300 to 450 grams per square ft

I looked at this, read the specs, and this is how I felt

But what IS it.



Growing a cannabis plant that resembles a brussel sprout plant, more than an actual cannabis plant would seem to appear.



Critical Mass or Critical 2.0 are well suited, AK 47 or Tutankhamen are also great for SOG but can be a bit leafy sometimes. Medical seeds Channel + and Sick Meds Williams Wonder are also awesome… IF I was a dedicated SOG grower… Something like a mix of Critical + and Williams Wonder would be on my to do list.


meh this is not a linear equation and the space is not flat. This cannot be figured just on square footage it neglects a dimension completely. what can be grown in 4 ft^3 is not flat either.


Tutankamen was good smoke but was bud rot city last time I grew her out.


This is the second time I’ve heard good things about freeze drying, @Muleskinner was talking about that over here, as well:

Thanks for bringing this up. Getting more interested in this technique.


I don’t really understand the link between the ohm law concept and cannabis ^^ Maybe the translation. I don’t understand the 9gr/watt example also.

But for me, any layer of justification will not change much the concept of this ratio than i consider as biased as fck. To be 100% honest, as totally useless to judge an indoor garden productivity. And i assume also the fact than i’m representing an ultra-minority of hobbyists thinking the same ^^

First, expressing the yield in a watt based-ratio, without including the time factor, is like counting his toes and fingers in loop for me. It’s not for nothing than standarts are based on Kw/hour, and it’s not inherent to the manner to produce nuclear power but for all source of energy.

In this vein, i bring back in the equation twos extrems : a sogger and a scrogger with the same clones and under 1KW (hps or whatever, but what is saying the watt-o-meter and not the marketing : i’m supposed to have 1Kw of neons per sqm, for real it’s 560W). Let’s say than both are starting to grow and don’t know much about strains, their specificities …

The sogger is a bad grower. He output max 7 grammers per clone (you have to want it to be that bad lol) on true sea of green (over 50 specimens per sqm). Usually when you’re bad or/and new to the game, you overgrow to compensate. But the guy is really stupid and stay low : 50 specimens. That’s 350 grammers per batch (a total shame in sog ^^) and per sqm, every twos months. With skills it’s more around the kilogrammer per sqm without being a top notch grower …

And that’s NOT 0.35 grammer per watt productivity, it mean nothing.
That’s 720 hours of 1Kw light for 350 grammers. And this is the true ratio.

The scrogger is equally bad and will need 2 months of veg + 3 months of flo to output around 500 grammers per batch. A pity also, the best scrog lovers i known output that with a single clone and they generally don’t use only one in one sqm.

And that’s not 0.50 grammer per watt productivity, it mean nothing again.
That’s just 2520 hours of 1Kw light for 500 grammers.

Now let me put these twos bad growers aside :

sogger : 350 grammers for 1Kw/h during 720 hours (12/12 * 60 days)
That’s :

  • 0.35gr/watt stupid ratio ^^
  • 5.8 grammers per day produced (true productivity)
  • 2.05 Kw/h per gram (true cost in term of lights)

scrogger : 500 grammers for 1Kw/h during 2520 hours (24/0 * 60 days + 12/12 * 90 days).
That’s :

  • 0.50 gr/watt stupid ratio ^^ (so this guy is doing well considering the E=Mc² thing ^^)
  • 3.3 grammers per day produced (true productivity)
  • 5.04 Kw/h per gram

It’s just why i hate so much this ratio than is from nowhere :

I known a bunch of talented ( i said talented, not skilled) weed producers with shitty gr/watt ratios than are out of reach for most of next-gen growers in term of indoor productivity AND costs.

I known a wagon of bad growers with high gr/watt ratio than are producing their weed at a higher cost than the blackmarket, for a lower quality.

Not sure the Grapestomper OG helped much to write it lol, but the full explanation is there.


