General questions about plasma light

[Whazzup 529]

We used to have a separate discussion about plasma light, on this forum but that has gotten way out of hand by non-discussions. Lots of information in it though. Sannie is doing a test-run at the moment under these plasma light, the Luxim LIFI-STA-40-02, also called PLS, that were kindly lend to use by Gavita ("we" is the Wietforum Test Lab staff, Wietforum is opengrows Dutch big sister).

 

To prevent sannies topic from being cluttered by technical details I opened this topic, so please keep the tech stuff etc. concentrated here.

 

I suggest you read those two topics first before asking a question.

 

Also, take into account that:

• we are not Gavita
  
• we are not the resellers of this product
  
• it is not available yet
  
• we are testing it only, unbiased, to determine the quality of the light on a cannabis crop.
  

So no manufacturers or off-topic discussions please, just about the facts as we know them. You can't have a discussion if you haven't got the same set of data, so if you want to discuss an issue please substantiate that with reliable data.

 

Thanks!

[abc123 0]

Going by Sannies preliminary reports with his grow, it appears as though the plasma falls well short of his 600w HPS for the same flowering time so far. Is there any word on a more powerful plasma in the pipe line?

 

I understand that the current plasma is rated at 250w (180w bulb), so its a rather unfair comparison. I remember reading that there was a modification being made to Sannies existing plasma to increase power and lumens, was that conducted and if so, what was the outcome? (Increase of lumens and power consumption)

 

Further, what was the modification to enable the increase?

 

Eagerly awaiting a reply from anyone who knows the answers!

[Whazzup 529]

yes, you can not compare 180 watt to 600 watt in any way, even on this surface. The difference between the previous grow and this grow was:

 

1. the addition of a reflector

2. the addition of R and FR leds to add more red to the spectrum

 

What we see it that the red leds do not add to the result (on contrary!), so we have switched them off. If you compare the output of the light in micromoles then it's about 35% of a HPS, with the new light we are getting soon this will be increased to about 50%. Now we know it's not just in the micromoles PAR you need to look at, but we expect that bigger lights (or a combination of lights) will give a better result. For the moment we are trying to get the best results with the current light, to find out if the light quality is correct.

 

In the first grow using a jackberry strain (low yield, normally 0,6 gr/watt) we already got to about 0,5 gr/watt (watt light output! NOT power use! ^*)). We expected that adding the reflector and red leds would increade the yield, but the red leds did the oposite. The seed grows under plasma went well, the first KO Kush went well (a bit smaller seeds, but they were all beautiful and there was very little unusable seed. The current seeds grow seems to go very well too. The quality of the Jackberry was great, with a very high dry matter content / high cannabinoid content.

 

So, we are back to just the plasma at the moment, trying to increase the amount of light on the crop. Furthermore we are going to do a few other side by side experiments with other lights, measuring the differences between the lights.

 

As said before, we are testing the plasma light, we are not the bringers of the holy grail (yet ). And though it is an exciting new development it needs to be tuned, and maybe we even need a bigger light to make it really work on this surface.

 

Based on the first results with seeds and buds we are confident that you can grow pot under plasma. It's just a matter of finding the right conditions / intensity etc.

 

^*) The reason why we use the 180 watt output as a calculating factor is simple: Normally we also use the output of the lamp to calculate gr/watt. The current plasma driver however uses more overhead power than a HPS ballast. With higher output plasma lights this will decrease, to become more comparable to traditional HPS lighting. Plasma will always have more overhead for the driver than the current HID lights.

[abc123 0]

yes, you can not compare 180 watt to 600 watt in any way, even on this surface. The difference between the previous grow and this grow was:

 

1. the addition of a reflector

2. the addition of R and FR leds to add more red to the spectrum

 

What we see it that the red leds do not add to the result (on contrary!), so we have switched them off. If you compare the output of the light in micromoles then it's about 35% of a HPS, with the new light we are getting soon this will be increased to about 50%. Now we know it's not just in the micromoles PAR you need to look at, but we expect that bigger lights (or a combination of lights) will give a better result. For the moment we are trying to get the best results with the current light, to find out if the light quality is correct.

