# Skylight Pro V



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

How would 4 of these on top of a 36x18x36 exo terra paludarium do? Has anyone used these light for taller tanks? Pictures are appreciated. 
















Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Or would 2-3 of the Arcadia be better?











Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## gex23 (Apr 15, 2008)

I looked at these and had the same doubts as you with regards output / PAR.

I ended up going for AI Prime Freshwaters instead


----------



## Tijl (Feb 28, 2019)

I have done some tests over the months with different Skylight led's and came to the colclusion, none are worth their price..

The bromeliad on the left is grown for 2 months underneat a basic T5 lamp and the one on the right underneat a Skylight led. The difference is almost non exsistent..


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Tijl said:


> I have done some tests over the months with different Skylight led's and came to the colclusion, none are worth their price..
> 
> 
> 
> The bromeliad on the left is grown for 2 months underneat a basic T5 lamp and the one on the right underneat a Skylight led. The difference is almost non exsistent..




That’s surprising. Thanks for the info. Still looking for good LED lights for the height. I use evo and se quad on my other tank but can’t find them anymore. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

gex23 said:


> I looked at these and had the same doubts as you with regards output / PAR.
> 
> 
> 
> I ended up going for AI Prime Freshwaters instead




How’re those working for you? How tall is your tank?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Pubfiction (Feb 3, 2013)

I would calculate that you will need about 5 of those Pro V lights on a 36x36 exo terra. They seem pretty pricey for their output and features.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Wow, are those Skylights overpriced! $100 for a simple 12W light is outrageous.

The Arcadias look to be a far, far better value if you just want a lot of light and don't have any kidneys to sell. I'd personally be worried about the lack of dimming control, though, with that much light. The ability to dim lights seasonally to control temps, or per the frogs' behavior, or as the plants grow in is something I use often.


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

I just bought one of the 34w 570mm jungle dawn LED bars to use on an exo terra 60cm x 45cm x 60cm glass terrarium and it is _seriously bright_, probably overkill and too bright for the animals and some of my plants. 
The light punches down to the bottom of the tank no problem and it seems like they would be great for larger enclosures.
I've been using the 13w jungle dawn LED bulbs on all my tanks until now and they definitely outperform cheaper LED plant bulbs of the same wattage.
The jungle dawn bar seems like it might give off slightly 'whiter' light than the previous generation of bulbs but it could just be because it's _so_ bright.


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Louis said:


> I just bought one of the 34w 570mm jungle dawn LED bars to use on an exo terra 60cm x 45cm x 60cm glass terrarium and it is _seriously bright_, probably overkill and too bright for the animals and some of my plants.
> 
> The light punches down to the bottom of the tank no problem and it seems like they would be great for larger enclosures.
> 
> ...




On the 54W of the jungle down it says it only does 126 par down at 18”. So I was concerned about it being enough at 36”


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Pubfiction said:


> I would calculate that you will need about 5 of those Pro V lights on a 36x36 exo terra. They seem pretty pricey for their output and features.




I’ll skip out on them. Any recommendations for a 36” high?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Austindg13 said:


> On the 54W of the jungle down it says it only does 126 par down at 18”. So I was concerned about it being enough at 36”
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Unless you are lighting the tabletop under the viv, you don't need 36". Substrate surface will be ~30" or a little more, and leaf litter grows fine in dim light.


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Unless you are lighting the tabletop under the viv, you don't need 36". Substrate surface will be ~30" or a little more, and leaf litter grows fine in dim light.




Except like I said above it’s a paludrium. So not only will it need to penetrate 36”, it’ll also need to go through the water


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Louis (Apr 23, 2014)

Austindg13 said:


> Except like I said above it’s a paludrium. So not only will it need to penetrate 36”, it’ll also need to go through the water
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


You might be surprised by the low par levels many aquatic plants can flourish at.
Aquarium staple plants like java fern, anubias etc. can grow fine in seriously low light conditions, less than 20 par. I would not expect to have any issues with growing plants in the lower levels of a 36" high vivarium if I was using the jungle dawn bars. I have been growing all kinds of plants in the lower levels of a 24" just using 13w jungle dawn bulbs. if you still have concerns but want to use LED then the key for you is going to be the beam angle projected by the lenses used on the LED diodes. Jungle dawn bars spread 120 degrees but you can find LED with more tightly focused lenses that focus more of the light straight downwards. 
you can find some good info on orchidboard.com about light levels and penetration down to lower levels but this thread on dendroboard has some information you might find useful too.
https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/parts-construction/156618-orchid-peoplepar-needed-grow-orchids.html


