Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

am I in the high light range?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: am I in the high light range?

    fishboyt,

     thanks for high jacking my post...... :evil:
    I ate my fish that died.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: am I in the high light range?

      French,

         I have owned all kinds of lights and all I grow is algae.
      I ate my fish that died.

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: am I in the high light range?

        with only 48w over a 12, I dont think you need to worry about about ferts too much.  Remember that the WPG rule doesnt really apply to small tanks.  For reference, I was running 130w CF over an 8 gallon and felt as if I needed "more" or "better" lighting.  Then again, I was trying to grow HC and hairgrass which require a lot more or intense lighting.  You could get away with 48w for low light plants.
        ADA mini-m planted
        ADA mini-m riparium
        ADA 30-C nano reef
        ADA 90-P community Tanganyikan
        ADA 120-p overflow Full reef in progress
        Eheim 90cm SA biotope
        110g Peacocks

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: am I in the high light range?

          Originally posted by myjohnson";p="
          fishboyt,

           thanks for high jacking my post...... :evil:
          Sorry  :(
          Fish are people too, they just have gills.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: am I in the high light range?

            Originally posted by French";p="
            I think Fishboyt's talking about the GE "Plant/Aquarium" T8's - it's about a 2,800k bulb.  They're great for growing algae - don't ask me how I know   .  

            Yes, that is the one I am talking about.
            Fish are people too, they just have gills.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: am I in the high light range?

              Not sure I follow you here, about the WPG rule not applying to small tanks.  I would think that lumens on target through water would be a function of some coefficient of light transmission per inch of depth, the actual measured depth and the initial lumens you start with above the surface.  I'm not following how a smaller volume of water,  i.e. a shallower water column, would change the physics.  If anything, I'd think that a shallower tank would require less light than the WPG rule of thumb.  

              Real life example: many years ago, when I was living in a nano 1 br apartment in NYC, I was growing SPS coral and clams in a 15 gallon with a single 75w halide lamp.  That's "only" 1 WPG more than myjohnson has now.  

              Here's a pretty good basic article about lighting by Carl Strohmeyer - I like his approach.  

              Of course, understand that I tend to be a minimalist and incredibly cheap.  I'm also new to planted tanks, and still make rookie mistakes, like buying the GE Plant/Aquarium bulb as I figure this out.  BTW, I've taken them out and they're in the garage as back-ups.  I might use them for the "land side" if I ever get around to setting up a vivarium/frog tank for my daughter.

              Has the thinking about lighting changed that much in the last decade?  Please discuss.

              - French


              Originally posted by screename";p="
              with only 48w over a 12, I dont think you need to worry about about ferts too much.  Remember that the WPG rule doesnt really apply to small tanks.  For reference, I was running 130w CF over an 8 gallon and felt as if I needed "more" or "better" lighting.  Then again, I was trying to grow HC and hairgrass which require a lot more or intense lighting.  You could get away with 48w for low light plants.
              80 Gallon Planted Tank
              80 Gallon Bala Shark Tank (Recently converted from Reef Tank)

              Comment

              Working...
              X