 

In the first grow using a jackberry strain (low yield, normally 0,6 gr/watt) we already got to about 0,5 gr/watt (watt light output! NOT power use! ^*)). We expected that adding the reflector and red leds would increade the yield, but the red leds did the oposite. The seed grows under plasma went well, the first KO Kush went well (a bit smaller seeds, but they were all beautiful and there was very little unusable seed. The current seeds grow seems to go very well too. The quality of the Jackberry was great, with a very high dry matter content / high cannabinoid content.

 

So, we are back to just the plasma at the moment, trying to increase the amount of light on the crop. Furthermore we are going to do a few other side by side experiments with other lights, measuring the differences between the lights.

 

As said before, we are testing the plasma light, we are not the bringers of the holy grail (yet ). And though it is an exciting new development it needs to be tuned, and maybe we even need a bigger light to make it really work on this surface.

 

Based on the first results with seeds and buds we are confident that you can grow pot under plasma. It's just a matter of finding the right conditions / intensity etc.

 

^*) The reason why we use the 180 watt output as a calculating factor is simple: Normally we also use the output of the lamp to calculate gr/watt. The current plasma driver however uses more overhead power than a HPS ballast. With higher output plasma lights this will decrease, to become more comparable to traditional HPS lighting. Plasma will always have more overhead for the driver than the current HID lights.

 

Your right, a fair comparison (not exactly fair but better matched) would be against a 250w metal halide or HPS.

 

You say your getting a new plasma light that gives off a 50% micromoles of HPS. WHats different to give this increase? Wattage? If so, what wattage is the new light?

 

I understand your a tester and not a producer however from my internet searches, the most knowlegable people in relation to plasma lighting are here, and the only grow I have seen using this new technology, as such, my questions are being posted here!

 

Looking forward to the future comparisons.

[DoggystyleD73 0]

Your right, a fair comparison (not exactly fair but better matched) would be against a 250w metal halide or HPS.

 

You say your getting a new plasma light that gives off a 50% micromoles of HPS. WHats different to give this increase? Wattage? If so, what wattage is the new light?

 

I understand your a tester and not a producer however from my internet searches, the most knowlegable people in relation to plasma lighting are here, and the only grow I have seen using this new technology, as such, my questions are being posted here!

 

Looking forward to the future comparisons.

 

Supposedly the wattage is not supposed to be different in the new bulb. But thats a very valid question and I'd also like to know how its done. However I'm guessing we might not get an answer as to how they will increase the micromoles with out increasing the wattage as it may be something Gavita would not want others to know, future competitors etc.

[abc123 0]

Supposedly the wattage is not supposed to be different in the new bulb. But thats a very valid question and I'd also like to know how its done. However I'm guessing we might not get an answer as to how they will increase the micromoles with out increasing the wattage as it may be something Gavita would not want others to know, future competitors etc.

Your right! Was just curious if it had something to do with a new reflector.

 

Realistically, I just want to know when we will have a viable plasma light that can replace a 600w HPS...

[keesthemad 8]

You can already get the really big plasma's, those rae 800W and up, but they are supposed to be dimmable. These do have moving parts as the lamp is spinning and they make a lot of sound, but they are plasma's that give 16% more on nearly everything with cucumber...

 

Kees.

[keesthemad 8]

A lot of led suppliers turn to IR or at least extra heat for better results at the moment, you also see the white leds for a more broad spectrum everywhere.

 

So you end up with a lamp that is very expensive in developement, expensive in production due to the different components. Also, I thought (and know for a fact, scientifically proven (1)) that there is nothing wrong with the spectrum of the sulfur plasma bulb as is. I also know for a fact (2) that it's not hard to add extra colors to the bulb, adding chlorides/bromides of different metals will enhance color the color spectrum. (If you can make this bulb, you can make the other bulb too, just trail and error works fine...)

 

When comparing lux between HPS and Plasma, so looking at the AMMOUNT of light instead of the QUALITY of the light we find the following:

 

The plasma gives off less lumen (thus lux) as the HPS, 180Watt's is best comparable with 150W HPS probably. The DR80 tents are 0.64 square meter. Normally sannies 600's were on a sqare meter I believe (100x100cm).

 

So using 180W in this tent results in "242W" per square meter (converted to ammount of hps light), whilst sannie would use 600W per square meter normally when using HPS. 2.48 times more light.

 

So I think It has something to do with the amount of light, that's why I have been interested in the lux levels... And I still am very interested in how much lux these lights give...

 

Kees.