I remember back in the 90s when people like Ed Rosenthal and Jorge Cervantes were trying to get the growing community to understand that grams per watt without any reference of time is a useless metric. I paid attention and did my part to push the grams per watt per month metric, and I remember noticing that a lot of others were doing the same on the forums and such, but apparently it didn’t stick. I still see people talking about grams per watt to this day and bragging about it, only to find out that they vegged for 5 months or some ridiculous shit like that. Grams per square foot is just as meaningless, IMO.


grams/KWh/m^3 would be the ultimate metric, but it’s more difficult to calculate.


When I was SOGging my metric was grams per day per pot then i could truly see what were the better producing strains.
In my system it turned out it was more productive to grow from seed instead of clones too. Except I never did do all the fem seed runs that I should have.


I was being a bit glib, mostly because the point I guess is that all things being equal 300-450 g per ‘square’ foot is a stupid metric.
The simplest way to measure it obviously is by total yield vs Kw hours. That way it makes little difference if you stack them on top of each other or just grow them flat. Inputs vs Outputs will give you the efficiency, which is all this claim is about imho.
Also has anyone tried fitting 450 grams of weed into a even a cubic foot? I am wondering where the air space goes?

I get the drying processes going on here, but what I don’t get is how the chlorophyll is dealt with. Some more research is obviously required here :slight_smile:


Agree. Still learning about this, mostly anecdotal.


So this is a statement from the one of the VP’s at Yofumo… It was the last sentence that got my interest… Now I am thinking this is just freeze drying with extra voodoo.

“Knowing how to manipulate the environment is paramount to the process,” says VP of Client Applications and Deployment Joe Edwards. “Moving water through the plant is the key. Environmental manipulation is just as important in the post-harvest process as manipulation is in the growing process. Curing is about water and resin—as you move water through the plant, it becomes a transfer vehicle and pushes the resin through the plant to the trichomes.”


So…they took out too much water and had to rehydrate? I do know that dryiing in the refrigerator gave a different and ‘greener fresher’ dried herb to cure. Freeze drying is just sublimation of the ice an old and good tech. Got to retain that 62% so for me it would be just running till you get that. Perhaps timed cycles above freezing to allow moisture to distribute evenly ?


Yeah, sublimation/vacuum extraction is hardly a new technique hey… It’s probably first year chemistry 101 and as you pointed out definitely works , well enough to have removed entire oceans from the surface of Mars . A couple of things I don’t get though… unless there is some other process going on, the chlorophyll is staying put as far as I see it… and I am sure every person who has ever microwaved weed knows, it tastes awful. So then… how to deal with it? And also, why does the vacuum extraction technique not remove other volatile esters/terpenes that may be present? Maybe the vapour pressure point of frozen water is lower than that of any other volatile present but I would be surprised if this were the case. Steaming will degrade the chlorophyll, however everything volatile is lost… maybe some sort of re-fluxing system?

The most impressive is the very long story of this insane ratio. As old than the “guess the sex of plants by seed’s shape” or the legendary "boil your roots for more THC in buds " ^^ I’m sure we have now reached the half century with that … maybe the faulty concept of this ratio is specifically what is appreciated.

And like you said, if Ed and Jorges failed at it … it’s hopeless i think ^^

grams/KWh/m^3 would be the ultimate metric, but it’s more difficult to calculate.

Exactly. A pain to make it universal, but maybe the most responsive ratio to catch the benefits/prices of all type of changes (nutes, lights, regime …).

It sound like something to be coded with the “rationalized/watt-o-meterized” marketing of all our lights also ^^

I get the point, it can be elegant to best refine the volume required for a given line. Better than me discovering than SOGging the JH in one gal volume is better than 2 liters pots, in flowering a motherplant ^^

I personally use something derivative to consider the yield potential : the root mass. Nothing very advanced. I put the whole plant root mass in a water basin to remove everything, i gently dry it (pressing it on “papel towel for kitchen” = removing at max the weight of the residual water) then i weight it (i cut at the trunk base).

