosynthetic efficiency of photons is generally similar between 400 and 680 nm, with a rapid fall off above the latter wavelength (Figure 2). Photosynthesis using light absorbed at wavelengths between the chlorophyll absorption peaks has a slightly lower efficiency.


Sometimes even from the same page:
http://biology.mcgill.ca/Phytotron/LightWkshp1994/1.5 Bugbee/Bugbee text.htm

to really sum it up.. IF you have 2 lights w/ 2 channels 
LIGHT 1 a)"white" and b)"red"(feel free to substitute blue here but ignore secondary conclusion) 
LIGHT 2 a)white b)white
And each produced the exact same amount of photons (not lux/lumens nor PAR)
Conclusion 1 : Light one would be more efficient but "possibly" only marginally so 
and 
Conclusion 2 : *You can make a heck of a better sunset out of 1.*....... 
MORE data...


> TABLE 2. The spectral efficiency of six electric lamps and sunlight.
> 
> Lamp type Ratio
> 
> Low Pressure Sodium (LPS) .99
> High Pressure Sodium (HPS) .95
> Incandescent (INC) .95
> Metal Halide (MH) .90
> Cool White Fluorescent (CWF) .89
> Red Light-Emitting Diode (LED) .89
> Solar on a clear day .88
> 
> Spectral efficiency is defined as the ratio of the lamp spectral output multiplied by McCree's quantum efficiency weighting factors, divided by the number of photons between 400 and 700 nm. Examples are given in Figure 4. The ratio for solar radiation is not a constant (see Figure 3). The LED had a peak output of 660 nm. LED's with peak outputs at shorter wavelengths wouldhave greater spectral efficiency, e.g. a peak output at 610 nm would result in an efficiency close to 1.0.





> PLANT GROWTH IN SOME SPECIES IS SURPRISINGLY LITTLE AFFECTED BY LIGHT QUALITY
> 
> Although photosynthesis may not be affected by light quality in short-term studies, the spectral quality from some lamps decreases chlorophyll concentration and alters phytochrome status, which can be detrimental to plant growth in long-term studies. The monochromatic radiation from low-pressure sodium lamps can significantly reduce chlorophyll and plant growth in several dicotyledonous species, for example.


Crap shoot.......... 
Just for comparison:
T


> he ratio for MH lamps (0.90) is reduced because they emit blue photons but this reduction is offset some because they emit photons in the UV region, which are not measured by PPF sensors. HPS lamps have a relatively high ratio (0.95) because most of their output is near the peak quantum yield.


----------



## FlyingHellFish

OVT said:


> To fudge up PAR?
> Sort of hard to do with red.
> v3


^ So the users can have more red if they want. 

Hey Gus6464, I couldn't really find your tank. Got a picture with a pure white LED fixture to compare?

@jeffkrol - I am agree 100% with you, of course they are useable. There is another hobby that deals with plant growing and guess what kind of fixture they use? And surprise surprise, they also have red leds, purple, blue, yup, pretty much everything.


----------



## gus6464

OVT said:


> To fudge up PAR?
> Sort of hard to do with red.
> v3


True but I also think it also stems to freshwater folk wanting nothing to do with clustered lights and opting for strips. I am firm believer that a proper full spectrum light can only be done with clustering. This is why full spectrum strip lights don't exist in the reef world.


----------



## MeCasa

gus6464 said:


> The thing is that what manufacturers are calling full spectrum is nothing but slapping a bunch of RGB LEDs with some cool white and calling it a day. That is not full spectrum. Those RGB LEDs they use have pathetic output. A cool white/warm white array is more full spectrum than those lights ever will be. Cool white puts out more than enough blue spectrum, why do you need more?





FlyingHellFish said:


> I see where you're coming from, no pun intended. I think they separate the RBG in LED fixtures to give the user more control over how the tank looks. But yes, you're right, the white light will cover the required spectrum but I like having the option of going a bit red or a bit blue is great!


What Gus said has no value since it is a generalization about a product line that has tons of variables and his statement not only includes all without exception but doesn't even begin to take into account any of the variables

And you agreeing makes even less sense

What controllable RGB on a plant array are Ya'll talking about?

And the conversation is that the white light will NOT cover the entire spectrum without some color LED's

This conversation has finally hit absurd

I'm outa here


----------



## gus6464

MeCasa said:


> What Gus said has no value since it is a generalization about a product line that has tons of variables and his statement not only includes all without exception but doesn't even begin to take into account any of the variables
> 
> And you agreeing makes even less sense
> 
> What controllable RGB on a plant array are Ya'll talking about?
> 
> And the conversation is that the white light will NOT cover the entire spectrum without some color LED's
> 
> This conversation has finally hit absurd
> 
> I'm outa here


Let's see. What is arguably the most popular light in this forum? The Current Sat+. Mostly comprised of cool white LEDs and a couple of RGB LEDs thrown in which can all only do one color.

Build my LED - Per 12" strip a whole bunch of cool white LEDs and 1 measly deep red along with 1 of a bunch of other colors.

You don't seem to understand that white LEDs are not really white. Cool whites are royal blue LEDs with a yellow phosphor. Warm whites are red LEDs with a yellow phosphor.


----------



## jeffkrol

Red LED Well all common LED's:










> a peak output at 610 nm would result in an efficiency close to 1.0.


gus you just looked at one BML.. My favorite of those though:
5000K "Discus light"... 
Ignore the K "x" it's in the wrong place for some reason..
4=660 11=6500K.........
http://forum.buildmyled.com/index.php?threads/new-5000k-planted-tank-spectrum.225/









Of course you were referring to the "Dutch" but the 10000K is arguably as popular...
DUTCH:


> LED Selections per 12" Board: (8) 6500K Cool White, (2) 625nm Red, (1) 470nm Blue, (1) 505nm Cyan, (1) 525nm Green, (1) 615nm Orange/Red, (1) 660nm Deep Red


10000K


> LED Selections per 12" Board: (10) 5700K Cool White, (3) 660nm Deep Red, (2) 450nm Royal Blue


ONE common theme is you cannot really go wrong w/ LED's due to the "high PAR of "white".. it then becomes a matter of taste... 
Sat plus is popular due to the "flexibility factor"


----------



## FlyingHellFish

MeCasa said:


> What Gus said has no value since it is a generalization about a product line that has tons of variables and his statement not only includes all without exception but doesn't even begin to take into account any of the variables
> 
> And you agreeing makes even less sense
> 
> What controllable RGB on a plant array are Ya'll talking about?
> 
> And the conversation is that the white light will NOT cover the entire spectrum without some color LED's
> 
> This conversation has finally hit absurd
> 
> I'm outa here



You have to read what I wrote, I said "*required*" not "*full spectrum*". I was under the impression he was talking about pure white, and yeah that would work, T5HO fixtures have pure white. 