 

[1]http://www.sulfur-plasma.ch/pics/adobe_article_cucumbers.pdf

[2]http://www.sulfur-plasma.ch/pics/plasma_SPD_red.jpg

[Whazzup 529]

The uniformity of

photosynthetic photon flux (PPF) and vegetative growth of Cucumis sativus L.

('Poinsett' cucumber) were examined using growth chambers equipped with

either six 400 W metal halide (MH) lamps or with a single 1000 W microwave

-powered sulfur (MPS) (LIGHTDRIVETM 1000) lamp mounted on a polished

stainless steel reflector with secondary screening for microwave protection.

We have already seen that in veg it works. That doesn't say anything about the quality of the spectrum for blooming. You are jumping to conclusions.

 

PPF levels in each growth chamber were set initially at 500pmol m-2 s-I.

They measured PAR light. So do we. But we measure the rest too.

 

You know, I think you should call luxim and tell those chaps to give it a go with the bromides and whatnot. You can probably even tell them how to do it as you know for a fact it is not easy to do that. . No, seriously, before you add something you want to know what to add and what for don't you?

 

And as mentioned already in the first topic: We are looking at the quality of the light and the way to use its potential, or optimise it. We are not looking at efficacy. We are all for a higher powered light, but that is not the issue here and now.

[keesthemad 8]

What do you mean, "In veg it works", yes the plants grow, but I have not seen any comparative grow. Just arbitrary opinion.

 

Furthermore, am I talking about blooming anything ? I was talking about the spectrum being ok for plant growth.

 

They measured PAR light. So do we. But we measure the rest too.

Okay, so I'm really interested in the LUX values...

 

You know, I think you should call luxim and tell those chaps to give it a go with the bromides and whatnot. You can probably even tell them how to do it as you know for a fact it is not easy to do that. wink.gif. No, seriously, before you add something you want to know what to add and what for don't you?

Yes like it said, you add calcium bromide and get an extra spike in the red's. If you are able to make a normal bulb, then you can make the same bulb with a minute extra quantity of calcium bromide...

 

Here's the information... And no it does not say how much, but you don't need to be a great scientist to conduct an experiment, a great scientist is the one that thinks of the experiment...

http://www.sulfur-plasma.ch/Technical.html

 

Why are you not looking for efficiency ? That's what we are mainly interested in right ?

 

Sure, daylight is interesting... But just for the sake of doing it ?

 

And as mentioned already in the first topic: We are looking at the quality of the light and the way to use its potential, or optimise it.

Ok, I well that was what I was doing... You don't want to be helped do ya ?

 

Anyways, have a nice day.

 

Kees.

 

you get what you give

[Whazzup 529]

Also, I thought (and know for a fact, scientifically proven (1)) that there is nothing wrong with the spectrum of the sulfur plasma bulb as is. I also know for a fact (2) that it's not hard to add extra colors to the bulb

There is nothing wrong with a 6500K T5, but I would not use it for blooming Kees. So if you give me a scientific proof of a 6500K T5 in which it says that they are great for veg doesn't that prove any point about the quality of the light. Yes, for vegetative growth. Read before you quote.

 

There is a very big difference between the cells of the Sulphur Plasma and the cells of the luxim. But you seem to be missing the point: If you don't know what you are missing (in light spectrum) you don't know what to add. On the other hand (according to you) why would we change anything about the light? It's scientifically proven that there is nothing wrong with it is there? Also remember that we are talking about Metal Halide plasma, not sulphur plasma. You are comparing apples with pears (well, maybe oranges and lemons). And though they are both plasma lights there are the little differences...

 

As for the lux values: you have the luminous flux specified and the surface, what more do you want?

 

You were talking about output per watt. That is efficacy, not efficiency. We look at quality of the light first, so efficiency of the light if you want to put it that way.

 

And indeed I don't want to be helped in that way by this great scientist, it takes me a lot of time to answer these eruptions of help and they don't help a lot.

[abc123 0]

Anyone prevy to information on the new Luxim STA 50 series high power Plasma?

[abc123 0]

Wazzap,

With this comparison of Plasma to HPS and the debate above (Colours etc), if luxim intended to market a specific bulb to take on HPS for grows, am I correct in saying that they should first attempt to match colour spectrum of HPS, then work on intensity then finally attempt to improve on spectrum? HPS appears to do very well (Best in the buisness) with a very shitty colour spectrum (extremely narrow band), however, it appears as though that spectrum is all that is necessary as they are the best in the buisness and no other lighting can match at this point in time. So it must be their intensity that promotes sucess?

