Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / General / Vision / January 2005

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

pearle vision - computer glasses - bad lenses!

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
hfs2@yahoo.com - 15 Jan 2005 18:41 GMT
I just picked up my pair of Pearle Vision
"computer" glasses and aaahhh.

There seems to be 2 small "water marks" in the center sides of
each lens, a total of 4.  One looks like this (ignore the dots,
I had to insert them to hold the white space.  google shifted
everything over to the side)

.___
( | )     "supoz to be a circle with line pointed down
..|
.100

the other looks like

.___
( | )     "supoz to be a circle with line pointed down
..|
..CS

They create a blurry zone which I was told to ignore.
But there also seems to be a 'vertical' bump in the lens - both
of them.  As you train you eye on a single spot and move your
head from side to side, there is a section of the lens that
puts the spot out of focus.  It's like a transision zone that
I would expect horizontally in a standard bifocal.

Also, is it possible that there were additional "water marks"
that would have been in the vertical blur zone?  I get the
impression that they failed to polish something away.

They will be returned today.

Questions:

1. What are these marks for?

2. What do they mean?

3. Are they chemically etched or physically placed?  I not
sure if I see a ripple when I reflect light off the lens
or printing.  I'd say ripple as in seeing a dent, but again
I'm not sure.

4. Does this plasic material come off a roll?  Would explain
the irregular positions of these marks when comparing the
two lenses.

I've had saftey glasses that had even more pronounce marking,
but the markings were way up in the corner - some place I
would never see. And they look printed or etched.

On the computer glasses one lens has this mark just outside what
I would call the sweet spot.  The the markings also seem to
roam.  One lens has the marks near the sweetspot and extreme
edge, the second lens has the marks both to the outside edges,
like this plastic came off a roll.

%0==D1cnks
Dr Judy - 15 Jan 2005 19:01 GMT
I just picked up my pair of Pearle Vision
"computer" glasses and aaahhh.

There seems to be 2 small "water marks" in the center sides of
each lens, a total of 4.  One looks like this (ignore the dots,
I had to insert them to hold the white space.  google shifted
everything over to the side)

.___
( | )     "supoz to be a circle with line pointed down
..|
.100

the other looks like

.___
( | )     "supoz to be a circle with line pointed down
..|
..CS

They create a blurry zone which I was told to ignore.
But there also seems to be a 'vertical' bump in the lens - both
of them.  As you train you eye on a single spot and move your
head from side to side, there is a section of the lens that
puts the spot out of focus.  It's like a transision zone that
I would expect horizontally in a standard bifocal.

You have progressive computer glasses.  The central part of the lens is set
at the correct power for computer use; the power  increases towards the
bottom of the lens to the power needed for reading and decreases towards the
top of the lens to the power needed to view 6ft  to 8 ft.  You are noticing
the tranistion zones.

Progressives do not work if you keep your eye on a single spot and move your
head from side to side.  The rules for using a progressive:
Point your nose at what you are looking at and move your chin up and down
until the clear spot is found.

Also, is it possible that there were additional "water marks"
that would have been in the vertical blur zone?  I get the
impression that they failed to polish something away.

They will be returned today.

Questions:

1. What are these marks for?

2. What do they mean?

The marks are to identify the lens type and progression rate.  They are
etched on all progressives and many single vision lenses and cannot be
removed.  They are used by the edging lab to put the lenes in the correct
position in the frame and by the dispenser to measure whether the lab
provided the correct lens in the correct positon. The marks are different on
the nasal and temporal sides and help to identify right and left lenses
during edging.

3. Are they chemically etched or physically placed?  I not
sure if I see a ripple when I reflect light off the lens
or printing.  I'd say ripple as in seeing a dent, but again
I'm not sure.

4. Does this plasic material come off a roll?  Would explain
the irregular positions of these marks when comparing the
two lenses.

I've had saftey glasses that had even more pronounce marking,
but the markings were way up in the corner - some place I
would never see. And they look printed or etched.

On the computer glasses one lens has this mark just outside what
I would call the sweet spot.  The the markings also seem to
roam.  One lens has the marks near the sweetspot and extreme
edge, the second lens has the marks both to the outside edges,
like this plastic came off a roll.