But I'm a huge fan of wider spectrums, I have two LED fixtures with very wide spectrum coverage. I love being able to turn my tank blue, red, purple if I wanted to. I'm a fan of LEDs, I think it's great we're finally getting some high tech stuff that normally only reefers get to use.


----------



## jeffkrol

FlyingHellFish said:


> ^ There is another hobby that deals with plant growing and guess what kind of fixture they use? And surprise surprise, they also have red leds, purple, blue, yup, pretty much everything.


Yep one "happy" group.. 
Of course most of us aren't expecting our w. wysteria to "bud"...


----------



## gus6464

FlyingHellFish said:


> ^ So the users can have more red if they want.
> 
> Hey Gus6464, I couldn't really find your tank. Got a picture with a pure white LED fixture to compare?
> 
> @jeffkrol - I am agree 100% with you, of course they are useable. There is another hobby that deals with plant growing and guess what kind of fixture they use? And surprise surprise, they also have red leds, purple, blue, yup, pretty much everything.


So here's 3 pictures. This is based on what I run the LED's at individually.

2700K 97CRI warm white - lots of red spectrum
25 PAR at the substrate









5600K cool white - blue spectrum
82-85PAR at the substrate









Combined to my preferred aesthetic
~110PAR at substrate









I am adding violet LEDs because I like that pink/purple hue some people have with their T5's and of course more usable spectrum is nice.


----------



## FlyingHellFish

jeffkrol said:


> Yep one "happy" group..
> Of course most of us aren't expecting our w. wysteria to "bud"...


They also deal with deficiencies and Co2 equipment. I had to buy dry fertilizers there and they seem very interested in our hobby, or maybe I just caught them at the right time.

@ Gus - No offense, but those pictures don't really tell us anything, we're talking about plants here. Those pictures are great at highlighting how AquaSoil substrate looks under different lighting.


----------



## gus6464

FlyingHellFish said:


> They also deal with deficiencies and Co2 equipment. I had to buy dry fertilizers there and they seem very interested in our hobby, or maybe I just caught them at the right time.
> 
> @ Gus - No offense, but those pictures don't really tell us anything, we're talking about plants here. Those pictures are great at highlighting how AquaSoil substrate looks under different lighting.


Tank is brand new and filled less than a week ago so don't know what you want. Some of my tillandsia is slowly but surely turning red with 200 PAR but that's it.


----------



## jeffkrol

NOW THIS is a lot of red.. 15W 3500K and 20W 660nm red each at a reduced power...


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> to really sum it up.. IF you have 2 lights w/ 2 channels
> LIGHT 1 a)"white" and b)"red"(feel free to substitute blue here but ignore secondary conclusion)
> LIGHT 2 a)white b)white
> And each produced the exact same amount of photons (not lux/lumens nor PAR)
> Conclusion 1 : Light one would be more efficient but "possibly" only marginally so
> and
> Conclusion 2 : *You can make a heck of a better sunset out of 1.*.......


Do you wish you lived on Mars is that why you like such a red sunset?


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> NOW THIS is a lot of red.. 15W 3500K and 20W 660nm red each at a reduced power...


How much PAR are you pushing with all that red?


----------



## wastewater

gus6464 said:


> You don't seem to understand that white LEDs are not really white. Cool whites are royal blue LEDs with a yellow phosphor. Warm whites are red LEDs with a yellow phosphor.


No disrespect, and not meant to derail your thread by any means ~ but, not all warm whites "are red LEDs with a yellow phosphor".



http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles/2013/01/warm-white-led-fabricated-using-single-phosphor.html

http://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...novation-and-truly-leverage-the-benefits.html


----------



## OVT

jeffkrol said:


> Yep one "happy" group..
> Of course most of us aren't expecting our w. wysteria to "bud"...


Or have as much disposable income as that other hobby 

v3


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> How much PAR are you pushing with all that red?


you can't accurately measure PAR in the red spectrum.. nor really most LED's


> With commercially available PAR meters, certain colors of LED tend to read high, while others read low. The best device for accurate PAR measurement is a spectroradiometer, which provides intensity readings at each wavelength. However, these are often not well suited for underwater measurements and can range in price from several thousand to tens of thousands of dollars.


http://www.apogeeinstruments.com/aquarium-par-meters/
Since I don't have a spectroradiometer.. why bother... ???
Besides I don't have a PAR meter... 
apogees are inaccurate and I assume "DIY ones" are as well........since the sensor is quite inefficient..



> LED Type
> 
> Error [%] for Apogee Quantum Sensor
> Cool White -4.2
> Neutral White -6.1
> Warm White -9.9
> Blue (448 nm) -10.7
> Green (524 nm) 5.8
> Red (635 nm) 4.7
> Red, Blue 2.7
> Red, Green, Blue 3.5



you want to borrow me a Li-Cor.. I'll measure it for you.. (even that is a bit problematic being "flat"......)


----------



## gus6464

wastewater said:


> No disrespect, and not meant to derail your thread by any means ~ but, not all warm whites "are red LEDs with a yellow phosphor".
> 
> 
> 
> http://www.ledsmagazine.com/articles/2013/01/warm-white-led-fabricated-using-single-phosphor.html
> 
> http://www.ledsmagazine.com/article...novation-and-truly-leverage-the-benefits.html


Yes sorry should have been more specific about the secret sauce of the new breed of warm white LEDs with high 90+ CRI.


----------



## OVT

gus6464 said:


> Let's see. What is arguably the most popular light in this forum? The Current Sat+. Mostly comprised of cool white LEDs and a couple of RGB LEDs thrown in which can all only do one color.


Not quiet right: the ratio of white to RGB is 2:1 and the RGB are "full spectrum LEDs".
v3


----------



## gus6464

OVT said:


> Not quiet right: the ratio of white to RGB is 2:1 and the RGB are "full spectrum LEDs".
> v3


I meant so say one color at a time. I don't see where the Sat+ can for example run half of it's RGB leds in red and the other half in say blue?


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> Yes sorry should have been more specific about the secret sauce of the new breed of warm white LEDs with high 90+ CRI.


ADDING a RED diode.. say it ain't so...............