 

Now back to your new test!!!

 

Any news on the upcoming Plasma test?

 

How many luxim emitters are you looking at using?

 

What will be changed from last test?

 

With the last test inclusive of Lumatek's reflector, what was the lumens difference directed onto the grow? Did you perform any light test to support its effectiveness?

 

On their site, they state the new 41-02 has a colour temp of 6,300k.

 

Is that a typo and supose to be a 5,300 like the 40-02 or has it changed?

 

Will you run a STA 50-02 when it becomes available?

 

Can you do a Plasma test with 3 emitters to compare to Sannies 600w grow?

We need a comparison to existing HPS grow. (Eg 1 plasma - 250w hps / 2 plasma - 400w hps / 3 plasma - 600w hps)

 

Would the 41-01 be more benificial for vegatative growth (STA 41-01 has more lumens (23,000 massive increase from STA 40 series) compared to STA 41-02 (16,000 slight increase from STA 40 series)

 

Give us a sneek peek into your thinking!!!

[abc123 0]

Wazzup where are you?!

[Todd Gaines 0]

Hello OpenGrow!

When I saw the Plasma topics I had to join.

I've been through the plasma topics many times with great anticipation of

a new lighting that lives up to its claims.

I've been considering getting my hands on an Eng. Kit to check'em out,

a few ???'s though.

What is difference between the 40-/41- models ?

Can anyone who's grown with one comment on this ?,if the vent/cooling system shut down

what would the temp peak out at?

Dinners on the table, I'll be back with more ???'s.

 

Thank You ,

T.G.

[Todd Gaines 0]

Welcome to Open Grow Todd Gaines?

Most of the answers to your questions you can find doing a search on Plasma,

there are some kewl plasma grows from seed.

The 41- series won't be available for another 60-90 days and sometime beyond

that for the agro version.

I'd IMAGINE if the power supply is not in the grow area it shouldn't get

much warmer that ambiant temps.

Feel free to post any other qustions you might want to answer yourself!!!

 

Regards,

Todd Gaines

 

Hello OpenGrow!

When I saw the Plasma topics I had to join.

I've been through the plasma topics many times with great anticipation of

a new lighting that lives up to its claims.

I've been considering getting my hands on an Eng. Kit to check'em out,

a few ???'s though.

What is difference between the 40-/41- models ?

Can anyone who's grown with one comment on this ?,if the vent/cooling system shut down

what would the temp peak out at?

Dinners on the table, I'll be back with more ???'s.

 

Thank You ,

T.G.

[The Joker 705]

Dear Todd Gaines,

 

Welcome to Opengrow.

 

Every one who contributes to this site is an unpaid volunteer. People share what they know out of passion for this hobby when it's convenient for them in their busy daily lives.

 

We all help when we can.

 

Please be understanding in that it's often difficult to find moments of free time in adult life and there are things that take priority over the fun we have with complete strangers on line. In than light , not all questions get answers in a timely fashion or at all.

 

Good luck in your quest for information.

[Whazzup 529]

sorry guys I lost this topic for a while

 

A few questions answered:

 

We have done 8 more comparison grows (sorry guys, no pictures this time), a few of the new combinations were: 2 plasmas in a one meter tent, plasma for veg and hps for blooming, plasma in combination with red leds and for reference 2 HPS 600 watt grows on the same surface. Though we are still learning some of the findings might change we way we look at growing.

 

One of the discussions we had with the light professors who helps analysing all the results is about blue light. The reason why we use HPS is because it is the most efficient way to create a lot of light light. It's much more efficient and easier to convert energy to red light than blue light. So a HPS lamp is more efficient than any other lamp at this moment, and it delivers most of its light in the PAR spectrum. Unfortunately it only performs well in the more red colours. For blue we have MH of course, but as we know a lot less photons come from HPS compared to a HPS. Blue light contains more energy but the plant does not really convert all that energy: it's the photon count that makes the difference. So you need more energy to produce enough blue photons for good grow. On the other hand plants react very well to blue light and grow great under blue light if exposed to the same amount of photons. Even when you have a bit less photons you can grow a great crop under MH, but you will use a lot more energy. Furthermore the amount of light has a lot of influence on the efficacy of the grow, hence the test with the two plasma lights in a 1m tent. If you use two new ones on 1x1 meter you have a lot more light than sannie had: Sannie had the old emitter on 80x80, in a situation with 2 new ones, that each generate about 30% more light, on 1x1 meter you have 66% more light on your surface. We are experimenting again with added red but so far it doesn't bring what you would expect, on contrary. So, we are actually looking at the 41-01 now too, and will also test with combinations of HPS and plasma. The 41-01 has even less red but more green and yellow. And of course you need to test with different strains as every plant react different to different light.

