 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Medical Forum / General / Vision / October 2007Ordering glasses online
Hi all, I posted to this group about a month ago and got really great responses, thanks! I as looking at ordering glasses online. Basically where I would send a frame and prescription in to them and a week or so later I would receive a complete pair of eyeglasses. I think my prescription is straightforward, I need single vision lenses, prescription about 5.0. I was going to go with Trivex. Some of the local practitioners that have the material want you to use their frames and I don't really like any of the frames that these specific people have hence my search online. Does anyone see any issues with ordering this way and then getting a "fitting/adjustment" done at a local optometrist? Apparently the only thing I need other than my prescription is the Pupilary Distance(?). Would appreciate any advice/recommendations, Thanks, Kevin KC <kebuchan@yahoo.com> wrote in news:1191503630.193433.151660 @r29g2000hsg.googlegroups.com: > Does anyone see any issues with ordering this way and then getting a > "fitting/adjustment" done at a local optometrist? Apparently the > only thing I need other than my prescription is the Pupilary > Distance(?). You get the service you pay for. If all goes well, you will be happy with an online purchase. If not, you will be unhappy. I think the on-site service is worth the extra cost.  SignatureScott Reverse name to reply Pupillary Distance (PD) is the distance (usually measured in millimeters) between the centers of the pupils in each eye. This measurement is used when making prescription eyeglasses. Positioning lenses correctly in relation to the pupil centers is especially important for higher powered lenses. (Wiki) > Pupillary Distance (PD) is the distance (usually measured in > millimeters) between the centers of the pupils in each eye. This > measurement is used when making prescription eyeglasses. Positioning > lenses correctly in relation to the pupil centers is especially > important for higher powered lenses. (Wiki) For that matter, you may wish to explain issues like pantoscopic tilt to the original poster. Thanks. >For that matter, you may wish to explain issues like pantoscopic tilt What it means is that, in the case of a minus lens, if the pantoscopic tilt is not fitted correctly then it can be a very big problem for patient because if done incorrectly, unwanted extra minus cylindrical and spherical power will be induced on the 180 axis. In the case of plus lens extra plus spherical and plus cylindrical power in induced on the 180 axis. Basically the end result being that the person will not see correctly through the lenses even though the power of the lens may be perfect. Well yes, that is the explanation. Problems like this is a good demonstration of the uselessness of glasses, and the infinite issues the maker has to consider. The worse the error of refraction, the greater the level of stupidity in wearing the glasses. Pantoscopic tilt can be defined as a rotation around the 180 meridian of vision. Pantoscopic tilt can be defined as a rotation around the 180 meridian of vision.So in the case of this patient Kevin, who is farsighted, a flaw in the pantoscopic tilt would cause unwanted plus spherical and plus cylindrical power to be added, if he was using a + prescription. Problems like this is a good demonstration of the uselessness of glasses, and the infinite issues the maker has to consider. The worse the error of refraction, the greater the level of stupidity in wearing the glasses. Neil / Zetsu, When would someone like a Lenscrafters do that? I got my prescription and handed it into them. This woman walked me around and helped me pick out a frame. She took measurement with these binocular looking things (I guess to figure out PD) and that was it. I came back an hour later and she handed me my new glasses. I put them on, she heated and twisted the ends (around the ears) so they would be tighter and not move around... and that was it. When I went back to complain about the spherical and chromatic abberation, she heated and bent the frame basically tightened the curve so it would be closer to my face on the edges and fit more snugly. Anyway, that didn't do anything for the abberations. That was it. Is the Pantoscopic tilt built into the lens? Did she measure that with the binocular-like tool? My prescription is +5.00/+5.25, I'm farsighted. Thanks, Kevin > When would someone like a Lenscrafters do that? Kevin: The thing that "Zetsu" and I have in common is that neither of us has ANY expertise in this area. Where we DIFFER is that "Zetsu" will still try to give advice. Ignore it. Along with the eye docs and vision researchers, there's a very talented, compassionate, and helpful optician named Robert Martellaro who frequents s.m.v. You'd do well to get their input on this. I'm highly farsighted, too. Every single element from refraction (the order in which the trial lenses are placed into the trial frame), vertex distance, pantoscopic tilt, etc, etc., etc. is critical for high degrees of refractive error. More specifics should come from better qualified people. I'm sure they'll chime in. Take care, Neil Hello, >Where we DIFFER is that "Zetsu" will still try to give advice. Wasn't it you who told me to give advice in the first place, stupid? Let me quote, to wake you up from your poor ability to remember the short term: "For that matter, you may wish to explain issues like pantoscopic tilt to the original poster. " So you shouldn't be a hypocrite! >The thing that "Zetsu" and I have in common Yuck! I don't want to have anything in common with you, old man. > >Where we DIFFER is that "Zetsu" will still try to give advice. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > "For that matter, you may wish to explain issues like pantoscopic tilt > to the original poster. " So you shouldn't be a hypocrite! No. I was simply pointing out to Kevin that you can do no better than to cut and paste from a website. That's not being helpful. Smart people know when to say "I don't know." You're not in that group. I never cut and paste unless I put a reference at the end. Like it will say: 'Wiki', or 'PubMed' at the end. But if I do not add a reference in the end of the post, then it means I am not copying and pasting. Then it is my own words. What makes you think I am copying and pasting, anyway! I never ever plaguerise work as that is very dishonorable. > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Yuck! I don't want to have anything in common with you, old man. Dear Zetsu jerk, perhaps neil was being sarcastic when he suggested that you write more BS about pantoscopic tilt, etc. The point is, you are not addressing the real and important questions that the original poster has. instead you are just posting for the sake of posting because you apparently like to see your messages appear on the internet. the poster is a real person with real concerns who is looking for real help from someone who really knows what they are talking about. that is NOT you. in fact, you change your name and alleged identity so much that we have no idea who your really are. are you a 15 year old kid living in england or are you the italian idiot Rishi? who knows and who cares. the point is that you offer nothing of value to anyone who posts here but for some reason you can't resist posting again and again and again. yuck, go away you pathetic little egotistical idiot. who wants to have anything in common with you anyway. Hi pclar, First of all I am not a jerk and the only real jerk around here is you, you are the biggest one ever! Anyway Neil wasn't being sarcastic he actually did ask me to 'explain to the original poster' about pantoscopic tilt, and so I did. Now I don't see what problem you have with that, I am just doing my best to help Kevin and you just have to jump on me like I am a big criminal. Yes, I like seeing my messages on the internet but so what. Why wouldn't I? But no that is not the real reason that I am posting. I am posting because I want to help out the poster here, and I did a lot of research on the internet and it took me a long time to find out about the pantoscopic tilt and now you are telling me off even after all my hard work and I only did it because I was trying my best to help the poster Kevin and I get loads of flames. Plus, I never even changed my name all I did was change my alias what's wrong with that, I don't see what's the problem with changing an alias. It's not like the world is going to end just because I changed it now is it. Now you should stop being so worked up about that. Yes I am 15 years old living in England, no I'm not Rishi. I am offering things of value to the people who post here, I am telling them how to cure their sight and anyone with a bit of intelligence would at least demonstrate these truths to themselves, that are found when a person begin the cure of imperfect sight with the rest methods system of treatment without glasses; the fools are those who continue to waddle in the pool of failure left behind by idiotic professions such as optometry, that knows nothing in the real cure of vision. No I am not going to go away and I am not an little egotistical idiot. I don't care if no one wants to have anything in common with me, but I know I don't want to have anything in common with you stupid man. > First of all I am not a jerk and the only real jerk around here is > you, you are the biggest one ever! Anyway Neil wasn't being sarcastic Yes, I was. > I am posting because I want to help out the poster here, You're an idiot. Your motives are totally irrelevant. Well if you were being sarcastic then howcome in your next post you wrote that pantoscopic tilt plays an important role for farsighted correction? That means you weren't being sarcastic. And I'm not an idiot you're the idiot so be quiet. My motives in posting might be irrelevant, but pclar was the one who questioned them in the first place so it was reasonable for me to object. > Well if you were being sarcastic then howcome in your next post you > wrote that