I use it as it but i also make a ratio between the root volume and the “wet” vegetal mass produced (for clones production and buds production). It help me to differentiate on similar specimens the true yielders from basic survivors just genetically made to survive on Mars.

I consider than at the moment you harvest enough weed to sustain your needs in homegrown context, there is no much considerations to have if you’re happy with what you got.

For me it’s a bit more stressfull. I can “lose” 5 grammers on flowered motherplants, i will not really give a fuck because it’s under the common variations between specimens.

But losing it on a Sogged clone is not a feedback from the crop I want to get. It mean than something gone really wrong and than i have to react fast to compensate the lack of grammers. Less than 20% lose on a clone don’t look like terrific, but when it happend 100 times for each sqm … you start to cry.

It’s when some metrics can be real companions informing you if you sux or outperform the standarts, also if you have made the right choice for your specimens eventually.

Also has anyone tried fitting 450 grams of weed into a even a cubic foot?

Never tryed that but an half kilogrammer in an half cubic meter is pretty easy without really compressing it ^^ I guess it’s a local joke on mexicans bricks than i can’t really taste lol

what I don’t get is how the chlorophyll is dealt with.

No deal at all, you get the bud as you put it inside but dryed. You can apply a six months curing after that or not, and never use this machine as a “buffer” in your stock management. It’s up to you.

“Moving water through the plant is the key. Environmental manipulation is just as important in the post-harvest process as manipulation is in the growing process. Curing is about water and resin—as you move water through the plant, it becomes a transfer vehicle and pushes the resin through the plant to the trichomes.”

I’ve understood what he have tryed to express, and there is nothing to have with freeze drying considerations.

He just tell fresh growers to don’t over water theyr plants just before harvesting them, like it’s writed in most guides as “flushing process”, and 90% of the time very badly interpreted lol Can be extended with nutes, final PH , acids use etc …

Now i have to correct a bit for the context this portion : “it becomes a transfer vehicle and pushes the resin through the plant to the trichomes”.

The danger is than the majority of fresh growers will consider it as a new “root boiler” technic if you don’t give enough details. Water is not and will never be a cannabinoid’s vehicle from let say the stems to the trichomes (it was lefty as fuck to present it like that imo). Because cannabinoids, or even let’s say the resin are produced “in site directly” and not with water electrolyze or something fancy, but with well known enzyms only. It’s chemistry, not logistic.

Perhaps timed cycles above freezing to allow moisture to distribute evenly ?

The machine do it for you. And it’s not a miracle this way to get an “aerated and expanded foam” in the grinder with a neville haze as impossible than it sound. Which is a bit more tricky to obtain with a traditional drying. This method of drying is no longer a debate in cups since years, it’s the place to discuss it if you’re interested to change your drying process imho.

the chlorophyll is staying put as far as I see it… and I am sure every person who has ever microwaved weed knows, it tastes awful.

The best weeds i’ve tasted in my life was green as fuck and relatively fresh. Chlorophyll is a fake ennemy, nutes profile and assimilation are the real subject on it for me.

To compare a “micro waved” weed with a freeze dryed weed is something bad to best figure out the concept. A micro wave will literally cook the weed in using the water of the vegetal mass, the vegetal mass becoming the “cooked mass” and the “pan” at a time, and the water inside the mass “the fire under the pan”. The resulting spinach is not only about the chlorophyll cooked in seconds.


I agree that grams/watt is stupid. It tells you nothing useful at all.

I got really great gms/watt on my last grow - but it took 5 months to get that amount of weed. My previous grow had much lower grams/watt, but yielded me almost the exact same grams per day - it was just a shorter grow over all.

For most of us home growers, I dont see why you need to know more than grams/day yield. What it really comes down to in the end is - how much pot do I have when its all done and the mess is cleaned up?