 

Generally these are the observations of the different grows:

 

600 watt Lumatek Pro, Lumatek reflector in 1x1m, 5 plants in large pots (reference)

Though 600 watt is a lot for 1 meter we did take the 600 watt as a reference to see how it would perform, plus the fact that two LEP lights use 540 watt, compared to 640 for the Lumatek Pro. The Pro did perform very well and resulted in very compact dense plants with very dense buds. Also the lateral shoots grew firm and dense. Overall very compact plants with a small internode distance. Typical HPS grow.

 

2 x Lumatek LEP 270

Compared to the 600 watt HPS this set-up uyes in total about 100 watt less electricity, but having a big overhead of 180 watt (against less than 40 watt for the HPS) effective we had only 360 watt of power going into the actual plasma light on 1 m2. Now fortunately when the LEP's become available in 300 or 400 watt models the absolute overhead will be not more, so efficacy will improve greatly. 2 small lamps will have much more overhead than one big one. But to be honest in the comparison: a total nominal power of 540 watt. As we did see too much uvc damage at this short distance to the plants we shielded the plasma lights, to eliminate almost every uv influence on the test (including uvb) so it's just regular light quality that is compared. There are a few big differences, also in climate!

 

- The LEP climate was much more humid and cooler. We had to recirculate some of the air in the tent for heating but that resulted in a very high humidity. So Plasma will need warmed air, whichever way you can get that. You can heat your incoming air most efficient by using your exhaust heat actually, improving the stealth of your grow (by cooling your exhaust) without complicated air conditioning but you will probably need to heat your grow room. There is always an advantage to a disadvantage: Only in very warm areas you would need additional cooling. You need very little ventilation for cooling so just think what this could do using CO2!

- The plants grow much more vigorously under LEP and the leafs seem to position themselves better to catch the light.

- The LEP node distance is bigger and the buds are therefore not connected to dens buds. The plans are 1,5-2 times as high as the ones grown under HPS, more open en branchy, with many lateral shoots reaching the canopy. Though not as dense as the HPS and with thinner stems the buds are numerous. Final weighing will determine the differences in yield. But there is much more air in plants grown under LEP. The foliage of the HPS grown plants is very dense and the leafs are very thick.

- If you take leafs from the plasma grow plant they wilt quickly, much quicker than from the HPS. We found out when doing leaf thickness measurements. That indicates more open leaf stomata.

 

2 x Lumatek LEP 270+ red LED

We tried this before, but now we increased the amount of plasma light. It is difficult to see a lot of differences but the red light seems to hold back the growth of the plant, in contrast what most of us believe in: blue light for short internodes, red light for long internodes. Right under the plasma lights the primary shoots are much higher. Again yield differences still need to be examined, including determination of dry matter percentage.

 

Lumatek LEP for veg, HPS for flowering

We vegged the plants under LEP and really gave them the full load. It resulted in what we determined as too much UVC damage. Nevertheless we are flowering these plants under HPS. Due to the improved branching during veg the plants are much higher than the ones grown just under HPS. They are not as high as the plasma grown plants and have a much more dense foliage. They are actually the most vital plants of the test at this moment. They seem to have built more resistance to stress, which coincides with the findings of Cleanlight, who use a specific wavelength UVC light as a treatment against and to prevent fungal infections such as mildew. The plants seem to harden.

 

Unfortunately the test were a bit compromised by a few days of very bad air due to painting activities nearby (which instantly showed as high damage on the plants) and a (resulting) massive infection of mildew. So it is not the prettiest of grows but interestingly enough this resulted in the discovery of the fact that the unshielded plasma pre-grown plant suffer the least infection and seem to have built up more resistance.

