Complaints about distortion an progressives...................................

[Chris Ryser]

What determines whether someone will notice distortion in a progressive?
Is it the script? It seems some people notice it in the higher end lenses and others wearing a lesser lens may not.

The patient will notice it.

Assuming you start a patient on PALs first time he get reading glasses with a low add.............he will most probably not notice anything, get used to it without a problem. After a couple of years he will get another pair and will have no problem as the reading addition increases along with the distortion. This is all psychological effect.

Assuming you start somebody on a progressive at a 1.75 addition he will immediately notice a doorframe being round when lookiong straight forward. He will see everything distorted through the periphery of the lens. Some of these people when making a special effort can get used to it and some will not.

Specially a myope is usually a very picky personality that has a good near vision without glasses. Therefore they are very often disturbed when seing objects distorted when looking through the periphery of the lens. :(

[QDO1]

I believe the post was in jest.. Taking the view point of Chris to a further extreme...

I personally believe there are some differences in progressive designs, my patients do as well...

I also believe that progressives aren't for everyone.. and yes some people do prefer the two pair method of 1 for reading and 1 for distance.

Patient education and interaction is what it is about.

Cassandra

exactly

[Lady Nicole]

I have a group of retired nuns we see them all in the course of the year. After one had her cat surgury she asked about the no line bifocal. She had heard and seen it and wanted to try it. We went over everything with her and she had a sucsessfull fit. Wouldn't you know it but now they are all coming in to get them after she sang the praises of the no-lines. Each one we went through and evaluated what would be the best and they are all wearing no-lines.

The moral of this story is, that the patient wanted to try the lens, and knew what to expect. She had the proper motivation to get her through the awkward "adaptation" stage, and was well educated by her optician on what her new lenses would feel like.

Patient complaints about distortions come from patients who did not expect the distortions. I remember when I put on my first pair of progressives. I knew what to expect, but it was still a struggle the first few days. If I had been simply a patient expecting clear vision like my single visions, and an optician had put me in that lens without teaching me what the pros and cons were, I probably would have been a complaining non-adapt myself!

It is the optician's responsibility to help guide the patient into making the best choice of lens for their personal needs. It is a disservice to them to simply slap a PAL into their frames and say it's the best available and they should "get used to it". Our industry is infatuated with progressives, but I personally believe that not every patient is a good candidate for progressive lenses. This is the fine line we walk in opticianry between being retailers and health professionals. If you start fitting progressive lenses simply because they're "the best" and don't take your patient's needs into account, I say you've crossed that line.

[spartus]

I personally believe that not every patient is a good candidate for progressive lenses. This is the fine line we walk in opticianry between being retailers and health professionals. If you start fitting progressive lenses simply because they're "the best" and don't take your patient's needs into account, I say you've crossed that line.

I think that most halfway sensible opticians would find that self-evident. Among posters here, I think it's probably close to 100% agreement on the point. However, there are some bomb-throwers around here who turn up in Every. Single. Conversation. about PALs and moan about "distortion".

Can we, once and for all, all come to an agreement that progressive lenses are not for every patient and stop apologizing to the minority that seems to think that it means that they're not for any patient? Really. It's getting monotonous:

Poster: Hey, is this progressive any good?

A chorus of other posters: Yeah, it's all right.

Bomb-thrower: There's nothing but distortion.................................oh sorry, "surface astigmatism".......................you know, a FT35 is much clearer.............my whole desk............clear out to here...........big companies make too much money.......

Stop. Point taken. Please.

[chip anderson]

This only one patient which doesn't say anything about the general population. But today I had a patient in to pick up new glasses his wife has been a happy contact lens patient of mine for 35+years (she now wears trifocal contacts and was about 15 when I first fitted her ) contacts, I have made him SV glasses in the past and he has been happy. He is 56 and until now has never needed bifocals even with distance glasses on.

