Seasonal Changes in light.

[RJSquirrel]

got this from the OS and thought I would pass it on as it has a lot of good info for all of us to enjoy

http://staugorchidsociety.org/PDF/Se...ySueBottom.pdf

I have lots of good light I just didnt have enough warm over the winter when there was a serious lack of light.
Lost a few I did. All the buds I had blasted on everything. I can grow em. I need to be able to finish the plants season off with some flowers. Im half way there 4 years later

[MattWoelfsen]

Excellent article! Thank you RJSquirrel for posting a link.

[My Green Pets]

Great article! Love this stuff.

I like to take photos of the sunrise/sunset at the equinoxes and solstices. Really amazing when you see them side by side.

[RJSquirrel]

I would say that with so many people growing under lights these days indoors they may not take notice of the thin line the plants always cross. Get some Sun

The deflator index for 1994 is 73.865 and for 2013 it is 106.59 (US Dollar Implicit Price Deflators for Gross Domestic Product 1929-2013, 2009=100, BEA). It follows that, with numbers rounded to two decimals:

12,000.00 US Dollars of 1994 are worth 17,316.46 US Dollars of 2013.

[Ray]

Originally Posted by RJSquirrel

I would say that with so many people growing under lights these days indoors (...snip)

Shifting gears a bit, based upon that comment...

What indoor growers don't seem to realize is that the "recommended light levels" we see in books and culture sheets is not the level the plants should see continuously, but it is the target peak level to which they would be exposed if grown in natural sunlight (as in a greenhouse). It starts at zero, goes to that peak at noon, then recedes to zero again in the course of a day, with the area under that curve being the summation of energy received. So under lights, you'd take that sum, divide it by the hours of "on" time, and that would tell you the intensity to use continuously - which is somewhere between 60% & 70% of that peak value.

[Subrosa]

Although the changing angle of the sun is mentioned in the article, I think most people are more concerned with how it relates to intensity. The angle is something to consider by itself as well. I almost lost am Aerangis citrate last year, because while the spot it was hanging in never got any direct sun most of the summer, at one point the angle got low enough that it did start receiving direct sunlight. Something to consider.

[lexusnexus]

Enjoyed the article. Thanks for posting.

[tucker85]

Excellent article. Thanks for posting that. I am often impressed with high quality of the articles published in the newsletter of the St. Augustine Orchid Society. they have some very knowledgeable members.

[RJSquirrel]

good stuff too Ray ...and now maybe some indoors types might adjust the lights too

Small differences mean a lot when outdoors exposed. My east exposure was hindered by the fence so I didnt get a lot of early eastern sun at all since june last year. Over the winter the fence blocked the southern exposure almost completely bec the sun was low in the sky and traveling along the top of the fence. I couldnt put the structure in the middle of the yard and hence why its close to the fence. I could have foreseen this if I had known. maybe...

little things. You only make a mistake when you didnt learn the 1st times