It costs me about the same amount to grow on a daily basis no matter how long the grow is. Every day I use roughly the same amount of nutes and my electric bill is about the same every day. There are minor extra costs now and then, but the daily costs remain pretty much unchanged unless you expand or shrink your growing setup. So you can also judge your efficiency by the grams/day metric as well.

Adding in volume of the grow space is an interesting addition, but not that useful in the end for home growers. I dont give a hoot if the grow space is 4 ft tall or 16 ft tall. All that really matters is - did I grow enough during the season to fill my needs using the space I have?

I used to track costs per day or per gram early on, but I got tired of that once I figured out it was way cheaper to grow than buy pot at the store - even using relatively expensive hydro techniques.

Now, if you want to measure how big your d$ck is compared to the other guys, then you can start adding in things like square footage, or total volume of space or other details, and prove that you can grow more than the other guy with less - but does that really matter other than for bragging rights? Maybe it does if you’re limited in space or have to make a profit based on a fixed size space, grow in closets or PC cases, etc. I really admire you guys who do micro growing and get good yields from tiny spaces.

Dont get me wrong, I have no problem doing a little tiny bit of polite bragging once in a great while, and then humbly and graciously accepting congratulations and worship from the masses when I think Ive earned it, but the bottom line is how much pot do I have on hand at the end of the season.

Plus the math is easier :slight_smile:


“Also has anyone tried fitting 450 grams of weed into a even a cubic foot? I am wondering where the air space goes?”

Lol its cuz you could be like 3 ft high so 450grams/3cu ft.
But even that is whack, thats only dried nugs w no sugar or fan leaves or stalks. Doesnt seem possible.

1 Like

Bro, I am thinking there is an element of Aussie humour that is gettign lost in translation here :laughing: All good, I think we are on the same page…
You have raised a good point, I also have noticed that some of the weed I have had has been almost still living and seems to carry the plants flavour profile better than it does when dry. Cuban cigars can like this, you either smoke them freshlly rolled, or you age them for at LEAST 3 years and they taste great. Smoked at 12 months they taste acrid and horrible… but I still don’t know the underlying chemical reason for this change.
It makes sense that if terpenes are volotile then a method of drying/curing that uses lower temps is going to preserve more of the terps… this is why I justify not use a fan when drying. It seems to me that a closed cycle sub critical C02 system would be the way to go if rapid drying was a commercial need?


Now we are talking about a big vice of mine : hand rolled cigars and blunts ^^ Cohiba’s are my poison, filled with goodness or not.

It exist twos big difference between a cigar and a nug of weed in term of evolution and “curing”.

  1. the tabacco leafs inside the cigar are allready dryed and cured (in stack, in barrels …) and cured (during months or years).

  2. the cigars don’t “evolve” in the way we see the things with the weed, it’s generally a blend in three layers with three different leafs sources : wrapper, filler (or weed ^^) and the intermediate binder. When you let sit your cigar at high RH for long term, you’re just “blending” the flavors of these three layers. Just like pipe’s smokers when they press theyr homemade blend, that’s the same finality and goals.

When you have a cigar with a very tastefull wrapper (like maduros), if you smoke it straight from the rolling station … you will just taste the wrapper because it cover the twos others leafs. It’s like feeling only the cinammon in a cinamon rolls, and nothing else. 6 months later, you discover a totally different cigar which is worth the price. Just because the wrapper sucked out the filler and binder flavors with the high RH of the cave, in losing intensity. There is not much chemicals transformation, it’s allready done in fact during the “leaf process”.

That’s the advantage to dry the weed directly in a wrapper/binder combo for months (thx Mc Muffin for the great inspiration lol). Freaking hot to watch out during months, but at the end you’re smoking something than is not existing in the nature : a totally fusionned flavor between tabacco leafs and weed, like melted. Luxury blunts i call that ^^

To give an idea, if you want exactly do the cigar way with weed, you have to blend three different weed in the jar and to wait than it give an unique “weed”. Never tryed but in knowing a bit about cannabinoids, i doubt than it’s possible. But the concept is there for the analogy.