I delivered his new glasses Rx -0.75sph O.U. +1.50 add. Vx comfort with Ar and transitions. His doctor had specificaly prescribed progressives. He wasn't happy but agreed to try them (acuity 20/15, J-1). Within an hour he was back wanting his old lenses back. Said he just couldn't live with this. On further observation (which I should have done before ordering lenses, but since his doctor had specified progressives, or because I was negligent) the man just does not move his head, but only rotates his eyes when reading.

I re-made the glasses in ST-28's and the patient is happy.

Of course his wife called me back an hour after he returned the progressives complaining about the fact he would have a line. He doesn't care of course, as he said: "I'm 56 and bald and I don't give a damn whether I have a line or not."

Chip:p

[chip anderson]

Yesterday, I had an Essilor man in (for 2 hours) selling me on the Varilux Physio. Among the promotional materials was a pamplet that actually used the words: Distortion and Aberration. I was shocked this is the first promotional material that didn't have misnomers like: Sand, Astigmatism, Blended areas, peripherial transition areas.
I was shocked, is truth in advertizing actually arriving in the optical business?

Chip

[Chris Ryser]

............ It is a disservice to them to simply slap a PAL into their frames and say it's the best available and they should "get used to it". Our industry is infatuated with progressives, but I personally believe that not every patient is a good candidate for progressive lenses.

Thank you Lady Nicole, your post was very sensitive and should be framed and hang on the wall of every opticians store.

There's nothing but distortion.................................oh sorry, "surface astigmatism".......................you know, a FT35 is much clearer.............my whole desk............clear out to here...........big companies make too much money.......

Spartus: Stop. Point taken. Please.

When a fact is a fact and.......................when the word "distortion" is changed and replaced by manufacturers for the sake of boosting sales to "surface astigmatism" so nobody will know what we talk about, your bomb thrower should remain active on this subject.

...........the Varilux Physio. Among the promotional materials was a pamplet that actually used the words: Distortion and Aberration.
I was shocked this is the first promotional material that didn't have misnomers like: Sand, Astigmatism, Blended areas, peripherial transition areas.
I was shocked, is truth in advertizing actually arriving in the optical business?

Chip, don't be shocked...............maybe the Optiboard discussions on the subject have helped them to make a turnaround. I know they all are watching this place like hawks.

[John Sheridan]

Assuming you start somebody on a progressive at a 1.75 addition he will immediately notice a doorframe being round when lookiong straight forward. He will see everything distorted through the periphery of the lens. Some of these people when making a special effort can get used to it and some will not.

your bomb thrower should remain active on this subject.

Well I disagree.

I have seen the effects of cheap vs. premium lenses. My first progressives showed exactly the effects you mentioned. Curved doorframes, curved computer keyboards, walls "swimming" when I walked down a corridor, etc. etc. And my add is only 1.5. They made me dizzy and sick and I had to return them.

Got lined bifocals. Those were OK most of the time but I couldn't go hiking in them. Try hiking a rocky steep trail with that discontinuity in your visual field. I couldn't do it anyway.

Then I told a couple of my friends about my PAL experience and they recommended another optician. I went there and got PALs that are totally different.

Please listen carefully Chris - these are totally different. The only time I see a curved doorframe is when I stand right in the door and turn my eyes so far to the side that it hurts. The only time I see any "distortion" is when I try to read fine print through the periphery. Yes, fine print. Ordinary sized print is a little blurred but I can still read it.

OK these effects will get worse as my add increases, but I don't expect that they will ever again be as bad as before with those other cheap lenses.

"But" you say, "I just fit someone with expensive premium lenses and they can't see. Cheap lenses had nothing to do with it"

Well, I think I can explain that. Put your head close to the screen so I can whisper a word in your ear: counterfeit



Well, why not? Aren't designer clothes counterfeited all the time? Manufacturers making cheap imitations, and slapping designer tags on them, selling them at high designer prices? Why can't it happen in your industry too? A lab, or more likely, labs in the plural, making cheap PALs out of old outmoded designs from the 60s, stamping them with the appropriate markings, then selling them at high prices? Sure it happens. If there is money to be made, you can bet someone out there is making it.

