Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: Progressives - These _can_ be made!

  1. #1
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    31

    Progressives - These _can_ be made!

    This is a follow-up to my earlier thread, “Progressives – Can these be made?” For my own reference, I’m going to write down my experience and reiterate my Rx and remake history, in case I ever wonder about those two months I had seven pairs of glasses made. The good news is that the 7th time is the charm, and the new glasses are great. Hopefully, some of the professionals here can extract a data point or two from all this. I’d again like to thank Robert, Texas Ranger, Lee, and everyone else who took what I said in that thread at face value and answered with constructive comments. It was useful talking to you.

    This is going to be kinda long, so a quick summary is this. The first six pairs were all made to the same Rx, and the ones that didn’t suffer from flaws such as 10mm fitting cross misplacements or ripple defects were similar in the suboptimal vision they gave me. I could correct the left lens by rotating it clockwise from my perspective as the wearer, which I’m told moved it back toward the 2001 axis value, and at the computer, at least, I could improve the right lens either by looking through a spot 3mm temporal to the fitting cross or looking more through the intermediate area. These lenses, made by three different labs, were all Essilor Natural polycarbonate. The new glasses have a slightly different Rx, determined from scratch by a new OD, which is almost the same as my 2001 Rx. The new glasses use AO Pro 15 plastic lenses.

    The pair that worked

    After putting it off for a couple of days, I returned to Eyemasters Saturday to pick up the remakes. The optician had me try them on and verified the lens markings lined up, so she removed the markings, and I verified I could see distance OK. We had a brief but pleasant conversation, and she asked me to call her next week and let her know how they did once I got home, which was fine by me.

    I got into my car, and I immediately noticed I could read the dashboard edge to edge, corner to corner, and it was nice and sharp with both eyes and each eye individually, with me looking at its center and just moving my eyes around. That was impossible with the six previous pairs, so my trepidation began to yield to optimism. Driving home, I found nothing wrong with the glasses, and I stopped at the supermarket before returning home. There, I found I could read labels on shelves at eye level from an ordinary distance without any trouble, which again was impossible with the six previous attempts.

    Once home, I tried reading, and I found I have a very usable reading area, so that seems OK. I watched some TV, and the news crawl at the bottom of CNN looked clear; the “slanties” (diagonal ray distortion at character bottoms) were gone (this was previously observed through the left lens). So at this point, everything that was wrong before has become right, leaving just the computer monitor to check out. The dreaded computer monitor. Given the good experience so far, I’m thinking I’ll be very surprised if it’s still a problem, so I got up my gumption and slowly opened my eyes to it. Like the dashboard in my car, it was clear edge to edge, corner to corner, with me looking at its center and just moving my eyes around. Both eyes are equally clear, and the strange dead spot in the right lens is gone. In fact, I believe I’ll even be able to replace my 17” monitor with a 19” without sacrificing much clarity in the periphery.

    So these glasses are pretty much a total win. Are they perfect? No, but what is? I do perceive some swim when turning my head, mainly in the right lens, which is significantly worse than with my previous SV pair (I guess the cylinder is the reason for it with the SV pair?), but I’m noticing it less and less. In addition, at monitor distance, 24-30”, my eyes are being asked to accommodate a little, and they have good days and bad days. While sitting with proper posture and looking at the top 1/3 of the screen, the lens aberration on either side of center actually improves the focus at this distance, and this is true for both eyes. So I can often see this part of the screen better when I turn my head left or right and look through the lens edges, and when I turn my head back to center, it can take my eyes a few moments to adjust. That’s adding up to some intermittent eyestrain, so I probably will look into computer glasses soon. I can’t fault the glasses for this, as I’m looking through the bottom of the distance part to view the top 1/3 of my monitor, and to fix this with the Rx, it would mess up the distance part for actual distance viewing.