----------



## FrogTim (Oct 1, 2015)

Look into kessil lighting. Led floodlights. Or plant specific lights. I use Sunblaster LED fixtures or agriled t5ho led replacements. All are cheaper than the jungle Dawn's except the kessils. They'll all perform better too. 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Johanovich (Jan 23, 2017)

If you are a bit handy I also recommend just making LED lighting yourself. I did this for my main two terraria and so far I'm very pleased with the result. Bromelia's hold their color very well and the frogs don't seem bothered by the light. I will post photographs later when I have the time to snap a few shots with the lights on.


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Johanovich said:


> If you are a bit handy I also recommend just making LED lighting yourself. I did this for my main two terraria and so far I'm very pleased with the result. Bromelia's hold their color very well and the frogs don't seem bothered by the light. I will post photographs later when I have the time to snap a few shots with the lights on.




Never really made my own lights before but I’m sure I could figure it out. I have heard of a guy that’s makes nice ones, spectral designs I believe. But I just looks like light strips places on a panel. Wasn’t really sure how they’d perform especially from such a height. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

FrogTim said:


> Look into kessil lighting. Led floodlights. Or plant specific lights. I use Sunblaster LED fixtures or agriled t5ho led replacements. All are cheaper than the jungle Dawn's except the kessils. They'll all perform better too.
> 
> Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk




I was thinking about the AI prime freshwater if I went with fish lights. Do you have any experience with the AI primes?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## FrogTim (Oct 1, 2015)

Austindg13 said:


> I was thinking about the AI prime freshwater if I went with fish lights. Do you have any experience with the AI primes?
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


No I don't. Those are a bit expensive for my tastes. I like pairing a powerful plant like in the 6500k range with a finnex 24 7 for the programmable sunrise/sunset cycle. More bells and whistles. Less $. Keep in mind I have a rack set up 

Sent from my Pixel 2 using Tapatalk


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Austindg13 said:


> I have heard of a guy that’s makes nice ones, spectral designs I believe. But I just looks like light strips places on a panel. Wasn’t really sure how they’d perform especially from such a height.


SD lights _are_ strip lights on a panel (though he also offers the addition of COB spots up to 50W), though they are not _just _ strips on a panel. He offers a couple color combinations, and these are distinctly not cheap Amazon strips.

The main virtues of SD panels are:

(1) they are made by a guy in the US who knows frog vivs, and...

(2) ...can (and will, happily) customize them for your setup. Brighter in the front, not so bright in the back, off center bright spot, etc.

(3) They're modular, so when a dimmer or power supply or controller goes out, the whole unit isn't trash.

(4) Coverage: unless a person _wants_ point source light (more on this below), the full coverage of panels is really nice. The whole viv is lit, not just the strip in the middle, or one or two points wherever spot lights are.

That's my biggest beef with Primes (I have one on a top-opening viv, which sucks because they are hard light and also have access to the top) is the shadowing. Primes really aren't that bright (55w, and the blue and red and green channels aren't visually bright at all, and if you want color control then they can't be run at 100%), so they don't do well mounted high above the viv top; but mounted near the top, the upper corners of the viv are in darkness. All the light comes straight (well, in a cone shape) down, too, so there are lots of dark caves in the small recesses and understory.

If that's a look a person wants, then Primes are great. The controllability is also awesome -- so many times I've been sitting on the couch watching a movie with my family and thought "y'know, if the viv was just a _little _more blue, and ramped a _little_ more slowly, my life would be complete; I bet I can slip my phone out with no one noticing..." I read that soon they'll have cloud-based connection, so you can do exactly this, but from Uzbekistan. 

<Spectral Designs fanboy, signing off...>


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> SD lights _are_ strip lights on a panel (though he also offers the addition of COB spots up to 50W), though they are not _just _ strips on a panel. He offers a couple color combinations, and these are distinctly not cheap Amazon strips.
> 
> The main virtues of SD panels are:
> 
> ...