pantoscopic tilt plays an important role for farsighted > correction? That means you weren't being sarcastic. No, of course it doesn't. You're just an idiot. You "prove" things in the same irrational way that Otis does. That should scare the HELL out of you. > And I'm not an idiot you're the idiot so be quiet. Actually, if YOU'd stop posting on this site, then YOU'd stop looking like an idiot. Really I don't care all that much how it makes me look or if it makes me look like a big idiot, posting on this site. I will continue to slap people out of their slumber - it is a dirty work, mind well, but someone has to do it. If no one does it then people remain in their sleep, following the ludicrous treatments of optomety like blind follower after blind follower. People will continue to suffer under the incompetence of nonsense quackeries such as glasses and LASIK. >That should scare the HELL out of you. What truly scares me is your idiocy. > What truly scares me is your idiocy. As they say, coming from you, that's a very big compliment. Thank you. Your welcome! > > Well if you were being sarcastic then howcome in your next post you > > wrote that pantoscopic tilt plays an important role for farsighted [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > Actually, if YOU'd stop posting on this site, then YOU'd stop looking > like an idiot. Neil, Probably me too. > > First of all I am not a jerk and the only real jerk around here is > > you, you are the biggest one ever! Anyway Neil wasn't being sarcastic [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > You're an idiot. Your motives are totally irrelevant. How often you are in good mood ? > Hi pclar, > > First of all I am not a jerk and the only real jerk around here is > you, you are the biggest one ever! oh yeah?? well I'm gonna tell my dad to call your dad and then you're really gonna get in trouble. give us all a break you sick little kid. On Oct 5, 5:47 am, p.clar...@gmail.com wrote: > > Hello, > [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > instead you are just posting for the sake of posting because you > apparently like to see your messages appear on the internet. Would not you be bored without ? the > poster is a real person with real concerns who is looking for real > help from someone who really knows what they are talking about. that > is NOT you. in fact, you change your name and alleged identity so > much that we have no idea who your really are. are you a 15 year old > kid living in england or are you the italian idiot Why we should use words like that ?Can we substitute them for something more mmm...gentle? >Rishi? who knows > and who cares. the point is that you offer nothing of value to anyone [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > yuck, go away you pathetic little egotistical idiot. who wants to > have anything in common with you anyway. >> X-No-Archive: yes > > Pantoscopic tilt can be defined as a rotation around the 180 meridian > of vision. a rotation of WHAT? SignatureNicolaas. ... Arse-deep in alligators, one can sometimes lose sight of the purpose of one's presence: to drain the swamp. Dear Kevin, It might be easier to just click here: http://zennioptical.com/cart/home.php Choose your frame, then type in your prescription. Piece of cake. Otis > Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Kevin On Oct 4, 5:47 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > Dear Kevin, > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > Piece of cake. So ... based on Kevin's high hyperopic prescription, you don't foresee any issues? Never mind. Don't answer that. YOU wouldn't. Kevin: you need a very good refraction -- possibly even by an optometrist who specializes in "low vision optometry" and who understands issues like vertex distance, pantoscopic tilt, etc. When your Rx is over 5.00d, the little things can make a big difference. Here's the usual disclaimer. Looks like it's needed again: Sorry. Rishi Giovanni Gatti (Zetsu), Lena102938, and Otis Brown are trolls who haunt s.m.v. Rishi has published, and is trying to sell worthless books. Otis is pathologically dishonest and actually hurts people. Following his advice can induce double vision in those not working closely with an eye doctor. Lena102938 uses anti-eye doctor rhetoric as a substitute for ANY actual information. It seems she now has to wear glasses and has developed a pathological (and ILLOGICAL) resentment toward the industry that "foisted these glasses upon her." You'd do well to ignore them and wait for responses from the caring, compassionate eye doctors who DO also participate in this site. Dear Kevin, A caring, compassionate eye doctor wrote you a highly accurate prescription after a complete review. You have the written prescription (as required by law) in you hand. You can fill your prescription anywhere you wish. Best, Otis > On Oct 4, 5:47 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 36 lines] > You'd do well to ignore them and wait for responses from the > caring, compassionate eye doctors who DO also participate