My badass lights are too badass

[Pdxile]

I've been playing with the settings on my 300 watt razors. Previously I have had them at the factory preset, but I'm begining to think it was too bright so I cranked it back by 20%. Razor users, at what percentage do you run your lights?

[Pdxile]

I forgot to mention my tank is primarily LPS.

[Aqualund]

You need to measure the par and adjust until you have about 150-200 par where your corals are placed.

[Pdxile]

I don't have a par meter, I imagine 90% or more of us don't. Looking for anectodal answers.

[pufferpoison]

I would say closer to 98%

[DocHogan]

The highest my settings get are 65% w and 75% b then they start ramping down. I only have lps. The lights are 8 inches above the tank and I use a glass top.

[Pdxile]

Thanks doc!

[Aqualund]

This is a science based hobby...Anecdotes won't get you very far. Maybe you have a local reef club/store that has one which you can borrow?

[Johnjohn713]

LEDs= Epic fail

[Pdxile]

And why do you say that, John John? Just stating it isn't helpful.

[Johnjohn713]

Originally Posted by Pdxile

And why do you say that, John John? Just stating it isn't helpful.

Why don't you try it for awhile then you'll see what I meant.

[scott3569]

Originally Posted by Johnjohn713

Why don't you try it for awhile then you'll see what I meant.

why not give your opinion is stead of really not saying anything at all..you certainly did not back up you first statement. that led= epic fail..So, are you really just shooting off at the mouth(keyboard) or do you have a valid opinion that you can share??

[meshwheel]

Start them at 20% then ramp up every week or two. For LPS, you dont need more then 30%. Leds are very direct and bright! Thats a powerful fixture you have!

[meshwheel]

I am having spectacular results with reefbreeders leds. My corals(SPS) are growing like crazy and I have coralline everywhere in my tank. And I use 88 watts max per day for 4 hours only. these other 8 hours is sun up and sun down. You have to dial in leds.
They are amazing! I have seen beautiful tanks with Razors as well!

[cody6766]

This is a science based hobby...Anecdotes won't get you very far. Maybe you have a local reef club/store that has one which you can borrow?

Yes it is, and yes they will. Otherwise, when someone says "I ran xxx over xxx tank and xxx coral grew well" it would just be worthless noise/text. This whole hobby is based off of anecdotes with a little support from real scientific research. Many people keep these sensitive little critters in their glass boxes having never even seen a scientific journal. What is a message forum? It's a collection of anecodtal evidence sometimes supported/backed/inspired by real scientific research. I'm glad I don't have to log on to Springer Link to find out what plumbing layout I should use for my new 120g.

As for the original question, I wish I could provide you with real world experience with the light, but I don't have any. I've found that starting low is the best way to go when trying out new lighting though. Start at the low end of the recommendations you get here and slowly crank your light up, probably a week at a time, and see how they respond. When you go too far, crank it back a bit and you've probably found your sweet spot.

[Aqualund]

Originally Posted by cody6766

Yes it is, and yes they will. Otherwise, when someone says "I ran xxx over xxx tank and xxx coral grew well" it would just be worthless noise/text. This whole hobby is based off of anecdotes with a little support from real scientific research. Many people keep these sensitive little critters in their glass boxes having never even seen a scientific journal. What is a message forum? It's a collection of anecodtal evidence sometimes supported/backed/inspired by real scientific research. I'm glad I don't have to log on to Springer Link to find out what plumbing layout I should use for my new 120g.

As for the original question, I wish I could provide you with real world experience with the light, but I don't have any. I've found that starting low is the best way to go when trying out new lighting though. Start at the low end of the recommendations you get here and slowly crank your light up, probably a week at a time, and see how they respond. When you go too far, crank it back a bit and you've probably found your sweet spot.

For some things it's fine. For lights, over corals that can reach upwards of $5,000 for the whole collection...and could die in days with the wrong configuration...I don't know why anyone would rely on anecdotal evidence when there is the option for actual data.

[leveldrummer]

Originally Posted by Aqualund

For some things it's fine. For lights, over corals that can reach upwards of $5,000 for the whole collection...and could die in days with the wrong configuration...I don't know why anyone would rely on anecdotal evidence when there is the option for actual data.

I have ran several reef tanks with anecdotal directions for setting up lighting, someone would say "this light will work find for a 24" deep tank, or more people would say not to use that skimmer, its junk, use this skimmer. its about a group of people sharing ideas and getting a decent understanding of what they are trying to acheive, there are hundreds of ways to keep a successful reef, you have to experiment and find what works best for you and your corals, there are tanks that are great looking that are outside of your specified par range.

[mgraf]

What's more scientific than thousands of tests being preformed daily by thousands of "scientists" to come up with usefull ideas on what may be the best procedures to follow. I think that is pretty much the way the FDA decides what medications are safe for us but, most likely on a much smaller scale. Experience is a great learning tool, not only with lights that can wipe out a coral reef but, parameters, nutrient export/import, species compatibility, filtration, and maybe hundreds of other factors of our hobby.
OP, it seems that lately I read a lot about high watts and lighting. I think there is a thought process that says more is better. That may not be the case. Spectrum plays a very big roll. Is it better to have a thousand watts at 10 percent? Or 100 watts at 100 percent. Not sure of the answer myself but, I do ponder it. Might be one of the factors that cause controversy with LEDs. New types of lighting may not hold to the same truths as other types.