So would you suggest the SD fixtures over 2 AI primes for this sized tank?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Austindg13 said:


> So would you suggest the SD fixtures over 2 AI primes for this sized tank?


Well, I guess it depends what you want in viv lighting. The SDs are cheaper, grow plants at least as well, and make the viv look better, IMHO. And the other concerns I mentioned, too. But you can discount the snarky bit about Uzbekistan, I guess; I'm not too excited about making vivs any more sophisticated than they need to be.

If I were building that size viv, it would not be a paludarium, and I certainly would not try to house a GTP in a planted viv, _but if I did_ it would have an SD panel over it.

One concern (if this is for the GTP you mentioned a while back) is that it is challenging to put heating (an RHP, I assume?) and panel-style lighting over an enclosure, since the panel is basically full-top size. Just a thought.


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Well, I guess it depends what you want in viv lighting. The SDs are cheaper, grow plants at least as well, and make the viv look better, IMHO. And the other concerns I mentioned, too. But you can discount the snarky bit about Uzbekistan, I guess; I'm not too excited about making vivs any more sophisticated than they need to be.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I’ll shoot the guy a message and see if he has anything that would work. 

No I won’t be doing the green tree python, I was under the impression that they would do good in one but they won’t. 

Why don’t you suggest a paludarium? I’m in a fb group and there’s a bunch of really nice paludariums my size and bigger. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fishingguy12345 (Apr 7, 2019)

Austindg13 said:


> I’ll shoot the guy a message and see if he has anything that would work.
> 
> No I won’t be doing the green tree python, I was under the impression that they would do good in one but they won’t.
> 
> ...


Getting the terrarium properly setup for ONE type of animal is a challenge itself, trying to them make it proper for MULTIPLE types of animals is exponentially more difficult (near impossible), and there is no benefit to the animals from sharing an enclosure with another species


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

fishingguy12345 said:


> Getting the terrarium properly setup for ONE type of animal is a challenge itself, trying to them make it proper for MULTIPLE types of animals is exponentially more difficult (near impossible), and there is no benefit to the animals from sharing an enclosure with another species


Yes, this.

There are people, and groups, who focus on building visually attractive "naturalistic" (in some sense, but not in others...) displays and then stocking them with colorful animals as accents, so that the displays are all that much more beautiful.

There are other people, and groups, who focus on species of animals, and set up enclosures that provide the best practical captive living conditions for those animals so that the animals can breed and be studied and be kept with a minimum of unnecessary complication.

I'm the latter, because I think frogs are infinitely more interesting and engaging and valuable and magical than are beautiful displays. After a couple decades of keeping animals in boxes, I've found that beauty gets really old over time, and maintaining it becomes a chore -- the "I don't spend enough time with this so it should go to someone else who will enjoy it more..." phenomenon. But intellectual engagement leads to more intellectual engagement, and on and on.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

This. So well said. It's all about whether you care more about having something pretty in your living room or accounting for your animals' habitat requirements as best you can - you can't do both. We are almost always doing a garbage job of the latter even if we ONLY have one species of animal in our tanks (our tanks are really far away from dart frogs' native habitats, no matter how hard we try). You are doing a lot worse by trying to mix multiple species (fish, lizards, frogs, shrimp, crabs, snakes, etc.) in the tank and having to adjust your conditions to the lowest common denominator of requirements for multiple animal types. There is a philosophical difference between these two approaches. I can't make decisions for other people, but I think that keeping my frogs in the best conditions I can is more important than aesthetic concerns. I fully realize that not everybody feels that way and that other people may have different philosophies of animal husbandry. 

Mark




Socratic Monologue said:


> Yes, this.
> 
> There are people, and groups, who focus on building visually attractive "naturalistic" (in some sense, but not in others...) displays and then stocking them with colorful animals as accents, so that the displays are all that much more beautiful.
> 
> ...


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Sorry, fishingguy, you were the one that said it first, I should have quoted your post, as well.