I'm not saying that it accounts for all PAL non-adapts. It may not even account for the majority. But when you have checked everything, the fitting, the prescription, etc. and you can't understand why your patient can't see - well, maybe those "premium" lenses you put in front of their eyes aren't as premium as you thought they were.

Personally I am never going to go back to lined bifocals ever again. These are so much more comfortable now that I don't have that jarring discontinuity in my visual field.

You don't notice that discontinuity Chris, because you are used to it. Why is getting used to that line any better than getting used to a little distortion?

EDIT: Decided to re-word a certain comment... ;)

[Happylady]

I agree completely with John Sheridan. Chris just because you don't like progressives and notice the distortion doesn't mean everyone else does. There is a huge difference between different progressives.

I see no distortion in my newest progressives unless I actively look for it. The distance is clear almost to the sides of the lenses. If I twist my head and try to look at the distance through the lower sides of the lenses it is blurry, but how often do I need to do that?

[Chris Ryser]

You don't notice that discontinuity Chris, because you are used to it. Why is getting used to that line any better than getting used to a little distortion?

John, you said it right..................I dont notice it because I am used it.

Same as you don't notice the distortion anymore because you are used to it too................but it is still there.

Anywhere there is a distortion on a lens you can not see clear through it and that is a fact.

I have never said that I am against progressive lenses, and I am not and have never been.

What I am against is an opticians attitude to love and admire progressives so much that they start believing they are made in heaven and not by Essilor, Zeiss and whoever else makes them. There are some post's on this thread that do make good sense and you should scroll back and read them.

Being resonable and sell them to patients that are good prospects for them and neing able to know the difference to the others that will NOT be able to tolerate and adapt to them............that is the key of selling progressives successfully.

After all there is still a much higher percentage of people in the age of having to wear multifocals that are wearing other lenses than progressives.

[John Sheridan]

John, you said it right..................I dont notice it because I am used it.

Same as you don't notice the distortion anymore because you are used to it too................but it is still there.

Anywhere there is a distortion on a lens you can not see clear through it and that is a fact.

Sorry you can't get away with that one. I do notice the distortion and I notice it fully. It's just a whole lot less than what you think it is, and that is a fact. When I put them on for the first time, my reaction was "Oh you made a mistake, these are single vision glasses". I had to look for the distortion before I saw it. I had to test my reading distance to see that they were indeed progressive.

You wear them in a frame with a small B measurement, where they are at their worst. And I suspect that your "all progressives are the same" attitude has lead you to get cheap lenses.

I have never said that I am against progressive lenses, and I am not and have never been.

No you just say that progressives are great for emerging presbyopes who don't know any better and for forty-something women who want to hide their age. I've been lurking here for long enough to know that's what you think.

The problem with saying "distortion" is that people don't know what you mean by that either, any more than they know "astigmatism". I used the word "distortion" when describing my PAL vision to a thirty-something I know. She was alarmed and said "Wow and they let you drive with those?" I had an uphill battle to make her understand that the so-called "distortion" is just barely enough to prevent me from reading fine print. It has no effect at all when I drive. My distance vision is clear across the entire top half of the lens.

Yes Chris maybe "surface astigmatism" is a euphemism that is trying to hide an undesireable characteristic of the lens. But your "distortion" has the opposite effect, making people think that the effect is worse than it really is.

[shellrob]

Ok John, I'm oficially in love with you!!!!


Just kidding. But in all seriousness, your post was not only easy to understand,but true in it's nature. I wish you could go to every consumer progressive post and just copy and paste the entire explanation you just wrote. Bravo.......

[Dd]

So I won't feel like I'm walking through a funhouse?? :)
I plunked down the extra money for the Physio's yesterday just to be sure.
I hope the distortion gods are kind.

[Chris Ryser]

Ok John, I'm oficially in love with you!!!!

Shellrob, ......................please dont start an affair with everybody looking on.

You wear them in a frame with a small B measurement, where they are at their worst.
And I suspect that your "all progressives are the same" attitude has lead you to get cheap lenses.