in this site. On Oct 4, 7:13 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > Dear Kevin, > [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Otis Otis? Can you tell me about the impact of vertex distance on accuracy when an Rx of +5 is written? In other words, if the vertex distance is not accurately taken into account WHEN THE refraction is performed, AND is not noted on the Rx, can you tell me how much difference (in diopters) results from, say, a 10mm discrepancy in vertex distance? Thanks. Kevin: since this is the kind of thing that Otis seems to know nothing about ... and cares even LESS about ... then: a) You may want to review the following to see why I point it out, and b) You may want to simply ignore Otis c) Actually, I'd do both http://www.drweiss.com/portals/15/pdf/Vertex_article_published.pdf > On Oct 4, 7:13 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > > http://www.drweiss.com/portals/15/pdf/Vertex_article_published.pdf Wow, I left for a few hours and there are about 12 additional responses :-) I don't know Otis or Zetsu. I do know that Zetsu kept posting in almost every post, something about "you can control/fix your eyesight with your mind, so forget about eyeglasses or lasik". Otis, I was looking for some answers,. I did ask for recommendations too though so thanks for plugging zennioptical.com website, I'll consider it with the rest after I figure out what else I'm missing other than PD. Neil - I decided to go with Trivex b/c of it's high Abbe value and good optics. However, none of the local optometrists (that I called) sell Trivex AND have the frames that I want. Will wait for someone to chime in, although a lot of people seem to advocate local practioners. Thanks, Kevin Two months ago, I took a chance and bought 2 pairs of glasses from Zenni Optical and was quite pleased. Unfortunately, you don't get to select the brand of lenses. My wife got progressive bifocals with photochromatic lenses for a total of $89, and I got a pair of lined bifocals with antireflective coating for $30. Shipping for both pair was $5. The frames appear cheaply made, but looked good. Oh, and it took 2 weeks to get the glasses. The lenses were perfect. No scratches and the prescriptions were right on! I've read many, many reviews of Zenni and the consensus seems to be that IF they get it right, you'll be more than pleased. But if you have any kind of problem, good luck getting it resolved in a timely fashion, if at all! By the way, does anyone here know where Zenni gets their lenses? Ed > Two months ago, I took a chance and bought 2 pairs of glasses from > Zenni Optical and was quite pleased. Unfortunately, you don't get to [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > > Ed Ed, It's important to note Kevin's prescription, though, when considering the relative merits of online ordering. If he wanted +1.50d readers, then ... sure. But his high plus Rx -- IMHO -- requires a little more attention to detail AND the flexibility for service after the sale that you reference. Not every problem with imperfect refraction CAN or SHOULD BE dealt with at the frame fitting level. That's the primary reason for local, highly qualified optometrist involvement. Kevin: how "local" is "local?" Perhaps with a bit of digging, you could find somebody who's at least /reasonably/ close. For the one or two trips that you might need to make, I'm thinking it would pay big dividends.... > > Two months ago, I took a chance and bought 2 pairs of glasses from > > Zenni Optical and was quite pleased. Unfortunately, you don't get to [quoted text clipped - 35 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Neil, I live in a metropolitan area so local is basically a 30mile radius I guess. Then again it's just optometrists who were referred to me by family and friends and some that advertise locally. If PD and Vertex can be measured by a local optometrist or my opthamologist I wonder if I would be covered. I'm definitely not looking at $39.99 a pair. So far the numbers I have in mind (from looking at multiple online places, including Ebay) are about $120 where I supply the frame. The problem found when I went to Zenni* or 39Dollar* they don't really specify the material of the lens. I know for sure I don't want Polycarbonate, that's what my Lenscrafters glasses were before I returned them, horrible optics. So I need either Hi Index plastic or Trivex lenses. Thanks, Kevin > I live in a metropolitan area so local is basically a 30mile radius I > guess. Then again it's just optometrists who were referred to me by [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > returned them, horrible optics. So I need either Hi Index plastic or > Trivex lenses. Again (and I'm not an expert; just another fairly farsighted guy), at your/our level of Rx, I'd want it done right. If you reviewed the article cited as a .pdf, you can readily see how a few millimeters can make a significant difference in your Rx. Your average 55 year old, needing +1.50 reading glasses has no real reason to spend more than drug store money ... unless THOSE glasses are inadequate or unsatisfactory. YOU (or I), on the other hand, SHOULD gain some awareness of ABBE value, index of refraction, etc. Depending on your age, particularly if you've had a cycloplegic refraction (I'd recommend it if you're under 40-45 years old), you're likely to keep a pair of glasses for a few years. Why economize when comfort, clarity, and crispness of vision CAN be enhanced with a really excellent Rx AND high-quality lenses. If you're interested, perhaps you could offer which metro area you're in. Maybe somebody knows somebody there, or ... if nothing else ... might be able to point you toward a "low vision optometrist" with particular expertise in meticulous refractions. Neil > > Two months ago, I took a chance and bought 2 pairs of glasses from > > Zenni Optical and was quite pleased. Unfortunately, you don't get to [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > > If he wanted +1.50d readers, then ... sure. Go to wallgreens for 30$ > But his high plus Rx -- medium > IMHO -- requires a little more attention to detail AND the flexibility > for service after the sale that you reference. No when it is high you would not spot detail +/-1.5 > Not every problem with imperfect refraction CAN or SHOULD BE dealt > with at the frame fitting level. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > two trips that you might need to make, I'm thinking it would pay big > dividends.... > On Oct 4, 7:13 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > can you tell me how much difference (in diopters) results from, say, a > 10mm discrepancy in vertex distance? Do not know Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? There is a word: adaptation, Neil, and not high, middle. > Do not know > Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? > There is a word: adaptation, Neil, > and not high, middle. Lena, When you're wrong ... feel free to STFU. http://www.aoa.org/documents/CPG-16.pdf Thanks. > > Do not know > > Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thanks. Well, Neil, I am wrong and what? I do not afraid to be wrong , I am serious. > > > Do not know > > > Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > I do not afraid to be wrong , I am serious. You figure it out. Check YOUR contentions. THEN check the reference that I provided. You, Otis, AND Atchoo are absolutely dead set against the idea of any independent research or fact checking, aren't you. Small wonder the three of you are wrong so often, and reach faulty conclusions nearly constantly. That's a damned shame. > > > > Do not know > > > > Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > Small wonder the three of you are wrong so often, and reach faulty > conclusions nearly constantly. Probably not a conclusions. for me the answer is " it depends" > That's a damned shame. No it is not a shame To be wrong it is not a shame. Shame when you do not have an opinion, or scare to tell it. > > > > > Do not know > > > > > Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? [quoted text clipped - 28 lines] > No it is not a shame To be wrong it is not a shame. > Shame when you do not have an opinion, or scare to tell it. No. Shame when you try to pretend you expert when, really, you wrong and simply hate eye doctors. That shame. > > No it is not a shame To be wrong it is not a shame. > > Shame when you do not have an opinion, or scare to tell it. Plus, we not talk about opinions. We talk about facts and you wrong much more often than right. Maybe STFU is good idea, no? > > Do not know > > Even if it is +/- 1 and what ? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Thanks. What is STFU ? > What is STFU ? www.google.com Tell all your friends (Otis and Atchoo). > > What is STFU ? > > www.google.com > > Tell all your friends (Otis and Atchoo). I googled it: "Internet slang." To be frank, I am not used to something like that. > > > What is STFU ? > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > "Internet slang." > To be frank, I am not used to something like that. If you keep chiming in ... when you're factually wrong, and clearly have very little idea what you're talking about ... I'd like to suggest that you try to get used to it. We're up to about three solid trolls here, right now (You, Otis, and Atchoo). The big question is, really, which of you will cause medical harm to somebody next? Care to guess ... Lena? You seem to do that with great ease. > > > > What is STFU ? > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Care to guess ... Lena? You seem to do that with great ease. You make me laughing , Tanks No, I do not think so. I am not so how to tell that focused on one idea. I wish I could do some other things with that ease. > On Oct 4, 5:47 pm, "otisbr...@pa.net" <otisbr...