 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / May 2007Snellen Chart
Can anybody direct me to a site from which I might print a Snellen Chart for reading distances? Probably one in PDF format, so the size of the type is nicely preserved... but I would welcome whatever is available. I'm recovering (nicely) from cataract surgery and IOL implant, and want to start experimenting to determine what reading correction I will require, now that my eyes are (close to) 20/20 but I am dependent on depth-of-field for intermediate and near vision. (Yes, yes, I know that my ophthalmologist will do this for me when my eyes stabilize in a few weeks, but I'd like to experiment at home in the mean time!) BTW, I wrote a few weeks ago about my first surgery leaving me with a constricted pupil... that cleared up after a few days. I seem to have a similar symptom in my second eye, but given the experience, I fully expect that to be fully functional again, soon. Rich Sure Rich. Just click here: http://www.smbs.buffalo.edu/oph/ped/IVAC/IVAC.html Then click on "Display". Read at 20 feet. If you have some questions feel free to ask. Otis > Can anybody direct me to a site from which I might print a Snellen Chart > for reading distances? Probably one in PDF format, so the size of the [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > > Rich Rich, here are some hard-copy charts for your use. http://www.i-see.org/eyecharts.html As a quick check, the 20/60 line should be 1 inch high. All the other letters will be correct (proportion) if the 20/60 line is right. Enjoy, Otis On May 25, 1:21 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > Sure Rich. Just click here: > [quoted text clipped - 29 lines] > > - Show quoted text - On May 25, 1:21 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > If you have some questions feel free to ask. and you'll feel free to respond even though you don't know a damn thing about what you write about. no education in vision. no clinical experience in vision. but maybe you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night! > On May 25, 1:21 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > If you have some questions feel free to ask. I have some questions to Otis. 1. Haven't you memorized by now your private Snellen? 2. Aren't you cheating when you continue to use the same familiar private Snellen? 3. Is self deception the purpose of your recommended method? 4. Would you recommend the same methods for an un-natural eye? 5. What about a non-fundamental eye, should the same Snellen be used? 6. Isn't it true that the STATE of an unnatural or nonfundamental eye is not dynamic? 7. Would you recommend memory enhancing exercises to accelerate myopia recovery? 8. Why do the old guys continue attacking you as if you were the biggest quack in the universe? Haven't they heard about much more powerful and dangerous quacks who defraud millions and extract billions of $$$ from them, whereas you have hardly a handful of followers? 9. Why do you continue to post here and expose yourself to eternal hate and ridicule? -- I have some questions to Otis. 1. Haven't you memorized by now your private Snellen? 2. Aren't you cheating when you continue to use the same familiar private Snellen? 3. Is self deception the purpose of your recommended method? -- What the hell are you talking about, Brainy? The link to the IVAC Snellen chart is randomized, in case you failed to realize. Come now, Brainy - surely someone named 'Brainy' should show a little more intellect? No? And even if the 'private snellen' that you're referring to WAS to always stay the same, it frankly wouldn't matter. For example, let's imagine (can you do that, Brainy?) that we have a hard copy chart attached to our bedroom wall. It's pretty familiar by now. So would it be 'cheating' to measure my vision using the same snellen? When you test yourself, *yes* you will already know which letters are where and be able to 'speak' them. But whether or not you can actually see the letter clearly is not dependent on whether or not you've memorized the chart. It's dependent on how solid and black the letters look, obviously. Therefore, if I am able to call out the letter 'E!' but I can hardly see it, then OF COURSE that measurement would be inaccurate. And even if you had remembered perfectly exactly how the letter looked with normal vision, and you 'imagined' you saw it perfectly, would that really be imagining it? The answer is: No. What one remembers perfectly, he imagines perfectly, and sees perfectly. Simple enough, right? Think before you speak, mika. I am more than honored to be attacked (the second time, and still counting) by this Revival new addition. Just read his recent post "Beuatiful Story" to get an idea of where s/he is coming from. With opponents like this who needs supporters? > -- > I have some questions to Otis. [quoted text clipped - 52 lines] > -- > Message posted via MedKB.comhttp://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/vision/200705/1 -- > If you have some questions feel free to ask. and you'll feel free to respond even though you don't know a damn thing about what you write about. -- And YOU are beginning to piss me off a little. I mean - what the hell is this? Rich asks for a Snellen chart, Otis kindly provides him with several helpful links, and along comes a git like you pouncing on him like a retard. If you 'aint got anything to productive to add to this discussion, then please do try and keep your shitty comments to yourself, thanks. You have a personal issue with Otis - you take it elsewhere. This isn't your playground to bully others. Infact, you know what, P Clar? STFU. Nice chattin'. > -- > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > And YOU are beginning to piss me off a little. Well ... that should incite a 180 degree turnabout, I should think. > I mean - what