 

So, to answer a few more questions about the lamp: this is the first prototype:

 

We already had it on show at the Spannabis:

And Grow 2010 in Manchester:

 

There are a few changes to the design as we now have a shielded reflector. The special glass plate can be removed. Also there is a heat shield between the emitter and the housing as the emitter gets very warm. The new 41 series emitters are being used.

 

Gavita / Lumatek expect to have the first 50 engineering samples ready by the end of May. Due to the high demand they will be sold per reservation form in limited quantities. All fixtures are hand built in Holland and will cost 1200 euros incl. taxes excl. shipping. They are sold as engineering samples and we hope to get more feedback from our first few hundred pioneer users.

 

I promise I'll be back more here guys!

[Todd Gaines 0]

@The Joker, I appreciate the response.

I was just fun'ing around, I'm sorry if you

or anyone was put off by my dry sense of humor.

@Whazzup-Thank you for the update/info,

I love it.

I need to get on Gavita/Lumatek's rez. list.

I need to find a new flowering light by July 1st.

Regards,

T.G.

[Todd Gaines 0]

I spoke with stray light optical and there aqarium light using the 40-02 is available now, any advatage waiting for Gavita/Lumatek's unit ?

Reagards,

Todd Gaines

[BaK 0]

Whazzup,

 

What was the final results of the 2LEP's vs the 600W hps? How was the yeild, the smoke, the smells? I'm sure the 600W yeilded more, but did the 2 lep's come close? Do you have any pictures?

[Whazzup 529]

I spoke with stray light optical and there aqarium light using the 40-02 is available now, any advatage waiting for Gavita/Lumatek's unit ?

Reagards,

Todd Gaines

Hi Todd, the difference is the housing, the reflector and the glass. We use glass that blocks the UVC but lets through most of the UVB, check that for the other fixture. The reflector is designed to be as rectangular as possible, and made of miro aluminum. Gavita has integrated the power supply and the microwave in one housing, so you have just your mains wiring (connected with wieland connector). The Gavita hangs in two brackets.

 

This was shot today, it is the first production model, of course equipped with the new emitter and square puck.

 

So yes, finally they become available.

 

Whazzup,

 

What was the final results of the 2LEP's vs the 600W hps? How was the yeild, the smoke, the smells? I'm sure the 600W yeilded more, but did the 2 lep's come close? Do you have any pictures?

There was a difference, but unfortunately we could not compare the results due to a lot of mildew damage on that location. We have moved into a more sophisticated growing environment since .

 

The plant structure under plasma was (as expected from the earlier trials) totally different from the HPS. Under HPS this strain was very bushy and leafy, very compact and carried a lot of leafs, where under plasma the plants were much opener, less leafs so light could better penetrate the plant, branched more and seemed to intercept the light a lot more evenly. The plans were higher and had a more open structure. I noted that the plasma lit plants were a bit less affected by the mildew, but that can also be a result of the different structure and climate.

[Todd Gaines 0]

Are there any new grows started since the mildew attack that you can share some details about?

Has anyone started a grow with the 41-02?

Anything at all to share regarding Luxims Plasma lights?

Will Lumatek be at the show in Long Beach in Oct. with a demo of

there Plasma light?

I'm holding myself back but I need to get a new light to flower with

a.s.a.p., just trying to decide:)

 

Be Strong & Shout at the Devil,

Todd Gaines.

[Whazzup 529]

Hi Todd sorry I missed your post. Yes, we will be showing the plasma at the Grow 2010 in LA. And yes, of course we are still testing in many configurations. We test the plasma against HPS, MH, combinations of HPS and plasma, HPS & MH in different configurations but as you know, testing costs time, and a cycle is 12-14 weeks.

 

Next week the new GAVITA-Holland site is on-line and the plasma light will come on sale from several on-line stores, including sannies... The nice news is the price: we could keep it just under €1000 incl. taxes. That is including the 41-02 puck which we calculated brings 300 micromoles of full spectrum PAR light.

 

At this time in the development I would not recommend flowering under a plasma light.

[Oddly_Sober 2]

Again, this is why I love this group and it's contributors. Complete honesty about the nature of the technology while still stating it is moving forward in testing.

 

Thanks for that update Whazzup. Like many, I still am hopeful about many lighting technologies and was really hoping plasma would have shown more favorable results overall.

 

Looking forward to more feedback as it becomes more available in the market. I still feel it may be a good choice for certain setups and I want to see if my postulation on that is correct.

 

 

Thanks again,

O_S