@pa.net> wrote: > [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > So ... based on Kevin's high hyperopic prescription, you don't foresee > any issues? Neil, Not "high" , Medium > > > Dear Kevin, > [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > Neil, > Not "high" , Medium Don't be afraid to be wrong, Lena. It's good. It's healthy. Though, come to think of it, you (and Otis) are wrong at an alarming rate. Perhaps that's not good ... not healthy. He's a +5 and a +5.25. READ a little. THEN shut up. http://www.aoa.org/documents/CPG-16.pdf Thanks. >Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >only thing I need other than my prescription is the Pupilary >Distance(?). >Would appreciate any advice/recommendations, > >Thanks, > >Kevin Kevin, You already know your Rx can perform poorly when filled by an inexperienced optician at big box optical, so it shouldn't surprise you if I said an order taker with no experience, who can't even observe the relationship between the frame, lens, eyes, and head, will cause even more problems then you've experienced already. The solution is to upgrade, not downgrade the skill and experience of the optician. Start looking at MD and OD offices and clinics, and use the knowledge that you've acquired online to ask tough questions, like issues with chromatic aberration (you don't want it- or more accurately not to much) and aspheric designs (this you do want!). They will also be able to fit the lenses into your own frame, if the frame is suitable for your Rx and fit. Make sure that any frame you purchase elsewhere can be returned for a full credit just in case there are any issues. Hope this helps Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself." - Richard Feynman > >Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > Hope this helps > Robert Martellaro Robert, Thanks for your response, was waiting for it :-) So, I guess you're saying that ordering online is probably a really bad idea. My issues with the glasses from Lenscrafters was the wrong material, namely Polycarbonate that caused the chromatic and spherical abberation. I was looking at getting Trivex or hi-index plastic (Seiko / Nikon) that would have a higher abbe value and reduce those abberation issues. However, if I were to go to an online place the only information they have would be what I send them which is basically prescription and PD. In order for your local opthamologist/optometrist to make a pair of glasses for you, what else do they measure before setting them up? Granted, what it is they do measure is probably not something I can just measure and send to an online place. Really appreciate your advise, as opposed to the other 40+ babble responses I've been wading through :-) Thanks, Kevin > > >Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 66 lines] > > Kevin >> >Hi all, >> [quoted text clipped - 48 lines] >So, I guess you're saying that ordering online is probably a really >bad idea. Might be ok for a back-up pair, although your optician could probably make a bare bones pair for not much more than what it will cost online. >My issues with the glasses from Lenscrafters was the wrong >material, namely Polycarbonate that caused the chromatic and spherical >abberation. I was looking at getting Trivex or hi-index plastic >(Seiko / Nikon) that would have a higher abbe value and reduce those >abberation issues. I like Trivex, but whatever you choose, make sure that it's an aspheric design. >However, if I were to go to an online place the only information they >have would be what I send them which is basically prescription and >PD. In order for your local opthamologist/optometrist to make a pair >of glasses for you, what else do they measure before setting them >up? PD must be monocular; ie, for each eye individually, and the vertical optical centers should be checked for proper position and adjusted if necessary. Frame should not be rimless, the nasal lens thickness should not interfere with the pads or pad arms when adjusted properly, should be adjustable for panto, sized for sufficient field of vision but small enough to minimize thickness/magnification and weight, and so on. >Granted, what it is they do measure is probably not something I >can just measure and send to an online place. Right, although it's unlilely they'll be able to follow any special instructions concerning vertical OCs and base curves. >Really appreciate your advise, as opposed to the other 40+ babble >responses I've been wading through :-) Might have to change the name of the group to sci.med.vision.clusterfuck. >Thanks, > >Kevin Your welcome. Keep in mind, the size and shape of the frame will strongly influence the weight and thickness of the lenses; try to use a smaller frame that minimizes decentration, and choose a shape that has rounded corners and is as symmetric as cosmetics and fashion will allow. Robert Martellaro ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Optician/Owner Roberts Optical Wauwatosa Wi. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ "Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself." - Richard Feynman > >> >Hi all, > [quoted text clipped - 103 lines] > > - Show quoted text - Thanks Robert! Can definitely use that information. Kevin |
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
|
©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.