the hell is this? It's years of spew by Otis. It's 12+ cases of induced diplopia THAT WE KNOW OF. It's insults, lies, falsehoods, deception, misleading use of jargon, and absolutely no real dialog or conversation. Otis likes his soapbox, but can't/won't engage when asked relevant, logical, direct questions. It's years of people getting sick of the person whose boots you've, inexplicably, chosen to lick. > If you 'aint got anything to productive to add to this discussion, then > please do try and keep your shitty comments to yourself, thanks. And that's what we've been trying to tell Otis for more than half a dozen years. Beautiful summation. > You have a personal issue with Otis - you take it elsewhere. Have you noticed that--over the last six + years, HUNDREDS of people have "had a personal issue with Otis?" Notice the common element (hint: it's Otis)? > This isn't your playground to bully others. But, magically, it IS yours to bully others, huh? Just checking. > Infact, you know what, P Clar? > > STFU. > > Nice chattin'. I'm sure the Poet Laureate is coming your way. Wait for it. > -- > [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > -- > Message posted via MedKB.comhttp://www.medkb.com/Uwe/Forums.aspx/vision/200705/1 Who anointed you "hall monitor"? People are free to post as they please. YOU NO LIKE, YOU NO LOOK !!!!! Dear PClar, Subject: I did my best to help Rich. Rich asked for a simple Snellen eye chart that he could use. I provided a Monitor Snellen, and a printable Snellen -- and you go ballastic. So rather that doing with Rich asked, you do not help him -- you attack me for helping him. You should have helped him. Otis On May 25, 9:54 pm, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote: > On May 25, 1:21 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > no education in vision. no clinical experience in vision. but maybe > you stayed at a Holiday Inn Express last night! > Read at 20 feet. As usual, Otis answers the question without reading the whole post. > If you have some questions feel free to ask. But will you read the questions in full, or just spew out one of your canned answers which don't apply and aren't correct? > > to start experimenting to determine what reading correction I will > > require, now that my eyes are (close to) 20/20 but I am dependent on > > depth-of-field for intermediate and near vision. > I'm recovering (nicely) from cataract surgery and IOL implant, and want to > start experimenting to determine what reading correction I will require, > now that my eyes are (close to) 20/20 but I am dependent on depth-of-field > for intermediate and near vision. It isn't the print that's important. It's the distance. > (Yes, yes, I know that my ophthalmologist will do this for me when my eyes > stabilize in a few weeks, but I'd like to experiment at home in the mean > time!) If you want precision, measure the distance from the bridge of your nose to your reading material and tell him you want a prescription optimized for that distance. If you need to see over a range of distances, split the difference, or consider a progressive that covers the extremes, say 16" to 36". -MT, OD > Can anybody direct me to a site from which I might print a Snellen Chart > for reading distances? Probably one in PDF format, so the size of the > type is nicely preserved... but I would welcome whatever is available. The Snellen chart and test are intended for distance vision. Doctors have something similar, though. > I'm recovering (nicely) from cataract surgery and IOL implant, and want > to start experimenting to determine what reading correction I will [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > eyes stabilize in a few weeks, but I'd like to experiment at home in the > mean time!) I've had cataract surgery in both eyes, five years ago and ten years ago. You can do much better testing at home. I use a +1.75 for computer use and regular books, +2.25 for newspapers and paperback and 2.75 for the fine print on pill bottles and such. Buy these at the drugstore or supermarket for US$15, roughly. You can try them on at the store, both to see how they look on your face and to see how they work for you. If you play with these, you will be in a better position to help your OMD find what is right for you. As someone else mentioned, measure the distance between you and the computer screen and between the newspaper and yourself. Give those numbers to your OMD before the exam starts. You may end up using something entirely different, but I think it would be helpful to have some experience with close correction. YMMV, of course. > BTW, I wrote a few weeks ago about my first surgery leaving me with a > constricted pupil... that cleared up after a few days. I seem to have a > similar symptom in my second eye, but given the experience, I fully > expect that to be fully functional again, soon. > > Rich > I've had cataract surgery in both eyes, five years ago and ten years > ago. You can do much better testing at home. I use a +1.75 for [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > for you. If you play with these, you will be in a better position to > help your OMD find what is right for you. Thank you Dan! That is exactly what I am trying to do. I've got a pair of +1.50 that I use for the computer, and a pair of +2.00 that I am using for reading (from before my surgery), but I don't think they are quite right... as you say, testing at home, trying to find the distances for reading that YOU use, under the lighting conditions in YOUR home... that's a good test! Your experience of +1.75; +2.25; and +2.75 is interesting. I probably would be reluctant to go so strong, but now I think I'll give them a try! Thanks again! Rich |
Reply to this Message |
 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
|
©2009 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.