----------



## jeffkrol

jeffkrol said:


> ADDING a RED diode.. say it ain't so...............


Like this better..  7=6500k/7=3500k (dimmed together)/660nm red ( global dimmed @90%..) blue/wh channel off cyan channel off










Daylight all channels on:









OVERALL









Surface.. you can see the various colors of LEDs in top left:


----------



## bhazard451

If Jeff is the one with the RGB in the Beamswork fixture, I'm totally copying that build if he ever shares a tutorial 

I've had DIY and commercial leds over my reef tank for almost 3 years now. Full Spectrum is not a gimmick, BUT, 95% of manufacturers don't really know how to implement it correctly. When implemented properly, it makes a huge difference in coral health and visual beauty.

4 Red 660nm 3W per 36" makes my clownfish pop, and it has certainly helped grow some coral with better color, all without algae. 400-430nm leds have done the same.

I have Cyan now, but will change to the new Lime leds soon. Lime leds look AWESOME, and when you change the intensity, you don't change spectrum, just the color temperature to your eyes.

Of course, none of this matters on a planted tank (which I have just started for the first time). A $45 Beamswork 55W "6500k" seems to have plenty of the red and blue spectrum that the plants need to survive and grow. I'm only addding a RGB strip for the awesome color effect, which would be useless for coral growth and somewhat unnatural over a reef. Without a spectrometer, RGB will jump all over the place in wavelength output, and intensity will be very little.

Never, ever trust a label such as "6500k", "Cool White", etc. Trust the spectrum graphs. If there is none, you have no idea what you are truly putting over your tank.

As an example, one chinese 3W "4500k" led i ordered produced a nice yellow/white. Another "4500k" from another source was visually pink. They both used radically different output to achieve "4500k".


----------



## jeffkrol

bhazard451 said:


> If Jeff is the one with the RGB in the Beamswork fixture, I'm totally copying that build if he ever shares a tutorial


That was 
Hoppy 
http://www.plantedtank.net/forums/showthread.php?t=545113&highlight=
Just use the beamswork as a heatsink..

, JasterMake and Randpost.


----------



## FlyingHellFish

gus6464 said:


> I meant so say one color at a time. I don't see where the Sat+ can for example run half of it's RGB leds in red and the other half in say blue?


Why would that matter? You're over analyzing this. Think of it this way --

More area of the spectrum, more resources for plants. If the companies want to toss in a red or blue source, and let the user control the light, I think it's great. I really don't think giving the consumer more control and options to be any gimmick. 

A gimmick would be Bob's special fertilizer, with a secret ingredient only Bob knows. 

*///* I respect everyone's opinion but please don't confuse a "gimmick" with moving forward. We have the ability to remotely control our lights, to set digital timers, to set intensity and control the colour with different channels. You can even set how much of a percentage you want a certain colour to increase. There are even fixtures out there that let you do all of this with your phone. 

Now, you're telling me you wouldn't want that? You just want white?

Well, here my tank and I hope the readers will come to their own conclusion. 









=======








=======








=======








=======








=======


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> I meant so say one color at a time. I don't see where the Sat+ can for example run half of it's RGB leds in red and the other half in say blue?


AFAICT it is a 4 channel design... Not much different than those 5050smd strips.. only w/ a white "channel" added..



> RGB+W Technology offers endless color blends


----------



## saiko

wow, this topic is on fire! Love the discussion. 
Also the idea of backing up your claims with your tank pics will help big time.


----------



## bhazard451

Coming from a strong reef led DIY background, I've been very disappointed in lighting choices for planted tanks. The Current and Finnex fixtures have the right idea, but they are a bit underpowered.

I'm going to design easy to install fixture tutorials based off of the cheap Beamswork fixtures, RGB smd 5050 strips, a led controller, and maybe even the Current or Ecoxotic pro ramp timers. I found out those timers just might work on the Beamswork with no modification.

This can be used in conjunction with the $30 programmable led controller for the RGB strips to create a ramping light with all the effects of the Freshwater+, but with much more power for nearly the same prices.

The current timer can be ditched altogether with a simple dc to 2 wire adapter to the $30 led controller as well. You just won't get lightning, remote, or cloud cover.

It would greatly show how extra spectrum and power can really spice up a tank, but with little modification, and little money.


----------



## acitydweller

There another aspect to LEDs that isnt being addressed where intensity is immensely high at the water level but quickly dissipates inches below. While this is hardly noticeable in a 8-12" tall aquarium, those that run 55g or greater tanks with exceeding depths will begin seeing challenges with limited light spread or shadowing, inconsistent color coverage across the length of the tank, low par on the substrate just to name a few.

Finnex and CurrentUSA (specifically the LED+ line) has done quite well to cater to the nano/pico sector of the hobby but those with larger tanks often deal with other challenges that are associated with the depth of tank where the RED wavelengths do not reach the foreground.

The term Full spectrum is often tossed around for marketing purposes but the specific colors need to be spread across the lenght of the lamp and not just in two or four places.

Be weary of LED fixtures that are including UV emitters as these wavelengths offer very little benefit to plant growth and are closer to the extreme spectrums that actually cause harm to both the plants and us.

I am running the BuildMyLED 5000k lamp and this really has provided both the warmer white light and amazing amount of RED leds while providing sufficient amount of 6500k leds to keep par fairly high. The composition of leds in this kit is top notch and worth considering for any DIY'ers to consider modeling.

As jeffkol mentioned, 6500k provides sufficient blue spectrum coverage. No need for moonlights unless you keep nocturnal fish. I actually use red LED flashlights to enjoy my woodcats. Those that love their 10k lamps on shallow tanks can keep doing what they do as much of this is subjective to our own tastes but certainly by this thread, it seems we are working towards a sweet spot between what the plants actually need and what is aesthetically pleasing without making our tanks look like a dedicated farm tank.

I will always reserve recommendations on lamps as performance of the same lamp always will vary by tank dimensions and far more consideration is needed than simply going with what everyone else uses. Its encouraging to see so many full spectrum enthusiasts chime in here. Please carry on.


----------



## roadmaster

Meanwhile back in the man cave.. Four tube 54 watt T5 fixture hung ten inches above low tech 80 gal tank allows me to use any combination of bulbs/spectrum I desire.
Fixture was $128.00 at Lowes.
Could easily be adapted/used over high tech as well.
Have yet to see plants that don't do well under near any spectrum one chooses or combination of spectrums.
Plants will use what light is available.Is more important to ME that I like the light and the way it makes the tank look.
Have used nearly every spectrum there is and or combination of spectrums and for ME,10,00K/6700K combo produces what I like.
Weeds make do.