    The pairs that failed

    Rx History

    Dec-93: OD(+0.50, -4.25, 018), OS(-0.50, -3.75, 167), SV, OD 0
    Jan-01: OD(+1.25, -4.50, 015), OS(+0.00, -3.75, 165), SV, OD 1
    May-03: OD(+1.25, -4.25, 015), OS(+0.25, -4.00, 160), SV, OD 1, no glasses made
    Jul-04: OD(+1.00, -4.25, 015), OS(+0.25, -3.75, 162), +1.25, OD 1, progs 1-2
    Sep-04: OD(+1.00, -4.25, 015), OS(+0.25, -3.75, 162), +1.50, OD 1, progs 3-6
    Oct-04: OD(+1.25, -4.50, 015), OS(+0.25, -3.75, 165), +1.25, OD 2, prog 7



    Lens Types

    Prog 1: unknown
    Progs 2-6: Essilor Natural polycarbonate
    Prog 7: AO Pro 15 CR-39

    Sears

    Sears made prog pairs 1-3. For pair 1, they gave me the wrong frame. I selected a Bulova frame, and over a week later, they presented me with an Oscar de la Renta frame with bare metal stems terminating in weird flared tips. I picked those up on a very busy Saturday and immediately felt something was wrong, besides having the tiniest sliver of reading area. I spent a solid 10 minutes looking around the store for the frames I actually selected, and while I didn’t see a single Bulova frame, I found the Oscars in brown. They had previously told me the frames I actually selected didn’t come in brown, so confused, I asked them to order the pair they gave me in brown; the manager happily agreed, since they “now had them in brown.” However, a couple of days later, I finally began to listen to myself, and I returned the glasses. When I told the manager they were the wrong frames, she gave me a line about “sometimes they have recalls”, and they’d be happy to let me select a different frame since the Bulovas “were no longer available.” So I did, and they made me a new pair. This pair also had a very small reading area and suffered from distortions similar to the ones I described in the earlier thread, so I went to OD1 for the first glasses check. Her assistant said the lensometry didn’t match the Rx, the seg height was too low, and the PDs were wrong, so after adjusting the frames for the very first time, OD1 wrote a new Rx (Sep-04) and specified the seg height and PDs. She also increased the add from +1.25 to +1.50, and when I asked if that was a good idea given the simultaneous seg height increase, she said it was due to the small frames. So I went along with this, and went back to Sears. After a few minutes of them denying they would have let me leave the store if anything had been wrong (I guess giving me the wrong frames doesn’t count, eh?), they agreed to redo the glasses. After another week of waiting, I picked up the glasses, and they were actually worse. I go back to OD1 for the second glasses check, and she finds the fitting cross is 10mm off temporally on the right lens. At this point, I was thoroughly disgusted and so returned the glasses for a refund. I also began researching progressive lenses at this time and found a copy of the Sola progressive identifier, fitting guides, etc.

    Eyemasters 1

    Eyemasters 1 made progs 4 and 5 and actively declined to adjust the frames before measuring me. The first pair had distortions similar to prog 2, and so I returned to OD1 for the third glasses check. Again, her assistant said she found problems with the lensometry (left lens axis of 154 vs prescribed 162, right lens off in sphere +0.50 diopters) and fit, and again, I described the adjustments I could make to see well (i.e. rotating the left lens and looking somewhat temporally through the right lens). This time, OD1 dialed the Sep-04 Rx into her trial glasses, and because I could read the eye chart with them, she said the Rx was right. So it’s back to Eyemasters 1 for a remake. That pair came back with horrible swirl marks, pitting, and a ripple defect in the upper right quadrant of the right lens, plus no improvement to the left lens. So I returned them for a refund.

    Eyemasters 2

    At Eyemasters 2, I spoke to an optician/technician who really seemed to know her stuff. She adjusted the glasses before marking them, a true first, though it should be considered standard operating procedure. She made them herself after ordering the tool she needed and said they came out perfect. But prog 6 had the same problems as progs 2 (Sears) and 4 (Eyemasters 1). With all these pairs, I found I could improve OS by rotating the lens back toward the 2001 axis value, and as for OD, there was a dead spot in the center of my vision which was improved either by looking through a spot 3mm temporal to the fitting cross or tilting my head back and looking more through the intermediate area. So, I went to the OD at that Eyemasters for a second opinion, and OD2 refracted me from scratch to almost exactly my 2001 Rx and prescribed a +1.25 add, down from OD1’s +1.50. She also suggested I try plastic lenses for their better optics. I went along with all of this, and instead of Essilor Natural polycarbonates, they used AO Pro 15 CR-39 lenses. Finally, after two months of this, and six previous attempts, prog 7 turned out fine.

    Assessment

    These AO Pro 15’s give me good vision with the new Rx, and the combination (prog 7) worked on the first try.

