Sorry. I was kind of waiting for someone else. Um. this was kind of all I could find that even sort of addresses the question, and it's for regular cameras, not digitals. As a best guess, I would say that the area dead-center in front of the window probably gets 300-500 fc when the sun is brightest, and that should remain fairly steady until you get to about 6 inches from the end of the window, where it probably starts to drop off pretty rapidly. Light intensity drops off more slowly as you back away from the window. The plant stand probably has about 50-100 fc, if I'm visualizing the set-up right, which I doubt I am. This is assuming a pretty unobstructed view, white walls, no overhang, etc. You might be able to find a camera second-hand that isn't, say, capable of taking pictures, but would still work as a light meter. Garden centers and camera stores are obvious places to look, too, if you really want exact numbers, but actual light meters will probably cost you. I think we sell one where I work, but I don't know how good it is, or how much it is, or even what it looks like (not something I've stopped to examine closely).

Hi Tanie, Those grow leds give a reddish purple light not nice for your living room, but great for your plants. It looks like they are not that bright but our eyes are not so sensitive for those colors. My suggestion is to combine some grow lights with one (or more) white led to make the light more nice for the human eye. I build the grow light myself so I can tune the ratio of blue to red, blue is more for growing and red for flowering. The days are short at the moment and some are cloudy so 12-> 14 hours artificial light is a great help for your plants to stay healthy. And yes I have been hiking in your neighborhood. Up Ha ling peak, Mt Rundlle, and peaks in the Kananaskis, Banf, Jasper , Yoho, Kootenay, Glacier (Rogers Pass) and Robson park, made even the hike up to Berglake (about 40km up and back) in one day, I did only day hikes. The highest hike was up Mt Sunwapta (3300 m) air become pretty thin for a Dutchman but I made it Greetings and Success with your orchids This post was edited by scorpio_bafh on Wed, Nov 12, 14 at 6:11

These comments are directed towards the the question: "Also, how do you clean a virused plant using cuttings? My experience of virus, admittedly not any which affect roses, has been that they are generally systemic," ------------------------- It is common to read in the general rose virus reviews something along the lines of the following: "Cuttings from an infected plant will be infected - no matter what portion of the plant they were taken from. The disease is systemic: The entire plant is infected, whether visible signs of the disease are present, or not." see as one example: http://www.goldcoastrose.org/ A Cornell 1998 rose virus research paper (not in the cited abstract: http://www.actahort.org/books/234/234_53.htm The statement is in the "must be paid for" full paper.) stated: "Virus distribution in apple, plum, and cherry trees is irregular" (they then give 1963, 1973, 1984, and 1986 references.) it is likely that virus distribution in rose is also irregular. This explanation appears to be reasonable since virus inoculated plants frquently exhibited some shoots expressing no symptons. It is possible that the virus has not been distributed throught the plant." ------------------- Since then, one French http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1094/PHYTO.2000.90.5.522 and one Polish study http://150.254.175.4/ptfit/pdf/PP38a/PP38_091-098.pdf have confired the irregular distributions. -------------------- The French reported that: "A total of 89% (59 out of 66) of Anna stems was entirely PNRSV negative when axillary shoots from these stems developed after the decapitation of the floral stem, after the development of cuttings, or grown in vitro were tested by ELISA. ELISA tests of leaves from these stems were all negative. Since IC-RT-PCR conducted in parallel on all the explants from three (out of seven) of these stems also were negative, we suspect that these stems were virus free, even if they belonged to infected plants, or that the viral titer was very low in the stems." http://apsjournals.apsnet.org/doi/pdfplus/10.1094/PHYTO.2000.90.5.522 ---------------------------- Thus, the French reported that they suspect that they were able to obtain clean plants from cuttings (as determined by the use of ELISA or PCR). They leave the door open that a more sensitive method may find a low amount of infection. ---------------------------------- This is what was reported concerning California Davis ROSE VIRUS experience: "Oddly enough, one way they eliminate virii is by clonal propagation. Simply put, if you culture enough buds (~100) some small number of them (two or three maybe) will be virus free. The drawback is space, labor and the need to index all the test plants." http://www.rosebreeders.org/forum/read.php?2,38492,38492#msg-38492 See the following thread for a discussion of the possibilities of cleaning cuttings in a hot climate. Here is a link that might be useful: garden web thread on possibilities of cleaning cuttings

This is hard to know precisely because there are many variables that come into play (distance from light to plant, light coverage, reflection, etc.), not to mention the imprecise definition of the word "full-sun" which refers to an uncertain intensity of light energy (varies by angle of sun in sky, cloud cover) over an uncertain period of time (usually a minimum of 6 hours but as many as 12). With indoor growing, you can make up for a lack of light intensity vs. the sun by extending the period of time you provide light energy because energy is cumulative over time, though some plants require a cyclical dark period for blooming, etc. I am not familiar with the footcandle measure but just to give you a ballpark estimate in lumens, full sun conditions are roughly approximated by 30-40K lumens trained perfectly on a plant (with limited light diffusion).