Mark


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

fishingguy12345 said:


> Getting the terrarium properly setup for ONE type of animal is a challenge itself, trying to them make it proper for MULTIPLE types of animals is exponentially more difficult (near impossible), and there is no benefit to the animals from sharing an enclosure with another species




I think you’re mistaken. I’m not putting multiple animals in this enclosure. My original plan was to put a gtp until I learned that they wouldn’t do good in a paludarium. So Im more than likely going to be putting some sort of tree frog. This post is about LIGHTS and only lights. Not sure where the confusion started about stocking. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Encyclia said:


> This. So well said. It's all about whether you care more about having something pretty in your living room or accounting for your animals' habitat requirements as best you can - you can't do both. We are almost always doing a garbage job of the latter even if we ONLY have one species of animal in our tanks (our tanks are really far away from dart frogs' native habitats, no matter how hard we try). You are doing a lot worse by trying to mix multiple species (fish, lizards, frogs, shrimp, crabs, snakes, etc.) in the tank and having to adjust your conditions to the lowest common denominator of requirements for multiple animal types. There is a philosophical difference between these two approaches. I can't make decisions for other people, but I think that keeping my frogs in the best conditions I can is more important than aesthetic concerns. I fully realize that not everybody feels that way and that other people may have different philosophies of animal husbandry.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark




This tank will not be housing dart frogs. I’ve been in the hobby long enough to know better. Not sure why the stocking of this tank got brought up. I’m asking for a suggestion on lighting lol. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

You said 'paludarium'. Virtually all paludaria have animals on land, and different species in the water. Your case is apparently different, but there were no clues of that difference, so everyone made the reasonable assumption.

You won't typically get _only_ the info you specifically request here; we aren't robots.


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Austindg13 said:


> Why don’t you suggest a paludarium? I’m in a fb group and there’s a bunch of really nice paludariums my size and bigger.


Probably this  If you were talking about a paludarium that wasn't stocked with fish, etc. along with other animals, then that's a different story. I think I was (we were?) reacting to the tendency to want it all in a paludarium - fish in the water, lizards/snakes/frogs in the terrestrial areas. That may not have been your plan, but I have seen it in an absolute ton of posts on this board. I will say again that each extra animal you introduce to the same habitat makes it necessary to adapt conditions farther from the ideal for each individual animal. I wasn't trying to call you out, more just making a broader point to anyone who might be reading this down the line. 

Mark


----------



## fishingguy12345 (Apr 7, 2019)

Austindg13 said:


> I think you’re mistaken. I’m not putting multiple animals in this enclosure. My original plan was to put a gtp until I learned that they wouldn’t do good in a paludarium. So Im more than likely going to be putting some sort of tree frog. This post is about LIGHTS and only lights. Not sure where the confusion started about stocking.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


My apologies, I read your post on a paludarium and assumed that you would be hosting multiple types of animals in it. (I.e aquatic and non aquatic animals). If that is not the case, I'm sorry for the confusion.


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> You said 'paludarium'. Virtually all paludaria have animals on land, and different species in the water. Your case is apparently different, but there were no clues of that difference, so everyone made the reasonable assumption.
> 
> You won't typically get _only_ the info you specifically request here; we aren't robots.




Paludarium refers to land and aquatic features and elements, not necessarily animals for both. However there will be animals in both land and water because of the fish that will be living in the water area. 

I get that. But better to ask than to just jump to random conclusions. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Encyclia said:


> Probably this  If you were talking about a paludarium that wasn't stocked with fish, etc. along with other animals, then that's a different story. I think I was (we were?) reacting to the tendency to want it all in a paludarium - fish in the water, lizards/snakes/frogs in the terrestrial areas. That may not have been your plan, but I have seen it in an absolute ton of posts on this board. I will say again that each extra animal you introduce to the same habitat makes it necessary to adapt conditions farther from the ideal for each individual animal. I wasn't trying to call you out, more just making a broader point to anyone who might be reading this down the line.
> 
> 
> 
> Mark




If you guys were referring to fish than yes that is the plan. Never heard of it being an issue of keeping fish and some sort of “land” animal together. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## fishingguy12345 (Apr 7, 2019)

Austindg13 said:


> If you guys were referring to fish than yes that is the plan. Never heard of it being an issue of keeping fish and some sort of “land” animal together.
> 
> 
> Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


Then, previous comments are still applicable. A paludarium with fish and a land-based inhabitant is NOT advised.