    Given that both a different lens and Rx were used to make prog 7, it’s hard to draw any firm conclusions. I do think it’s clear that the OD1 Rx was flawed, because three labs made three pairs with similar distortions, and I find it hard to believe Essilor Naturals are so badly incompatible with my Rx. This, plus the nature of the adjustments I could make to improve the similar progs 2, 4, and 6, points the finger directly at the Rx, in my lay (though scientifically trained in other areas) opinion. OD1 should have considered the clinical feedback I gave her and revisited the Rx.

    For progs 2, 4, and 6, Sears, Eyemasters 1, and Eyemasters 2 probably made them reasonably close to the flawed Rx. Maybe OD1’s lensometry was flawed, and that’s why they kept saying the glasses weren’t made right. For example, on her lensometry note, she recorded that prog 4 had an OS axis of 154, and frankly, I no longer believe this was accurate, as I wouldn’t have been able to see at that axis.

    Plastic lenses are not too thick and heavy for my Rx, even for progressives. I was rather vigorously steered into polycarbonate around 10 years ago, when I decided to wear glasses again, having worn contacts for a little less than 10 years prior to that time. I was really out of touch with the world of glasses then and went along with everything that was suggested to me.

    Plan

    For the foreseeable future, I’ll stick with plastic lenses, as they are cheaper, not too thick and heavy, and have better optical properties (though I don’t know how significant this really is for me) than polycarbonate.

    I’ll listen to myself earlier, especially when I’ve made detailed observations and formulated questions such as the ones I presented in my earlier thread here. In particular, I should have asked OD1 why the adjustments I could make to progs 2, 4, and 6 to see better through them weren’t leading her to revisit her Rx.

    Pay a visit to Eyemasters 2 and thank the optician and OD there.

  2. #2
    OptiBoard Professional UFRich's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sunny Florida
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    177
    Congratulations Geaux Tigers!


    I am glad you found a competent OD an Optician. I am also glad to know that I was wrong in saying you were not a good progressive fit.
    UFRICH:cheers:

  3. #3
    Master OptiBoarder Texas Ranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Republic of Texas
    Posts
    1,433
    I am glad that you were persistent in your quest for glasses that could indeed be made to fit your needs; I think that there is a lesson here for us all in the profession. I have found over the years that I do a lot better in helping solve problems if I listen to what clients are telling me at face value, that trying to be a good amatuer psychologist. Dealing with the public in filling eyewear rx's can be quite frustrating for dispensing opticians; we are people with certain skills and training, but also working under the direction of an eye doctors Rx, and I would imagine that you could go to several doctors and get a slightly different Rx in the same week. You really had a bad experience, but in the end your persistence through the system should be commended, and you discovered that you can wear a pal lens, and it reaffirms that some optical firms have quality opticians, and some don't. La, doesn't have licensing and like most states, they should. someone wasted 6 pairs of pal lenses...if there is any industry that has more needless waste, I can't imagine.. but basically, I am so glad that the new lenses are working out for you; as time goes by, you'll feel like you're not even wearing multifocal lenses, your visual lifestyle will seem more and more natural, and you'll not be obcessing over your glasses, at least for a couple years...

  4. #4
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Thumbs up

    =GeauxTigers

    Driving home, I found nothing wrong with the glasses, and I stopped at the supermarket before returning home. There, I found I could read labels on shelves at eye level from an ordinary distance without any trouble, which again was impossible with the six previous attempts.
    Congratulations, you earned it. You worked hard at the problem and did not give up.

    "Challenges are what make life interesting; overcoming them is what makes life meaningful."
    -Joshua J. Marine

    I guess I got to eat my own words. In a previous posting I promised to supply you a lifetime supply of OMS Anti-Fog/Anti-Stat lens cleaner (50 bottles of 120ml) if you would would end up satisfied.

    All you have to do is send me an e-mail through the Optiboard containing your name and address and we will ship you the promised goods with my compliments.
    :)

  5. #5
    One of the worst people here
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Canada
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    8,331
    I would like everyone to take note of the final progressive. It goes to show you that a person can adapt to almost any progressive if the prescription is correct and the fit is correct.

  6. #6
    Master OptiBoarder Joann Raytar's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4,948

    Thumbs up

    GeauxTigers, congratulations on a successful progressive lens fitting! Thank you for involving us with your experience - you have taught us all something!