If you cannot see clearly using the "point nose..." method of positioning
your head, Pearle may have mismeasured where the centres should be.  They
can check that when you take them in.

Expect a "sweet spot" and to take some time to learn to use them.  If you do
not adapt after two to three weeks, you may need to get a non progressive
lens.

Dr Judy
hfs2@yahoo.com - 15 Jan 2005 19:08 GMT
Thank you for the information but this transistion question remain.

I expected, and can see, the progression top to bottom - it's like a
regular bifocal.

What I don't understand is the change I experience moving my head left
to right.  It should not
be there.  It isn't there on anyother pair of glasses I've ever had.
Mike Tyner - 15 Jan 2005 19:12 GMT
> I expected, and can see, the progression top to bottom - it's like a
> regular bifocal.
>
> What I don't understand is the change I experience moving
> my head left to right.  It should not be there.  It isn't there
> on anyother pair of glasses I've ever had.

It's there to some degree in every pair of progressives. Not so much in the
upper portion (distance vision) but the near add can't be clear all the way
across. Physics won't allow it. Some brands are better than others, and
adjusting the frame (closer) can often improve the experience.

-MT
hfs2@yahoo.com - 15 Jan 2005 19:22 GMT
I do remember her saying something about distortion and that I would
experience
it because (I think she said) because the progressive line went all the
way across
the lens.  Does that make sense?  Had I known about this blur I would
have just
got the old regular line.  This dead zone is dead center on my left,
off to the right
on the other.  It's pronounced on the far lens (top).
Thanks all
That's it.
Sibir - 24 Jan 2005 09:44 GMT
> I do remember her saying something about distortion and that I would
> experience
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
> Thanks all
> That's it.

I don't know your Rx, this could cause some issues if astigmatism or
aniesekonia plays a role, but the optics should normally give equal left
or right cutoffs before the blur. I would check the OCs for each lens.
The left eye may be out of alignment. I'd also double check the
convergence for each eye independantly. You should be able to read most
books just fine with a slight back and forth motion.

There is going to be a blur off to either side for any kind of
multifocal. There is an easy fix for it. DON'T LOOK THERE! Get the
alignment fixed and learn to use them.

Carl
Joe Stella - 15 Jan 2005 23:51 GMT
>Thank you for the information but this transistion question remain.
>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>to right.  It should not
>be there.  It isn't there on anyother pair of glasses I've ever had.

I suspect that you have never worn progressive lenses before.  They
all show that effect, more or less, when you look through the
intermediate focus area.

Now the strength of your computer glasses should be low enough so
that you are not looking through the intermediate portion of the
lens when you view your computer screen.  You are supposed to be
looking though the upper, distance portion.  Then there will not
be any blur when you move your head from side to side.  That's
what computer glasses are for; they give you a wide field of view
at computer screen distance.
Mark A - 15 Jan 2005 19:06 GMT
0. Do not post on newsgroups using rtf or html. Always use text. Change the
option in your newsreader.

1. The etchings are using to identify the progressive lens manufacturer,
model, and usually lens material. They should be outside the field of
vision. The should also include a number which represents the reading add
power.

Lens also come with markings on them to identify the center (horizontal and
vertical) of the lens. This is important because the center of the lens must
be placed at the proper fitting height in the frame for your vision. These
will wash off. Ask Pearle to remove any remaining markers in the field of
vision.

2. Check this link for progressive lens id's suing the etchings on the side
of the lenses. The document is a few years old, and does not include all
manufacturers. This may be a problem for Pearle, since they don't use well
known brands (or make their own).
http://katzandklein.com/images/LensIdentifierGreen2002.pdf

4. The lens markings (etched permanently on the sides, and those that wash
off in the middle) are always in the same place in the round lens, which
usually is about 75mm  - 80 mm before it is cut to place in your frame. When
the round lens is cut to put in your frame, they may have cut the lenses so
that it appears the markings are in different places. This may be OK if your
eye positions are asymmetrical, or it may indicate that the lenses/frame
were not measured/cut properly, or that the person who did the frame fitting
on your face made errors (fairly common with progressives).
hfs2@yahoo.com - 15 Jan 2005 19:10 GMT
Bingo - didn't cut it right.  Thanks!
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.