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

fishingguy12345 said:


> Then, previous comments are still applicable. A paludarium with fish and a land-based inhabitant is NOT advised.




Can you send a link as to why this is not advised? Or is it just your personal opinion? Tried looking myself but couldn’t find anything. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Austindg13 said:


> Can you send a link as to why this is not advised? Or is it just your personal opinion? Tried looking myself but couldn’t find anything.


Search here for "mixing". Go to FrogForum and find the page on mixing. This horse has been dead a long, long time.

Fish are animals. Thus, fish + any other animals (typically restricted to vertebrates, for reasons that should become apparent as you learn the reasons why vertebrates ought not to share enclosures) = mixing species in the same enclosure.

This comes up often in paludarium threads here, so that's another good place to look.

Also, in this very thread, Mark already mentioned the complexity of balancing the needs of species.


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Go to FrogForum and find the page on mixing.


Sorry: caudata.org. There's likely good info at FrogForum, too, though.

https://www.caudata.org/cc/articles/Mixing_disasters.shtml


----------



## fishingguy12345 (Apr 7, 2019)

On top of what's been said before: if the tank is 36x18" (base), you're going to have what 6-9" of water depth? So approx. 15 gallons, before taking away space for the substrate for the water section, support for the land section, etc. By the time that's done you're likely down to less than 10 gallons, which is not much space to work with for the aquatic inhabitants .

You then have the issues of filtering their water, you have to either use up even more of their water space with an internal filter, or figure out pumping the water out of the tank , filtering it , and then sending it back into the tank. 

And that's ONLY the aquatic side.

On the land/arboreal side of things, you'll have less floor space (maybe not a major issue if the tank has 36x18" floor space to begin with), you'll eventually have issues with plant roots going down into the water section (taking up even more of the "free space" there ), and unless the land/arboreal inhabitant is a good swimmer you're putting them at a lot of risk if they manage to fall into the water section (which in my experience of keeping reptiles/amphibians/invertebrates, WILL happen eventually)


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Here's a fresh thread, relevant to the subject:

https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/g...ibians-densmore-green-2007-a.html#post3085336


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Here's a fresh thread, relevant to the subject:
> 
> https://www.dendroboard.com/forum/g...ibians-densmore-green-2007-a.html#post3085336




That’s tough stretch. If your worries about bacterial infections well they can happen from anything and everything. So just because there is the possibility doesn’t mean there is a huge cause for concern. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Socratic Monologue (Apr 7, 2018)

Sigh. Didn't actually read the article, huh?


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Sorry: caudata.org. There's likely good info at FrogForum, too, though.
> 
> 
> 
> https://www.caudata.org/cc/articles/Mixing_disasters.shtml




None of these apply to the stocking of the tank. Both the amphibians and fish will be too small to harm the other. Also will have basically no interest in each other, as the amphibian will likely be one that doesn’t do much in the water except for defecating.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Socratic Monologue said:


> Sigh. Didn't actually read the article, huh?




I did man. I’m concerned you didn’t, or maybe you didn’t understand it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Encyclia (Aug 23, 2013)

Maybe this thread derail is adequate, especially since we have the other thread to talk about the article in now  Perhaps we can return to discussing lighting now that opinions have been spoken. At the end of the day, we all have to make decisions for ourselves as to how we will care for our animals. Different folks have differing opinions on the subject, and that is probably as it should be! 

Austin, I've also had good experiences with Spectral Designs, especially with Kurt's flexibility in putting what you want into the light. I asked him to add 3x 10watt spots to the back of my light (36x18x36) to light the back wall a bit better. I have 2x 30watt in the front. The brightness is great, but I kinda wish I could dim the spots independently of the strips. With the spots up high (bright), the color of the strips kinda gets lost which is a shame because I love the mix on those. Anyway, that's my $0.02.

Mark


----------



## Austindg13 (Aug 31, 2017)

Encyclia said:


> Maybe this thread derail is adequate, especially since we have the other thread to talk about the article in now  Perhaps we can return to discussing lighting now that opinions have been spoken. At the end of the day, we all have to make decisions for ourselves as to how we will care for our animals. Different folks have differing opinions on the subject, and that is probably as it should be!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Agreed. 

Thanks man I’ll check him out and see what he can do for me. Thanks. 


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------