  7. #7
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    31
    Quote Originally Posted by Texas Ranger
    some optical firms have quality opticians, and some don't. La, doesn't have licensing and like most states, they should.
    As you probably know, LA is nuts. Here, a license is required to arrange flowers for sale, but I guess anybody off the street is allowed to fit people with prescription eyewear. :hammer: Ah well, it's not all bad. At least my Tigers redeemed themselves in FL this past Saturday. :)

  8. #8
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Location
    Louisiana
    Posts
    31

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by GeauxTigers
    As you probably know, LA is nuts. Here, a license is required to arrange flowers for sale, but I guess anybody off the street is allowed to fit people with prescription eyewear. :hammer: Ah well, it's not all bad. At least my Tigers redeemed themselves in FL this past Saturday. :)
    This flower arranging license business has been in the news in the past year, and it seems so over the top in the difficulty of the testing, and so potentially corrupt in that established florists are judging their would-be competitors, I think you guys might be amused to read about it:

    An Illegal Arrangement By Cynthia Joyce
    http://www.legalaffairs.org/issues/M..._mayjun04.html

    Honestly, I don't know how to feel about this. It's good to have standards, but they have to be fairly applied. I do think it was unfortunate the first two people who sold me progressives didn't know they had to be adjusted to fit my face before measurements could be taken. That does seem a tad more important than arranging flowers correctly, to put it mildly!

  9. #9
    threadkiller? eromitlab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    the state of confusion
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    226
    wow! what a story! I'm suprised you've had so much trouble getting these lenses made... one of the Lab Managers I work with can do scripts like yours with little or no problems, as he gets some really wild Rx's in his store on a regular basis. I didn't say anythingin your original topic about this because I thought it was pretty routine-looking and didn't want to say anything off-colour or ignorant. I know that this guy I mentioned will only run lenses like yours in CR39 AOPros or AOCompacts, stating that the Naturals and other poly PALs cause undue distortion and Rx problems. So, I wasn't suprised to see that the pair that "works" uses CR39 AOPros, since they almost always work with even the wildest scripts, in my experiences.

    If you're ever in the Baltimore area... and you find yourself needing a new pair of eyewear, look me up... we'll get 'em made right for ya the first time! ;)

  10. #10
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Bewildered
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    16
    As a ABOC certified Optician that has worked for EyeMasters for 12 years in almost every capicity including Lab Manager I do apologize for the issues you had with our company. One issue you may consider when purchasing your next eyewear is the type of progressive you purchase.

    The Essilor Natural that you purchased from us is a good lens, but it is a "soft" lens design. The AO Pro that ended up working correctly for you is an older "hard" lens design. Basically the difference between the two is how they handle the visual channel. Hard designs have a wide very distinct distance and near portion with little width in the intermediate corridor and therefore it is easy to locate the far and near correction. However, hard designs have more distortion outside the visual channel and usually have a longer corridor, meaning they cannot be made correctly into some of the smaller frame styles. Softer progressive designs like the Natural and Ovation have a much more blended visual corridor that some patients have a harder time negotiating. However the corridor is generally shorter and the distortion outside the corridor much less so these lenses can be placed in the widest variety of frames safely without the concern of cutting off the near or distance correction.

    Whenever I have a very difficult issue with progressives as you have had I always attemp to recommend this "fix". In many cases, particularly with former "hard design" wearers I have found this will eliminate most issues. I wish someone had taken the time earlier to address this option with you. In the future wherever you go to purchase eyewear you might keep this in mind when choosing lenses and frames. Also you might mention this to the person helping you, so they may fit you properly and choose the right type Progressive lens for you.

  11. #11
    Just An Optician jediron1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    USA, New York
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,727
    :D :bbg:

  12. #12
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240
    Quote Originally Posted by DNICKELLII



    However, hard designs have more distortion outside the visual channel and usually have a longer corridor, meaning they cannot be made correctly into some of the smaller frame styles.



    As you can see on the oher thread about low fittig at 16mm.....................

    No progressives should be used on these small frame styles for the benfit of good vision of the patient/customer.

  13. #13
    Master OptiBoarder Lee Prewitt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Snoqualmie, WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    691
    Geaux Tigers,


    Congratulations on your eye wear. Most consumers would have given up long ago. It truly is a shame that you have to have license to cut hair, do a manicure and such things but many states still do not require a license to dispense eyewear. Gee, it is only our number one sense. (Something like over 75% of all inputs come to us visually).