----------



## MeCasa

bhazard451 said:


> $30 programmable led controller for the RGB strips to create a ramping light with all the effects of the Freshwater+, but with much more power for nearly the same prices.


I want a link swap

This

http://www.aliexpress.com/store/gro...controllers-led-dimmers/312912_252001222.html

The DX8 remote and R4-CC receivers are of particular interest but the problem is in cross usage with Storm/Typhoon controllers since these items are weak in programming and do not have fade in fade out controllability, also the memory is in the remote and not the receivers causing issues on linking to Storm/Typhoon.

Your turn, I'd like to see the $30 RGB programmable controller because I may be able to use it 

What I really want is a multi zone, multi channel, programmable controller with enough power to push HP LED's and a remote.

.


----------



## Onyx165

acitydweller said:


> Be weary of LED fixtures that are including UV emitters as these wavelengths offer very little benefit to plant growth and are closer to the extreme spectrums that actually cause harm to both the plants and us.


No commercial led fixtures have true UV emitters; for some reason this term has stuck around when its highly inaccurate. Its actually just violet light at the end of the visible spectrum (400-430nm). You'd have to get lower than 315nm (UVB) to be able to cause DNA damage in organisms. And herp keepers have been using UVB fluorescent bulbs for decades without hurting themselves. 

And I certainly don't think you can claim that 400-430nm light has no benefit to plant growth when it is so preferentially absorbed by chlorophyll.


----------



## jeffkrol

Onyx165 said:


> And herp keepers have been using UVB fluorescent bulbs for decades without hurting themselves.


as w/ most things ..taken in moderation and I'm sure the output is quite low....but:


> UVB radiation causes sunburn, darkening and thickening of the outer layer of the skin, and melanoma and other types of skin cancer.


but your right.."most" UV are violet.. not technically UV...
As to efficieny.. depends on the chart.. Looks to start trailing off at 425...ish








Chlorophyll absorption at even higher nm...
"prettier"..


















Adding "violet" is as arguable as adding 660nm red... though at least 660nm red has higher quantum efficiency.. 
for later:
http://www.heliospectra.com/sites/default/files/general/What light do plants need_5.pdf


----------



## bhazard451

roadmaster said:


> Meanwhile back in the man cave.. Four tube 54 watt T5 fixture hung ten inches above low tech 80 gal tank allows me to use any combination of bulbs/spectrum I desire.
> Fixture was $128.00 at Lowes.
> Could easily be adapted/used over high tech as well.
> Have yet to see plants that don't do well under near any spectrum one chooses or combination of spectrums.
> Plants will use what light is available.Is more important to ME that I like the light and the way it makes the tank look.
> Have used nearly every spectrum there is and or combination of spectrums and for ME,10,00K/6700K combo produces what I like.
> Weeds make do.


In 3 years time, the cost of your bulb changes will triple the cost of the fixture itself. One of the great beauties of LEDs is no bulb changes. Just press a button and instant color change. LEDs also show shimmer, T5 doesn't.

Another huge benefit is power consumption. A well set up 60 watt fixture will output the same amount of PAR or better than the 200+W T5 and save hundreds of dollars over that 3 years time as well. Power in NY is expensive.

In the end, you'll get a drastically better looking, more convenient, less expensive fixture with a good LED setup.


----------



## bhazard451

MeCasa said:


> I want a link swap
> 
> This
> 
> http://www.aliexpress.com/store/gro...controllers-led-dimmers/312912_252001222.html
> 
> The DX8 remote and R4-CC receivers are of particular interest but the problem is in cross usage with Storm/Typhoon controllers since these items are weak in programming and do not have fade in fade out controllability, also the memory is in the remote and not the receivers causing issues on linking to Storm/Typhoon.
> 
> Your turn, I'd like to see the $30 RGB programmable controller because I may be able to use it
> 
> What I really want is a multi zone, multi channel, programmable controller with enough power to push HP LED's and a remote.
> 
> .


Aliexpress $31 ePacket (faster shipping):
http://www.aliexpress.com/item/dc-1...l-rgb-strip-time-programmable/1332695048.html

DC to bare wire $4 (or make your own)
[Ebay Link Removed]

12V 20a power supply $23
[Ebay Link Removed]

Power supply goes to input V+ V-

From the Beamswork fixture, plug the dc end in. Bare wire goes to V+ output and Channel 1.

RGB channels go to channel 2,3,4.

For my 30" 23 gallon tank, the fixture, RGB leds, and everything total comes to about $120 for over 60 watts, programmable, any spectrum.


----------



## MeCasa

Thank you bhazard, I looked at that unit once before

Jeff, isn't that about 6 Luxeons per channel if it will even work without constant current?

And how does it function with high output LED's without CC?

We can go to PM as to not tread on the lively debate


----------



## roadmaster

bhazard451 said:


> In 3 years time, the cost of your bulb changes will triple the cost of the fixture itself. One of the great beauties of LEDs is no bulb changes. Just press a button and instant color change. LEDs also show shimmer, T5 doesn't.
> 
> Another huge benefit is power consumption. A well set up 60 watt fixture will output the same amount of PAR or better than the 200+W T5 and save hundreds of dollars over that 3 years time as well. Power in NY is expensive.
> 
> In the end, you'll get a drastically better looking, more convenient, less expensive fixture with a good LED setup.


 Bulbs are free for me.Have cases of T5 bulbs for replacing same in offices at work.(I order them)
As it stands now,I replace bulbs when they burn out.
Don't care about shimmer but I could simply raise the spray bar and achieve the effect.


----------



## gus6464

400-425nm is called near-uv. It's just a purple light and nothing more. You have to go <400nm to cause damage and have tons of it. I have yet to find an actual real UV LED.


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> as w/ most things ..taken in moderation and I'm sure the output is quite low....but:
> 
> 
> but your right.."most" UV are violet.. not technically UV...
> As to efficieny.. depends on the chart.. Looks to start trailing off at 425...ish
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Chlorophyll absorption at even higher nm...
> "prettier"..
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Adding "violet" is as arguable as adding 660nm red... though at least 660nm red has higher quantum efficiency..
> for later:
> http://www.heliospectra.com/sites/default/files/general/What light do plants need_5.pdf


Every chart is different. Some will say red is absorbed more than blue and others vice versa. Just because you refuse to accept purple is needed doesn't mean it won't help. Also purple is the second strongest usable wavelength that penetrates water after RB.


