defdac;17855 said:
True, its just that I without the knowledge of PAR/PUR-calculations wouldn't have figured out that the wpg-rule can be a bit misleading sometimes and also never gotten any feel for how little PAR/PUR we actually got in most setups. It is quite enlightening to dwelve into the details, and also fun.
But I agree, it's not needed in most cases to run a nice planted tank =)
I think it's odd that so many associate me with not using test kits, yet I test and have more test equipment than any hobbyists perhaps in the world.
Irony has no limit.
But why I use use test kits, meters is quite different from most.
I seek answers to hypothesis that interest me and then set about trying to answer them or rule out things that they are not.
Most just use them to monitor or balance their tank.
While no one needs a test kit, few get into the hobby to test water.
I've yet to meet a person that's said so at least
But we can also say that adding CO2 is not needed either.
I sytarted out never testing, then tested like mad to see why things worked for me and not other folks.
I already knew how to produce and maintain a control algae free healthy fast growing planted tank. Then I got the test kits out.
I measured successes, not problems.
Ooooo..........again, quite a different approach, as most break out test kits only when they have problems............
I'm the other way around.
If you don't/are not able to produce a success or a control tank that's healthy and algae free, as is often the case, then you cannot compare anything, you have no control the gauge anything against.
Now with lighting, that is really what folks are up against unless they go to the PAR light meters.
Measuring and modeling light is very tough.
It drives everything in our tanks and we must have a fair standard to compare it to for the plants, not our eyes, watts etc etc when we talk about it and then discuss how it drives CO2/nutrient uptakes etc.
10% off is a lot here, that can mean BBA, BGA etc.
Still, many will justify and cheapo 10$ NO3 test kit vs a 249$ light meter and try to make rational judgements as best we can.
Still, most are simply tinkering with nutrients/CO2, not really testing critically.
But that is not their goal, they are just trying to do what they believe is best for their tank, plants, fish etc.
But belief and fact are two very different standards.
Something I often get into debates and rants about.
I'm not big on belief however...........
Regards,
Tom Barr