Having a couple of degrees in optics, having owned an optical lab specialised in progressive lenses and a frame company for 20 years, plus having a few inventions and patents in the optical field, has not lead me to get "cheap lenses". I can get the very best at distributor price and do the in my own premises.

Having looked at your profile I see that you are not related to optics which means you are a consumer that gives his opinion, to which you are fully entitled and welcome. However that does not make you a judge and a specialist in the optical field just because you are a "happy customer"

There are thousands of happy consumers and customers wearing progressives like you, but these are not the ones that were addressed with these issues.

The optical retail business should not be a happy go lucky business, as sell the most expensive items as much as you can, It is a business that should be ruled by what is best for the patient, and there are patients that do not fit in this category of lenses.

[spartus]

Having a couple of degrees in optics, having owned an optical lab specialised in progressive lenses and a frame company for 20 years, plus having a few inventions and patents in the optical field, has not lead me to get "cheap lenses". I can get the very best at distributor price and do the in my own premises.

Yes, yes, appeals to authority aside, the burning question is this: If they're all the same, how do you tell which one's the "best"? If it's so clearly superior, please do share. It could really help us all out with removing the Essilor/AO-Sola/Zeiss brainwashing of which you claim we're under the effect.

[John Sheridan]

Having looked at your profile I see that you are not related to optics which means you are a consumer that gives his opinion, to which you are fully entitled and welcome. However that does not make you a judge and a specialist in the optical field just because you are a "happy customer"

I never claimed to be a "specialist". But when someone says something that I know is false, then I know it's false.

I was going to write a longer reply than this but I just deleted it. Like you said, you are the professional. So don't bother with me, just go and do whatever you want.

[Happylady]

Chris, I know you have posted which progressives you have worn before but I can't find the post. Isn't the latest progressive you have tried the Comfort? Am I remembering correctly or incorrectly?

Can you update us again with which progressives you have personally tried?

[Chris Ryser]

If they're all the same, how do you tell which one's the "best"? If it's so clearly superior, please do share. It could really help us all out with removing the Essilor/AO-Sola/Zeiss brainwashing of which you claim we're under the effect.

What I have said and stand by it.................that they are all the same in principle.............some have a slightly shorter progressive channel or larger or smaller reading segments..............or smaller or larger distorted areas.

If they would .........not have a minor difference they could not make any pro selling claims. So......I am in no position to say what is best. In the case of advewrtising they all tell you that they are the best and make the best .....would'nt you say you are the best optician in you area?

It is the power of money that dictates the means of advertising and the better and more often you do it the more people will believe you.

Can you update us again with which progressives you have personally tried?

You have personally asked me the same question before and I did answer it.

If memory dont help, go and do some checking back in the optiboard files.;)

[Happylady]

You are right Chris, I did ask you before. However both of us have many posts and I was unable to find it. I guess you aren't too proud of which ones you have tried since you won't tell again.....

[Chris Ryser]

I guess you aren't too proud of which ones you have tried since you won't tell again.....

It makes no difference which make or model or design progressive I am wearing, have worn over the years.....there are too many to even remember.

This discussion is not about me............liking them or not, it is about knowing who should wear them and who should not.

In general your post's show that you are an enthusiastic promoter and advocate of this type of lenses, which is all good as long as you know who can, or should not be using them.

Everything has a limit, and so have progressives or any other lens. Nothing is for universal use because of limitations of one way or another. If you don't agree with that arguments you must one of those "one way opticians".

:)

[Mikef]

What do you think the % of patients are non adapt! Out of 100!


Have been asking cutomers over the past week and most of them say less than 5% and some less than 2%!

Does anyone of the lens rep have any hard #'s

[spartus]

It makes no difference which make or model or design progressive I am wearing, have worn over the years.....there are too many to even remember.

This discussion is not about me............liking them or not, it is about knowing who should wear them and who should not.

On the contrary, the discussion has expanded to include precisely that when you said this:

Having a couple of degrees in optics, having owned an optical lab specialised in progressive lenses and a frame company for 20 years, plus having a few inventions and patents in the optical field, has not lead me to get "cheap lenses". I can get the very best at distributor price and do the in my own premises.