    Now for those computer glasses...

    WARNING: Many chains do not dispense these types of lenses. Ask first! Some brands are Shamir Office, Sola Access and Nikon On-line. Do not let anyone sub a progressive on you and adjsut the Rx for computers. Good luck!
    Lee Prewitt, ABOM
    Independent Sales Representative
    AIT Industries
    224 W. James St.
    Bensenville, IL 60106
    Cell : (425) 241-1689
    Phone: (800) 729-1959, Ext 137
    Direct: (630) 274-6136
    Fax: (630) 595-1006
    www.aitindustries.com
    leep@aitindustries.com

    More Than A Patternless Edger Company

  14. #14
    One eye sees, the other feels OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wauwatosa Wi
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Lee Prewitt
    Do not let anyone sub a progressive on you and adjsut the Rx for computers.
    Lee,

    Do you mean cutting the add and raising the fitting cross? Or do you mean splitting the add so that the distance Rx is set for the monitor distance? Before answering, please note that I've been using the latter method since the AO Technica hit he steets about 15 years ago. :)

    Regards

    Robert

  15. #15
    Master OptiBoarder Lee Prewitt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Snoqualmie, WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    691
    Robert,

    The new computer lenses are a better application than a standard progressive would be. I know that we have all made different lenses work for years and they have performed well...I am a firm believer in new technology. The Office lens has a extremely soft peripherial (only like .5D distortion) and generally the whole bottom for reading. I don't think any progressive comes close to this. It is a very SV like experience. Call your local Shamir rep and ask to be comped an Office lens. I think you will be very pleasantly surprised.
    Lee Prewitt, ABOM
    Independent Sales Representative
    AIT Industries
    224 W. James St.
    Bensenville, IL 60106
    Cell : (425) 241-1689
    Phone: (800) 729-1959, Ext 137
    Direct: (630) 274-6136
    Fax: (630) 595-1006
    www.aitindustries.com
    leep@aitindustries.com

    More Than A Patternless Edger Company

  16. #16
    One eye sees, the other feels OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wauwatosa Wi
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,458
    Lee,

    Done. My lab is going to make me a pair gratis. I've found this to be the only way to evaluate lens design performance. I'am skeptical though, I find it hard to believe that a +.75 or even a +1.00 add PAL is less SV like than these proprietary designs, especially if there is a "distance window". My Rx is -4.50 add +2.25 OU. I'll try not to be overly biased in my assessment. :)

    Regards

    Robert

  17. #17
    Master OptiBoarder Lee Prewitt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Snoqualmie, WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    691
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Martellaro
    Lee,

    Done. My lab is going to make me a pair gratis. I've found this to be the only way to evaluate lens design performance. I'am skeptical though, I find it hard to believe that a +.75 or even a +1.00 add PAL is less SV like than these proprietary designs, especially if there is a "distance window". My Rx is -4.50 add +2.25 OU. I'll try not to be overly biased in my assessment. :)

    Regards

    Robert
    Excellent Robert!! Do me a favor? Ask for the new Poly lens and then post a review in the Review Forum. Shamir just released the Office in Poly and I have not had an opportunity to try one yet. I really think you will find lower distortion than a progressive. Remember that there are only 2 zones really that are being dealt with than the typical 3 that a progressive will have (regardless of the power of the add). Oh! Don't forget the AR!!
    Lee Prewitt, ABOM
    Independent Sales Representative
    AIT Industries
    224 W. James St.
    Bensenville, IL 60106
    Cell : (425) 241-1689
    Phone: (800) 729-1959, Ext 137
    Direct: (630) 274-6136
    Fax: (630) 595-1006
    www.aitindustries.com
    leep@aitindustries.com

    More Than A Patternless Edger Company

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. "You made my glasses wrong"
    By Ryan in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 08-06-2015, 12:25 PM
  2. Are progressives possible with high cylinder prescription?
    By dlabow in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 03-09-2006, 12:30 PM
  3. Progressives - Can these be made?
    By GeauxTigers in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 52
    Last Post: 10-08-2004, 09:22 AM
  4. Polarized Progressives?
    By LENNY in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 08-05-2003, 10:06 PM
  5. Thai Polymer To Offer Lenses Made From Trivex Lens Material
    By Newsroom in forum Optical Industry News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-19-2002, 04:52 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •