To cut small buds or not

[anarowe]

I've talk to different people about whether to cut low small buds or let them grow, so I wanted to get others input. So do you cut small buds to concentrate growth to top buds or do you harvest top buds and continue to let small, lower, popcorn buds mature?

[Kingdiamond]

I take off the lower branches for clones pre flower and  the buds that remain big or small all get harvested all at once.

[anarowe]

1 hour ago, Kingdiamond said:

I take off the lower branches for clones pre flower and  the buds that remain big or small all get harvested all at once.

I normally do the same but people keep telling me to cut them off so the energy can go to upper buds. The small buds are good for butter and capsules. Thank you for your input because it is good to understand the reasoning behind ones choice.

[Wild Bill]

I usually remove anything that is below the canopy and doesn't receive direct light. It generally turns out to be the lower third of the branches. This is dependent on the growth habits of the particular strain. I currently have a Skunk strain that needs very little pruning because it grows like a tumbleweed and most of the branches are in direct light.

[Kingdiamond]

Two of my patients  prefer the smaller buds dont ask why but  from top to bottom it all gives me what I need as far as a desired effect and more overall weight per plant  popcorn buds usually end up weighing an ounce.

[Wild Bill]

Small buds may not look as pretty but are just as effective as big ones.

[anarowe]

2 minutes ago, Wild Bill said:

Small buds may not look as pretty but are just as effective as big ones.

My thoughts exactly

[glued gorilla]

I go through at 3 weeks flower and cut all underdeveloped bud sites. Trimming a bunch of small bud takes a lot of time. I want everything to be dense quality flower.  If i was a concentrate maker, i wouldn't bother, i would just blast or press the smalls

[Kingdiamond]

4 hours ago, glued gorilla said:

I go through at 3 weeks flower and cut all underdeveloped bud sites. Trimming a bunch of small bud takes a lot of time. I want everything to be dense quality flower.  If i was a concentrate maker, i wouldn't bother, i would just blast or press the smalls

My lower buds all get hard and dense  I just make sure I thin the larger  fan leaves to allow more light to get to the lower buds below the upper canopy.

[anarowe]

Thank you everyone for providing great information to help weigh my decision. 

[anarowe]

I was thinking the small buds would be good for making butter or capsules

5 hours ago, glued gorilla said:

I go through at 3 weeks flower and cut all underdeveloped bud sites. Trimming a bunch of small bud takes a lot of time. I want everything to be dense quality flower.  If i was a concentrate maker, i wouldn't bother, i would just blast or press the smalls

 

[blackhorse]

5 hours ago, anarowe said:

I was thinking the small buds would be good for making butter or capsules

 

Small buds and finish clippings I use for butter.

[glued gorilla]

15 hours ago, anarowe said:

I was thinking the small buds would be good for making butter or capsules

 

They are, its all preference. I have done both, there is little to no difference in weight. I prefer all quality bud.

[glued gorilla]

17 hours ago, Kingdiamond said:

My lower buds all get hard and dense  I just make sure I thin the larger  fan leaves to allow more light to get to the lower buds below the upper canopy

I defol also, but on larger plants, i think its necessary to prune all the low growth if you don't want larf. To each their own though.

[Restorium2]

It's going to depend on your lighting.  If your lights don't penetrate than you need to trim. You need 500 - 750 PAR reaching the bud sights for blooming. 

[glued gorilla]

22 minutes ago, Restorium2 said:

It's going to depend on your lighting.  If your lights don't penetrate than you need to trim. You need 500 - 750 PAR reaching the bud sights for blooming. 

Not sure there is a light that would reach the bottom of 5ft plants. This why i trim out. I have 850-1000 par at canopy. I feel that max penetration is about 2ft. So, that is about the amount of canopy i keep. Million ways to skin a cat, this is just one

[anarowe]

9 hours ago, glued gorilla said:

Not sure there is a light that would reach the bottom of 5ft plants. This why i trim out. I have 850-1000 par at canopy. I feel that max penetration is about 2ft. So, that is about the amount of canopy i keep. Million ways to skin a cat, this is just one

I have two lights down low to give them light. It seems to be working.

[Restorium2]

11 hours ago, anarowe said:

I have two lights down low to give them light. It seems to be working.

That will work.

What the warehouse grows do is have a lot of light up high. Then the range where you have excellent par is from a large plant's top all the way to the floor like the sun. 

[Restorium2]

21 hours ago, glued gorilla said:

Not sure there is a light that would reach the bottom of 5ft plants. This why i trim out. I have 850-1000 par at canopy. I feel that max penetration is about 2ft. So, that is about the amount of canopy i keep. Million ways to skin a cat, this is just one

Low lights with just enough PAR you only get a couple feet range of usable PAR. 