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> Every chart is different. ...............Just because you refuse to accept purple is needed doesn't mean it won't help. Also purple is the second strongest usable wavelength that penetrates water after RB.


I never said purple wasn't "needed" anymore than 660nm red.. 
When I get a 3ft deep tank I'll worry about penetration of "red"...










you do lose about 30% in a meter...

http://books.google.com/books?id=Ht...shwater light attenuation coefficient&f=false

Remind me to add more red..........


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> I never said purple wasn't "needed" anymore than 660nm red..
> When I get a 3ft deep tank I'll worry about penetration of "red"...


It's not just about depth but also amount of that particular light required. Since purple penetrates easier it means you need a whole lot less of it compared to red to get the same effect.

Those depth charts are based on full sunlight which puts out a whole boatload of PAR more than we have in our tanks.

Take these two LEDs:

http://www.rapidled.com/semileds-violet-uv-led-410-420nm/
http://www.rapidled.com/philips-luxeon-rebel-es-660nm-deep-red-led/

Very close in price. Put them both on top of a standard 18" tank and run them at same current. Which spectrum will the plant at the bottom of the tank get more of?

There is a reason reefers switched to violet to fulfill chlorophyll A vs using deep red. Violet is much more efficient in penetration vs red.


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> Very close in price. Put them both on top of a standard 18" tank and run them at same current. Which spectrum will the plant at the bottom of the tank get more of?
> 
> There is a reason reefers switched to violet to fulfill chlorophyll A vs using deep red. Violet is much more efficient in penetration vs red.


but your mixing things up.. FIRST you would have to produce the same "moles" of electrons.. subtract depth losses and then "correct" for photon efficiency ala McCree.. 

You can't just throw any old LEd's and say "see"..


I could under drive the Violet and overdrive the 660nm red and achieve "equal" molar amounts of photons which. theoretically makes the red more "efficient" due to quantum efficiency factor..AFAICT.. It's been awhile.. 

Or I could add a 60 degree optic to the red and leave the violet "native"..

ect.ect.. 
@ normal fish tank depths (say 18"-24") you will lose 15-20% "red" in comparison to violet. Got no problem w/ that..
The fact that according to McCree red is marginally more "efficient" makes up for part of that.. LED "efficiency" can be all over the board..

Your spitting hairs ...  but it's fun.. 
http://aqua.wisc.edu/publications/PDFs/SelectingLureColorsForSuccessfulFishing.pdf

Oh a percent is a percent.. doesn't matter on "quantity".... 
50% of 10 or 50% of 100 is still half...

(about 35% of red light (680nm) is absorbed by a 1-meter deep column of pure water.)

BUT 50% or 10 moles of photons is different than 50% of 100 moles of photons..

Again so at 3FEET I'd have to double my "photon count" of REd vs.. Violet BUT mitigated by the effective capture and utilization of said photons..

I never ever ever said that "you' shouldn't use violet.. I only said if you make one "exception" you can make more.. Like Cyan or 660nm red ..or pink for that matter.
As McCree stated "most light" has the same effect in equal quantities.. only really making an exception for green/yellow (what was it 30% less effective..)


----------



## gus6464

jeffkrol said:


> but your mixing things up.. FIRST you would have to produce the same "moles" of electrons.. subtract depth losses and then "correct" for photon efficiency ala McCree..
> 
> You can't just throw any old LEd's and say "see"..
> 
> 
> I could under drive the Violet and overdrive the 660nm red and achieve "equal" molar amounts of photons which. theoretically makes the red more "efficient" due to quantum efficiency factor..AFAICT.. It's been awhile..
> 
> Or I could add a 60 degree optic to the red and leave the violet "native"..
> 
> ect.ect..
> @ normal fish tank depths (say 18"-24") you will lose 15-20% "red" in comparison to violet. Got no problem w/ that..
> The fact that according to McCree red is marginally more "efficient" makes up for part of that.. LED "efficiency" can be all over the board..
> 
> Your spitting hairs ...  but it's fun..
> http://aqua.wisc.edu/publications/PDFs/SelectingLureColorsForSuccessfulFishing.pdf
> 
> Oh a percent is a percent.. doesn't matter on "quantity"....
> 50% of 10 or 50% of 100 is still half...


And yet I could do the same with violet compared to the red. At the end of the day I get more out of the $4.50 violet than I do of the $3.50 red. The age old complaint that violet is more expensive is over. Hey guys just buy a ton of red even though there's this LED over here that's the same price and actually more powerful so you need less of it.

Ohh and violet screws with your color temp a lot less than red does but whatever.

I am not throwing any LEDs and saying see. I am using LEDs which are easily available to hobbyists that are building such fixtures. But by all means go tell reefers that they should dump their violets and go back to reds.


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> And yet I could do the same with violet compared to the red. At the end of the day I get more out of the $4.50 violet than I do of the $3.50 red. The age old complaint that violet is more expensive is over. Hey guys just buy a ton of red even though there's this LED over here that's the same price and actually more powerful so you need less of it.
> 
> Ohh and violet screws with your color temp a lot less than red does but whatever.
> 
> I am not throwing any LEDs and saying see. I am using LEDs which are easily available to hobbyists that are building such fixtures. But by all means go tell reefers that they should dump their violets and go back to reds.












Now if you can find me "moles of photons/watt of violet and red.. I'd appreciate it .. we could be more exact..
No PAR meters don't cut it...


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> Ohh and violet screws with your color temp a lot less than red does but whatever.


a qualitative measurement and has nothing to do w/ "PAR efficiency"... nor even half of what we are talking about.

ON a "strictly personal note" "I" find more uses for Red than violet...YMMV

Odd thing to think about.. if you lose soo much red how can it screw your color temp.. 

I understand your points and agree w/ some.. maybe I didn't make that clear enough..

Lets try to sum this up
You like violets because of lack of toning, "perceived efficiency", spectral deficiency in white, and depth penetration
I prefer red (though violet is a fine "addition) because of "perceived efficiency", color toning, spectral lacking in white, and fair penetration in normal depths..

In "advising" I have never discouraged violet. just never pushed, nor recommended them..  Someone asks. I say "sure why not, just not too many..oh throw some reds in as well".. oh how about cyan"??. 
When someone says all "you" need is whites and violet.. well that is a different story.. apparently a longer one than necessary..


----------



## MeCasa

How do the rest of us know ya'll aren't making this stuff up?


----------



## jeffkrol

gus6464 said:


> But by all means go tell reefers that they should dump their violets and go back to reds.


This has nothing to do w/ reefers and their Windex tanks.. 

for fun..


> I took the UV leds out and added RB. Some corals were changing color and some of the leds melted.
> Anyways the space right down the center of the tank is where I'm thinking of adding 6 red and 6 green. Too many? Not enough? I was thinking of having them on seperate channels so I can adjust them independently. Would this be a must?
> Please share your thoughts and experience on adding red and green leds.





> I added red and green to my system and it did help bring out more color in my corals. If you have each color on its own separate channels so they are independently adjustable the numbers seem about right. If they are going to be combined I would use 6 red and four green.


reefcentral...ect. ect...




> 430NM violets is as low as I would be comfy going in purples, for green, make sure you get the lime not the green. and for reds you obviously want the 660nm.


"stuff"...


> On April 7, 2013 we presented an improved version of the assembly, which we call Rev. 2.1. In this revision one of the cool-white LEDs was replaced by neutral-white, and the deep-red (660nm) LED was replaced with normal red (620-630nm) Philips Luxeon LXM2-PD01-0050. This mostly resolved the problem of better representation of warm colors. To our amazement, it turned out that this orange and red spectrum added significantly to the beauty of a reef tank. This spectrum has been mostly neglected so far, and requires additional attention.
> We would like to make some notes about the algae bloom concerns. Many hobbyists believe that, due to high photosynthetic activity, the presence of wavelengths longer than 620nm may facilitate to algae growth, and therefore any radiation in this range should be eliminated from the fixture. This approach will, unfortunately, deprive us from enjoying the beautiful shades of non-fluorescent orange and red color present in many corals and fish.
> The algae problem can be resolved radically by maintaining good water parameters in the tank, and particularly, by maintaining constant phosphate deficiency in the water. An American oceanographer Alfred C. Redfield discovered in 1934 an empirical stoichiometric ratio of carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus present in marine phytoplankton. It later turned out that most living organisms require these nutrients in roughly the same proportion.


http://www.rollitup.org/t/660-nm-deep-reds-algae-in-hydroponics.830745/


----------



## gus6464

I never said "just whites" and violets. I said and here is it again:

1. A low CRI cool white with big spike in blue
2. A high CRI warm white with big spike in red
3. Violets

And the whole point of that was to try and simplify a light which is still very much full spectrum but does not require a whole bunch of LEDs. That combo above gives you big spikes in Chlorophyll A+B without needing a whole bunch of different LEDs. Violet gives you the high PUR in Chlorophyll A that red cannot do unless you pack that fixture with those LEDs.

In a shallow tank of course this point is moot but people with big tanks that are not only deep but wide this becomes much more relevant.


----------



## jeffkrol

MeCasa said:


> How do the rest of us know ya'll aren't making this stuff up?


It's a puzzle.. I throw pieces.. you put it together for your satisfaction.. Besides you got to believe somebody.. 

For "fun" read through the "revisions"...
http://www.advancedaquarist.com/201...ider&utm_medium=slider&utm_campaign=clickthru

Gus you too.. supports you more than me .. but it is "reef centric"... 












> Looking at the graphs, it is clear that the spectrum of PC Amber is virtually the same as with Neutral-White, except for the lack of the blue spike. The manufacturer has designed this LED specifically for the adjustment of color from cool-white LEDs, in order to achieve a warmer light.
> 
> While in our previous revisions we could only adjust the color temperature towards cooler colors (by adding the radiation of Royal Blue and True Violet LEDs), with the addition of PC Amber[2] we are now able to control the CCT towards warmer colors also. Due to using more efficient white LEDs along with PC Amber, visual brightness of our LED assembly has almost doubled!
> 
> Some manufacturers try to control color warmth by using a Red-Orange (610-620nm) LED. We had experimented with this approach, but the results were not satisfactory: experienced hobbyists reported an unnatural color rendition on a reef tank. Both Red-Orange and conventional Amber LEDs emit only a narrow band in the required spectral range, whereas PC Amber has a wide and even spectral diagram in the whole range.
> 
> In Rev. 3.0 we also used a unique Philips Luxeon red LED with dominating wavelength at 630-645nm. It is better suited for our needs than the common 620-630nm, as well as the 660-670nm LEDs that were used previously. The 620-630nm range is sufficiently present in PC Amber, whereas in the 660-670nm range the sensitivity of the eye is significantly lower[3]. The use of this particular wavelength allows us to obtain an even spectral density in the long-wavelength range and to efficiently control it.


----------



## MeCasa

jeffkrol said:


> It's a puzzle.. I throw pieces.. you put it together for your satisfaction.. Besides you got to believe somebody..


OK, I've made my decision.

Gus was right on the Vero, lots of light at an extremely affordable price, I believe that a combination Warm White and Cool White would work

And Jeff was right on the colored LED's. I believe both to increase spectrum and increase ascetics a few colored LED's are necessary, probably a couple of Deep Red, perhaps a Cyan or two, so on and so forth

I think we should cluster the individual LED's around the Vero's. We shall call this the Evil Cluster...oh wait...JediMasterBen already took that name.

Oh well, call it what you like, the idea is sound. Which series of Vero and whether or not to use optics should be decided by tank depth

I have spoken
The puzzle is assembled
MeCasa


----------



## gus6464

And I just fried an LDD-700H and 2x $20 LEDs trying to jimmy-rig :angryfire


----------



## O2surplus

gus6464 said:


> And I just fried an LDD-700H and 2x $20 LEDs trying to jimmy-rig :angryfire



Du-oh! How'd you manage to do that? I can see smoking an LDD, that's easy, but 2 leds too? Were they a couple of your new violets?


----------



## FlyingHellFish

gus6464 said:


> And I just fried an LDD-700H and 2x $20 LEDs trying to jimmy-rig :angryfire


How much money do people typically save when doing DIY Led fixtures? I can see why people do custom Co2 regulator builds (no source for them) but LEDs fixture are already cheap.


----------



## jeffkrol

FlyingHellFish said:


> How much money do people typically save when doing DIY Led fixtures? I can see why people do custom Co2 regulator builds (no source for them) but LEDs fixture are already cheap.


