Photo v Auto

[Sadface]

I'm only pulling all your legs ,autos do defo have their advantages your right

[Jingo]

The only auto strain on the planet ( rudralis) has almost 0% thc ...there isn't an argument on this planet that will convince me they are the best .....what they are ..they are a compromise for convenience ( I get that ) but fuck me they are not a par on a well grown photo and never will be ....seeds at best are wank let's be honest ,it's another level of piss poor genetics using autos ...it's blatant to see over the last couple of years observing from the sides .....

I made an almost identical argument about 6 years ago and now the only thing I grow is autos. I've grown out a lot of seeds for different seed companies and done testing for them behind the scenes because it's legal in Washington State to do so. I can tell you that autos perform just as well as photos these days. it's true you have to have the skills to be able to adjust on the fly if you get into trouble, but that just means you're a good grower if you can do it. If you can't well then stay away from them.

Sent from my SM-G975U using Tapatalk

[gardro]

I switch between both to keep up my skills.

I love the overall speed of autos but theres a lot that take forever in flower and then you wonder what you gained. But the next time you run a photo you think damn this is boring, at least the veg and veg flower transition.

You definitely cannot run the light levels in an auto that you can with photos because of DLI. Seen quite a few sick autos under strong light, invariably led.

I think the fast flowering photos running 13 on 11 off with some light manipulation are the new big thing.

[scoot]

I've smoked some good auto's back in the day,haven't tried them for over 9 years now though,weed is legal in Canada though so I'm throwing 4 in my neighbours greenhouse while I do 4 in my basement(4 plant limit per household),looking forward to seeing how auto's have progressed over the past 9 years.