I work in horticulture with a goal of optimal illumination to the plant canopy. The industry standard is to position each light as close as possible to the top of the plant canopy directly over a limited number of plants (without burning them) in order to optimize the light intensity they receive. The inverse square law is often cited as the justification for this practice. This makes sense when you are working with one light over one fixed area.
My question has to do with how the inverse square law might apply differently when you introduce multiple light sources across a larger canopy and achieve cross-illumination. My understanding is that yes, as you move any light a further distance from a static point of measurement that you will lose intensity (total number of photons hitting that point or fixed area) due to the wider canopy of illumination that occurs as you spread the light over a larger area. However, as you raise multiple lights, evenly spaced across a large plant canopy, shouldn't the illumination at any point not also increase from the surrounding lights from which light was not previous received. And as this occurs, would not the light received at any point in the canopy begin to equalize as the lights are raised together simultaneously?
Assuming we have highly reflective walls, my assumption is that the loss of light to heat absorption would be minimal and that the advantages gained would be lower radiant heat at the top of the plant canopy, and fewer shadows than with a single, fixed source of light. It should, thoerectically be the same number of photons hitting the plants, no? Commercial nursuries very commonly mount their lights up on the cross-beams (15ft up) and don't suspend them closer to the plants. Seems to me the indoor cultivation centers might be too obsessed with the single source light approach. So, where am I getting it wrong...?
I have linked a rough sketch of what I am describing. (Please forgive the crudeness, I am not an artist or graphic designer. But, you should get the point...)
https://app.box.com/s/5dynrxzrndei0hq79ue4fu3crz6ldpoa
Thanks for any feedback...
My question has to do with how the inverse square law might apply differently when you introduce multiple light sources across a larger canopy and achieve cross-illumination. My understanding is that yes, as you move any light a further distance from a static point of measurement that you will lose intensity (total number of photons hitting that point or fixed area) due to the wider canopy of illumination that occurs as you spread the light over a larger area. However, as you raise multiple lights, evenly spaced across a large plant canopy, shouldn't the illumination at any point not also increase from the surrounding lights from which light was not previous received. And as this occurs, would not the light received at any point in the canopy begin to equalize as the lights are raised together simultaneously?
Assuming we have highly reflective walls, my assumption is that the loss of light to heat absorption would be minimal and that the advantages gained would be lower radiant heat at the top of the plant canopy, and fewer shadows than with a single, fixed source of light. It should, thoerectically be the same number of photons hitting the plants, no? Commercial nursuries very commonly mount their lights up on the cross-beams (15ft up) and don't suspend them closer to the plants. Seems to me the indoor cultivation centers might be too obsessed with the single source light approach. So, where am I getting it wrong...?
I have linked a rough sketch of what I am describing. (Please forgive the crudeness, I am not an artist or graphic designer. But, you should get the point...)
https://app.box.com/s/5dynrxzrndei0hq79ue4fu3crz6ldpoa
Thanks for any feedback...