[power boat jim]

Originally Posted by meshwheel

Start them at 20% then ramp up every week or two. For LPS, you dont need more then 30%. Leds are very direct and bright! Thats a powerful fixture you have!

After using LEDs for about three years now, I would say this is about right. All my LPS are in the corners of the tank or on the bottom.

[Aqualund]

Originally Posted by mgraf

What's more scientific than thousands of tests being preformed daily by thousands of "scientists" to come up with usefull ideas on what may be the best procedures to follow. I think that is pretty much the way the FDA decides what medications are safe for us but, most likely on a much smaller scale. Experience is a great learning tool, not only with lights that can wipe out a coral reef but, parameters, nutrient export/import, species compatibility, filtration, and maybe hundreds of other factors of our hobby.
OP, it seems that lately I read a lot about high watts and lighting. I think there is a thought process that says more is better. That may not be the case. Spectrum plays a very big roll. Is it better to have a thousand watts at 10 percent? Or 100 watts at 100 percent. Not sure of the answer myself but, I do ponder it. Might be one of the factors that cause controversy with LEDs. New types of lighting may not hold to the same truths as other types.

Unless you know and employ the scientific method and your results are repeatable upon peer review by other scientists, you are not a scientist, but a hobbyist, and therefore your "information" is anecdotal.

All I said, the point of my response, is that you will achieve the best results by using some measurement to determine the problem. If you do not do this, you will still be unsure and could potentially lead to more problems. This is not an insane thing to do... I dont know why you all take such deep regard to this.

[mussel and hate]

Definitely go slowly with ramping up the intensity. Too little light is more acceptable than too much, at least for the short term.

Originally Posted by Aqualund

Unless you know and employ the scientific method and your results are repeatable upon peer review by other scientists, you are not a scientist, but a hobbyist, and therefore your "information" is anecdotal.

All I said, the point of my response, is that you will achieve the best results by using some measurement to determine the problem. If you do not do this, you will still be unsure and could potentially lead to more problems. This is not an insane thing to do... I dont know why you all take such deep regard to this.

Your standards are unrealistic. We don't all have access to quantum flux meters let alone PAM fluorometers. How do you propose to measure appropriate light intensity levels without such equipment except for trial and error?

In addition peer review isn't a requirement for science. You could be alone on a desert island and conduct science as long as proper methodology is observed. Hobbyist and scientist isn't mutually exclusive either. Science is conducted by amateurs in every highschool daily.

In closing this forum is primarily for the exchange of anecdotal information. It is not a scientific journal.

[Aqualund]

Originally Posted by mussel and hate

Definitely go slowly with ramping up the intensity. Too little light is more acceptable than too much, at least for the short term.



Your standards are unrealistic. We don't all have access to quantum flux meters let alone PAM fluorometers. How do you propose to measure appropriate light intensity levels without such equipment except for trial and error?

In addition peer review isn't a requirement for science. You could be alone on a desert island and conduct science as long as proper methodology is observed. Hobbyist and scientist isn't mutually exclusive either. Science is conducted by amateurs in every highschool daily.

In closing this forum is primarily for the exchange of anecdotal information. It is not a scientific journal.

I never said it was, but new data is not accepted as fact until it is peer reviewed. You can do all you want on that island, but it is not proven until it is repeatable.

My standards I guess must be unrealistic...but the reef club I belong to pooled our resources to have a par meter available for use between all members. Maybe I'm spoiled i dunno...but it's seems like a very realistic goal to attain.

In closing I only suggested that OP will never truly "know" what his light levels are until he get them measured...until then, it's just anecdotal. if anecdotal his fine with him, then so be it.

[alton]

A PAR meter will pay for itself whether you have MH, T5, or LED. In my case I can change MH lamps for $240 every year or check with a PAR Meter $400 or Foot candle Meter $100 and run them up to 24 months or as little as 12 months. In ten years I could of spent $2400 on lamps, instead I spent around $1,680. Saving myself $720. How many run there leds at 80% or T5's or MH and have no clue what there corals require? I run the PAR meter loan club here in San Antonio. Just about every person who has one of the newer LED lights on the market today told me they had to turn there leds down because they had to much PAR! One told me he was throwing his DYI unit out because he had too many hot spots. I never could understand the start out at 20% and raise from there? Does that mean when you get to 80% you can never add another coral for fear of burning it?
Aqualund you have it dead on.

[Percher]

Originally Posted by Aqualund

I never said it was, but new data is not accepted as fact until it is peer reviewed.

In closing I only suggested that OP will never truly "know" what his light levels are until he get them measured...until then, it's just anecdotal. if anecdotal his fine with him, then so be it.

...and how far off the deep end are you willing to go to pretend that having a PAR meter provides nothing more than anecdotal evidence? Unless you are breaking things down to a cellular level and running control groups then your own suggestion is nothing more than anecdotal. Secondly, the numbers you gave is arbitrary at best since people have reported keeping LPS corals with decent growth and coloration with PAR readings down into the 70's.

[alton]

Originally Posted by Percher

...and how far off the deep end are you willing to go to pretend that having a PAR meter provides nothing more than anecdotal evidence? Unless you are breaking things down to a cellular level and running control groups then your own suggestion is nothing more than anecdotal. Secondly, the numbers you gave is arbitrary at best since people have reported keeping LPS corals with decent growth and coloration with PAR readings down into the 70's.

You just proved Aqualund correct, by someone using a meter and knowing what there light levels where? They would of not known that if they had not used a meter correct?