Saving is an elusive term.. 
Look at it this way.. for an "automated build".....
PS=$20-$50
Controller= $20-$60(much higher for much fancier i.e Apex) 
Drivers(if not using constant voltage strips) $7 per channel
LED's= $20 for 


> *LED type: SMD 5630*
> *LED quantity: 300 pieces*
> *View angle: 120*
> *Strip length: 5m/ 16.4ft*
> *Input: DC 12V*
> *Consumption: 72W/6A/5meter*


(1/2 W diodes are "the smallest" I'd recommend for anything PERSONAL opinion)
to 3W $1(or less)-$4 each for 3W "chips"..

so a minimal timer controlled fade in/out 72W LED fixture would be $60 plus hardware ("canopy", wire ect.)

A "static" build would be $40 (about equiv. to a Beamswork w/ more power)

A 99W full color/full control (no special effects) LED using quality emitters will run minimally $200 plus hardware..
Approaching the Marineland/BML pricepoints w/ for Marineland fewer "bells and whistles" and higher power for the BML

"Intangables" are what "you want" vs what the manuf. wants to sell you..

Goes back to the cost/benefit analysis in computer hardware.. Used to be "slightly" cheaper to build your own w/ the parts of "your" choice" and usually slightly higher specs..

In either case unless you build "top of the line" where paying manuf a "premium" is built in, your savings can be minimal but w/ measurable improvement in outcome..

Toss in "I" did it.. and call it a day.. Oh and "if" something breaks.. I can fix it w/ usually a reduction in cost....

toss in custom "spots" or multichip (COB) arrays ect..w/ a pre-built in "designer" factor and you could "save" more than the above "strip" estimates..

"Historically" it was only a year or so that the 2 started "converging".. Would not have been unusual to save Hundreds not too long ago....


----------



## acitydweller

Its not much of a $ savings as it is tailoring the lamps to precisely what one wants to provide over their planted tank. Also most LED fixture manufacturers only offer particular lengths so customization addresses this as well.

When asking this question, you also have to factor the learning curve, time and expertise required to make a really finished lamp and for supporting/troubleshooting when something goes amiss. Some of our famous regulator builders will probably tell you the same 

For that reason, there isn't enough common knowledge or expertise in lighting that has really exhibited an explosion in the DIY lighting front. Manufacturers today are still working on lamps that are more plant specific. Its a sign that things are still not clear cut.


----------



## acitydweller

We should probably put into perspective the amount of light spectrum is respective of what a fixture can provide. e.g. a LED fixture with (32) 6500k LEDs and (4) red LEDs will heavily skew the spectrums where the amount of REDs may hardly be noticible or useful. For this reason, increasing the RED led ratio for taller tanks may prove practical.

The aforementioned diagrams are respective of general light say from bulb and sunlight that are cast evenly. LEDs are directional and the spectrum directly below a fixture will vary per square inch.

These are some details that often fall between the cracks for those switching from fluorescent to LED.



jeffkrol said:


> I never said purple wasn't "needed" anymore than 660nm red..
> When I get a 3ft deep tank I'll worry about penetration of "red"...
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> you do lose about 30% in a meter...
> 
> http://books.google.com/books?id=Ht...shwater light attenuation coefficient&f=false
> 
> Remind me to add more red..........


----------



## O2surplus

FlyingHellFish said:


> How much money do people typically save when doing DIY Led fixtures? I can see why people do custom Co2 regulator builds (no source for them) but LEDs fixture are already cheap.



In my opinion- most DIY Led builders aren't concerned with saving money. For most it's about control and the innate satisfaction that comes from building exactly what _you _want vs. just buying what some product supplier is willing to offer.


----------



## MeCasa

On a small tank the economics will never be there unless you want something special. 

But on a large tank those Vero's have really leveled the playing field especially if you want a simplistic system but as in anything, when you add complexity the prices go up proportionally.

I find pretending your saving money and never adding it up is a winning formula.


----------



## jeffkrol

MeCasa said:


> I find pretending your saving money and never adding it up is a winning formula.


LOL.. What... I can't write my off my "R&D" in my taxes.. 

some people can do it in one shot.. others.. not so much...

more words of wisdom from the internet:



> I've said in some places before that just because a company puts a light out with certain spectrums doesn't mean it's the correct spectrums. I have no doubt that almost all of the major aquarium manufacturers have done research similar what that article presents. I'm very happy reefll shared their research as I think more companies doing this would further the industry as a whole.
> Take a look at the RapidLED new puck, tons of violets and lime. 5NW, 6RB, 5B, 12Lime (yes 12), 5 Violet, 4 Deep Red.
> New Maxspect Mazzarra-P, 4 CW, 2WW, 4 RB, 4B, 1 400-410, 1 410-420.
> New Ecotech Radion XR15w, 4CW, 4RB, 4 B, 2 Green, 1 DR, 1 Yellow, 2 Indigo, 2 Violet.
> The list goes on. My point being, all of these companies do extensive research into spectrums, hang their fixtures over tanks, gather results...etc.
> Heck, take a look at the OP's tank. I have no doubt he already has sufficient spectrum coverage to grow corals. One experienced reefer may walk into his house and flat out love the coloration. He feels he's missing something and is looking to add. The fact that he wants to add both Red and Green tells me that he knows what he's looking for as they are both colors that are going to accomplish the same things brightness and intensity wise.
> So who's right? IMO nobody and everybody at the same time. These should be the guidelines:
> Provide the full spectrum for growth for everything you plan to put in your tank (easier said then done, but we have a lot of data).
> Don't inhibit growth of the things we add based on lighting.
> 
> Add colors/white until you're visually happy


----------



## bhazard451

THAT'S the key. No one way is the "correct" way. If it looks good to you and doesn't kill your inhabitants, it works.


----------



## gus6464

Also show me a commercial LED planted tank fixture that can do 200PAR with the light 3ft from the substrate that doesn't require me to buy multiples of it. I would have to spend close to $600 on BML fixtures to get what my light does and even with fried LEDs and drivers I still haven't spent half of that. Ohh and that $600 doesn't come with a sunrise/sunset controller.


----------



## JeffE

gus6464 said:


> Also show me a commercial LED planted tank fixture that can do 200PAR with the light 3ft from the substrate that doesn't require me to buy multiples of it. I would have to spend close to $600 on BML fixtures to get what my light does and even with fried LEDs and drivers I still haven't spent half of that. Ohh and that $600 doesn't come with a sunrise/sunset controller.



Evergrow/Reefbreeders value fixture and change out some LEDs 150$ + 30 or so on chips


----------



## gus6464

O2surplus said:


> Du-oh! How'd you manage to do that? I can see smoking an LDD, that's easy, but 2 leds too? Were they a couple of your new violets?