Lots of light up high stretches out the usable zone. 

 

[glued gorilla]

23 minutes ago, Restorium2 said:

Low lights with just enough PAR you only get a couple feet range of usable PAR. 

Lots of light up high stretches out the usable zone. 

 

I don't think lights up high would increase penetration. It does increase spread and especially with gavitas, the overlap is useful. Commercial ops will never have a canopy deeper than 2ft or so. This is why (amongst other reasons)they grow lots of plants packed in and not less large plants. Very few commercial ops grow plants over 3 ft.

If you have a full flat canopy, a light can only go so far. If you spread plants out so light gets all the way around the plant, then yeah they will have good bud further down. That's why plants are so far apart in professional outdoor gardens. Indoors, spreading plants out is less productive than packing a canopy.

[Restorium2]

58 minutes ago, glued gorilla said:

I don't think lights up high would increase penetration. It does increase spread and especially with gavitas, the overlap is useful. Commercial ops will never have a canopy deeper than 2ft or so. This is why (amongst other reasons)they grow lots of plants packed in and not less large plants. Very few commercial ops grow plants over 3 ft.

If you have a full flat canopy, a light can only go so far. If you spread plants out so light gets all the way around the plant, then yeah they will have good bud further down. That's why plants are so far apart in professional outdoor gardens. Indoors, spreading plants out is less productive than packing a canopy.

It's an extreme example; take your meter outdoors and see that the sun way up high gives you a very wide range of usable PAR. 

The same idea applies to plant lights to a lessor degree. The higher you go the range of usable light increases. 

I have 8 foot tall plants growing with buds from the top to the bottom. The fans leaves are gone and the tops are spread out so light can get down to the bottom. 

Making a flat canopy is ok however it's only one dimensional and best suited for lights that have a very small range of usable light. 

 

[glued gorilla]

1 minute ago, Restorium2 said:

It's an extreme example; take your meter outdoors and see that the sun way up high gives you a very wide range of usable PAR. 

The same idea applies to plant lights to a lessor degree. The higher you go the range of usable light increases. 

I have 8 foot tall plants growing with buds from the top to the bottom. The fans leaves are gone and the tops are spread out so light can get down to the bottom. 

Making a flat canopy is ok however it's only one dimensional and best suited for lights that have a very small range of usable light. 

 

Your plants are 8ft inside, getting light all the way down from only top lighting? Can you post a pic? would love to see how that works. I also spread tops, as i stake not trellis. I have found that unless i have a lot of room around the plants, buds more than 2ft down don't develop the same.

[Restorium2]

54 minutes ago, glued gorilla said:

Your plants are 8ft inside, getting light all the way down from only top lighting? Can you post a pic? would love to see how that works. I also spread tops, as i stake not trellis. I have found that unless i have a lot of room around the plants, buds more than 2ft down don't develop the same.

Nope, no pics. I don't need to post pics when the science involved is obvious. MANY people like me have grown tress in a coliseum style grow. Just listen and learn. I find that you like to refute everything that you don't understand. Take some time and think and you will understand the obvious science. You are a lazy reader and researcher and would rather blather than learn. 

 

[glued gorilla]

8 minutes ago, Restorium2 said:

Nope, no pics. I don't need to post pics when the science involved is obvious. MANY people like me have grown tress in a coliseum style grow. Just listen and learn. I find that you like to refute everything that you don't understand. Take some time and think and you will understand the obvious science. You are a lazy reader and researcher and would rather blather than learn. 

 

You refute more than i sir. You also did not mention a coleseum or stadium set up, that changes everything. That's not what we discussed. Also that type of set up is usually vert bulbs. They are not hung high above the canopy.simple and obvious science is that the further away from a light source the lower the par. I was trying to understand you, knowing that you always claim science. This defies it. 

Its all good though, we can be done. I know you are King Resto knower of all, and will never admit someone else is right. That is why this will be my last post. 

[Restorium2]

8 minutes ago, glued gorilla said:

You refute more than i sir. You also did not mention a coleseum or stadium set up, that changes everything. That's not what we discussed. Also that type of set up is usually vert bulbs. They are not hung high above the canopy.simple and obvious science is that the further away from a light source the lower the par. I was trying to understand you, knowing that you always claim science. This defies it. 

Its all good though, we can be done. I know you are King Resto knower of all, and will never admit someone else is right. That is why this will be my last post. 

It's just science. If your mind was open you could see it for what it is. If you have a lot of light up high the range of usable light will expand vertically. Once you understand the concept you can extrapolate to see how your two foot range can expand up to 8 feet and beyond like the sun. To refute it is like refuting the sun, the moon and the stars.