All I want to know--and I think Happylady will concur--is what lens you are wearing, since you've already told us it's the "best". Since you have a couple of degrees in optics, I eagerly await your informed opinion on such a contentious matter.

In general your post's show that you are an enthusiastic promoter and advocate of this type of lenses, which is all good as long as you know who can, or should not be using them.

I'd call her enthusiastic, certainly, but an advocate or promoter? Not really. She has been forthright in informing any and all readers of this forum of her correction, lens designs she wears, and opinions on all of them. What I find interesting is that she praises her Sola Ones nearly as often as her Physios (and mind you, she's mentioned several times that her husband tends to prefer his Sola Ones over his pricey Physio 360 lenses), but she's never accused of being an overt Sola advocate. You, however, have accused her of being a shill for Essilor, both overtly and covertly. In fact, you're just about as reliably an anti-Essilor voice as High Abbe is anti-Luxottica, although High Abbe tends to be slightly less juvenile.

A significant portion of the time when Happylady posts on merits/drawbacks of progressives, it's hardly unbidden. The reason I posted my "typical conversation" above was to highlight that the typical discussion around here is started by someone asking if a given lens is any good, not "Golly gosh my new Varilux Superdupers by Essilor sure are terrific! I hope they corner the market and crush all their competition!" However, that seems be the way you typically interpret the run-of-the-mill "Panamic/Physio/Gradal Top/Sola One/Comfort/Liberty: Any good?" threads. In fact, it's gotten so pervasive (and tiresome), I intentionally chose not to post to this thread, simply because I didn't want to get dragged into the usual tedious "Well of course they all have distortion," discussion. Or in that particular thread's case, this:

If a company can still do product launch parties of that kind.........in the UK and how many other countries.................they for sure will price the product accordingly and count on major sales figures.

The customer will always have to pay back advertising cost and original R&D in the price of the product.

We get it: Progressives have distortion. They're not for everyone. They're expensive, perhaps moreso than they should be. Too many lazy opticians put every presbyope into them, perhaps because they don't know any better. We. Get. It.

I'm not disagreeing with your message, just the predictability of it. You would be better served promoting education and the passing on of information like this, rather than sitting around crankily reminding a group of people on the Internet who already know better, that they should know better.

Everything has a limit, and so have progressives or any other lens. Nothing is for universal use because of limitations of one way or another. If you don't agree with that arguments you must one of those "one way opticians".

Everything has a limit? Damn, there go my plans for a hot-dog powered spaceship.

[hipoptical]

Spartus, intentionally or not, I just disrupted my wife's sleep because of you. For those of us who are posting at weird hours, there should be a warning when you're writing something that makes one's drink exit through one's nose.

..."Golly gosh my new Varilux Superdupers by Essilor sure are terrific! I hope they corner the market and crush all their competition!"

and

...there go my plans for a hot-dog powered spaceship.

[Chris Ryser]

What determines whether someone will notice distortion in a progressive?
Is it the script? It seems some people notice it in the higher end lenses and others wearing a lesser lens may not.

What I learned long ago.......and the also expirienced myself, as the reading addition inmcreases so does the distortion.

This is why people starting out on progressives when they have a low addition will never have a problem to switch to a higher addition as the reading add gets higher with age. They are used to it.
The problems usually occur when you start people with on progressives with an addition of 1.75 and higher. Thes are the ones that get disturbed and can see the distorted parts.

[Happylady]

What I learned long ago.......and the also expirienced myself, as the reading addition inmcreases so does the distortion.

This is why people starting out on progressives when they have a low addition will never have a problem to switch to a higher addition as the reading add gets higher with age. They are used to it.
The problems usually occur when you start people with on progressives with an addition of 1.75 and higher. Thes are the ones that get disturbed and can see the distorted parts.

Hey, we agree on something! :D

The doctor I work for often recommends single vision glasses for people that have a low add like +1.00 or +1.25, I don't think she realizes how much easier it is to adjust to a progressive with a low add rather then waiting. She didn't wait, she got her first progressive when her add was no more then a +1.00.