The LEDs with optics were only meant to be used with adhesive but I didn't want to have them stuck there permanently so I tried to modify the optic to use screws but tolerances were super tight. Also used a really thin wire and somehow solder must have jumped to - side so when I plugged it in the lights went "POP" and next thing I know the LDD has a huge hole in it with smoke coming out.

I thought the LEDs would be ok but when I fired it up only 1 core lights up so I must have fried one of the other cores and since it's 4 little cores wired in series the second one in the chain must have blown. Really stupid of me considering rapidled sells this:

http://www.rapidled.com/berquist-thermal-pad-individual/


----------



## gus6464

O2surplus said:


> In my opinion- most DIY Led builders aren't concerned with saving money. For most it's about control and the innate satisfaction that comes from building exactly what _you _want vs. just buying what some product supplier is willing to offer.


This^. I have so many random LEDs lying around the house. I still have some brand new BXRA-56C1100 in their plastic case that will probably never be used. One of those can light a nano tank real good.


----------



## gus6464

Ohh I was wrong about actual UV LEDs. SemiLED has a new quad array that goes down to 380nm and funny enough one of it's target markets is "aquarium". In it's highest bin this thing puts out a ridiculous amount of violet and UV.

http://www.semileds.com/system/files/N9SL-U-A.pdf


----------



## MeCasa

bhazard451 said:


> THAT'S the key. No one way is the "correct" way. If it looks good to you and doesn't kill your inhabitants, it works.


Bingo!! Give the man a Kewpie Doll :icon_wink


----------



## acitydweller

LOL @ MeCasa


----------



## O2surplus

gus6464 said:


> This^. I have so many random LEDs lying around the house. I still have some brand new BXRA-56C1100 in their plastic case that will probably never be used. One of those can light a nano tank real good.



LOL- You aint seen nothing! Try building your own drivers and controllers for a few years and then talk to me about how much stuff you have laying around. I've made so many Mouser & Digikey purchases that they send me Christmas Cards! I've even been investigated by the Feds, because I, evidently,private purchase way too many components from China to be considered a mere "hobbyist". The G-men were finally convinced that I was- when they saw that I still had most of the components stashed in my garage, and I explained to them that my OCD gets the best of me when suppliers offer steep discounts for buying stuff in thousand quantities. 

That's just me! I feel "naked" if I'm not always fully "stocked up" for further R&D.:biggrin:


----------



## jeffkrol

O2surplus said:


> L The G-men were finally convinced that I was- when they saw that I still had most of the components stashed in my garage,


Photons of mass destruction??? ....


----------



## O2surplus

jeffkrol said:


> Photons of mass destruction??? ....



LOL- Yes- I build "ILD's" (Improvised Lighting Devices) not "IED's". My stuff only goes "BOOOOM"- if I've done something wrong.:eek5:


----------



## gus6464

Haha now I wonder what your garage looks like with a sea of boxes with IC's.


----------



## Turningdoc

http://www.aquaillumination.com/lighting/hydra/


----------



## gus6464

Turningdoc said:


> http://www.aquaillumination.com/lighting/hydra/


Spectrum sucks for planted tanks. 

Sent from my XT1060 using Tapatalk


----------



## mba

JeffE said:


> Evergrow/Reefbreeders value fixture and change out some LEDs 150$ + 30 or so on chips


+1 on reefbreeders!


----------



## Turningdoc

If you want to tweak spectrum, why not add

http://www.kessil.com/horticulture/H350.ph
or

http://www.kessil.com/horticulture/H150.php

In whatever narrow ranges you want to supplement?


----------



## MeCasa

Those are good looking lights but the price is Outrageous!!!


----------



## gus6464

MeCasa said:


> Those are good looking lights but the price is Outrageous!!!


For Hydras? They are good lights and put out a ton of PAR. The new hotness in DIY right now though is this:

http://store.ecotechmarine.com/store/upgrades

Radion Gen 3 upgrade pucks. You get 2x for $150 and owning a Radion prior is not required. All you need is a $10 wiring harness, TIR lenses, 6 LDD drivers, controller of choice, 36v power supply and heatsink of choice and you got yourself a DIY Radeon at half price or so. You could even go with fancy CNC Reef heatsinks and still come out way ahead.


----------



## MeCasa

No, those Kessil's are expensive. I've noticed a ton of factory clusters coming on the market.

There's so many options out there it's tough to complete a design before redesigning for something else.


----------



## Turningdoc

gus6464 said:


> For Hydras? They are good lights and put out a ton of PAR. The new hotness in DIY right now though is this:
> 
> http://store.ecotechmarine.com/store/upgrades
> 
> Radion Gen 3 upgrade pucks. You get 2x for $150 and owning a Radion prior is not required. All you need is a $10 wiring harness, TIR lenses, 6 LDD drivers, controller of choice, 36v power supply and heatsink of choice and you got yourself a DIY Radeon at half price or so. You could even go with fancy CNC Reef heatsinks and still come out way ahead.



These have nearly same spectrum as Hydra. Other than visual preference, Does anyone have any real experience they get better growth or quality in tank as a result of pushing more red/violet into tank?


----------



## gus6464

Turningdoc said:


> These have nearly same spectrum as Hydra. Other than visual preference, Does anyone have any real experience they get better growth or quality in tank as a result of pushing more red/violet into tank?


I was answering Meca on what he said and I thought he was talking about the Hydra. None of these lights has a nice color spectrum for planted tanks.

As far as red/violet growing plants there are plenty of tanks here with T5HO that show what red/purple bulbs can do for a tank.

My replacement violets come in tomorrow so I will let you know in 3 mos.


----------



## bhazard451

Turningdoc said:


> These have nearly same spectrum as Hydra. Other than visual preference, Does anyone have any real experience they get better growth or quality in tank as a result of pushing more red/violet into tank?


Yes, but for coral.

If you aren't careful, too much red and too many nutrients can turn your tank into an algae farm, planted or reef.

A Radion is overkill for a planted tank.


----------



## gus6464

So I got the replacement violets in and this is what they look like.

Full power 700ma









Looks a lot brighter with the camera too. PAR wise I highly doubt the meter is anywhere near accurate since the Apogee meter is ~50% off at this spectrum based on this graph.










My Hoppy DIY meter reads ~22 PAR at the substrate at full power so in reality the violets alone are pushing ~45 PAR. The purple completely disappears when other 2 LEDs are turned on.

As far as color rendition the tank looks a lot more T5HO like with the violets. Really hard to tell right now because the carpet is growing in. I have a huge order of Buce's coming in next week so I should have better pictures of color then.


----------

