Lifting Frame Helps Near Vision

[Leo M]

Hi, I am an Optician, wearing progressive lenses for about 8 years now. I searched here but really didn't find an answer and this probably has been covered before. I'm one of those people that can see better if I lift my frame up when looking near. I have had this complaint from clients over the years and thought the lens was measured low. I am quite sure that is not my case. I can see with my lenses (Definity right now) but if I lift the reading area as high as my pupil, print becomes a darker and richer. Why is this?

[Pell]

Depending on the seg and circumstance, it could be a lot of things. My first inclination is that your add higher than needed. Also, I would be curious to know what is happening optically at the point that your vision is 'richer'. I would try to isolate the power you're looking through and try to replicate that in a pair of stock single vision.

Another option is that you're just one of those people that holds near material higher. For that, I place the seg at base pupil and use a short corridor (even if the seg height is above the recommendation).

[Leo M]

Thanks Pell, I thought this was a more common problem than the replies indicate. Funny thing. I have a frame here in my office that is about 20 years old, that I never sold. It was made in Japan and sold by a company long out of business. This frame was designed for progressive lenses. It has dotted lines showing the progressive hour glass shape on the demo lenses. It was called Focal Change by New Look. The temples are hinged so the pantoscopic tilt can be changed by about 10 degrees and the bridge and nose pads slide up and down changing the height of the lens by about 8 mm. Somebody else had this problem if a frame was designed to over come the problem. Strange indeed.

[Happylady]

I find this to be true with my Definity Short lenses, too. I think that progressive doesn't have the best reading area. If you use a progressive that has a higher reading area you might like it better.

[Robert Martellaro]

The temples are hinged so the pantoscopic tilt can be changed by about 10 degrees and the bridge and nose pads slide up and down changing the height of the lens by about 8 mm.

I still have one frame left that has the adjustable bridge- Hi-Rise 2000 by Engelhardt, probably made at the old Menrad factory in Australia. I used it for hobbists- model building and such, where they had to see at eye level frequently, but wanted the eyeglasses to serve as a spare pair, or on occasion, their everday pair of eyeglasses.

Concerning the chin lift required on many of today's PALs, I believe that PAL designers make the corridors too long for Adds over +1.75 for two reasons- because they are trying to make the lens feel more refined with easier adaptation, and to maximize the zone widths, the latter making this design more tolerant of improper positioning, especially on the horizontal meridian. The Definity PAL that you are presently wearing is a good example of this type of lens.

This works reasonably well for those who aren't avid readers, assuming you fit center pupil with at least 18mm of usable seg height. I always warn these clients that in exchange for the wider zone widths (some of these designs have outstanding on and off-axis distance vision) and smoother power gradients, very fine text (footnotes, Rx instruction inserts), the top of the book page, and middle of the newspaper will be a tad soft, if not very difficult to see without a chin lift. Some will require a 2x mag for very small text if the lens is fit below the pupil center, or without enough depth to develop the full power.

[Happylady]

Concerning the chin lift required on many of today's PALs, I believe that PAL designers make the corridors too long for Adds over +1.75 for two reasons- because they are trying to make the lens feel more refined with easier adaptation, and to maximize the zone widths, the latter making this design more tolerant of improper positioning, especially on the horizontal meridian. The Definity PAL that you are presently wearing is a good example of this type of lens.

Yes, I agree. Definity has a great intermediate and good distance and it's a very comfortable lens to wear. The reading isn't the best.

[Robert Martellaro]

Yes, I agree. Definity has a great intermediate and good distance and it's a very comfortable lens to wear. The reading isn't the best.

Are you a hyperope? If so, which lenses do you like for everyday wear? I'm a moderate myope, and don't have any moderate hyperopes around me to use as a guinea-pig!

[Leo M]

I await your recommendations. My script is;

R +0.75-1.00X093
L +0.50-2.00X082
Add +2.00 OU

I must add that I read a lot and always use half eyes at home. I wouldn't think of wearing progressives to read a book.

[scriptfiller]

For folks who do a considerable amount of reading I use a short corridor PAL to maximize reading. I do mention that to them that the intermediate will not be that large or usable. I like the Ellipse for situations like these or a FF PAL.

[Robert Martellaro]

I await your recommendations. My script is;

R +0.75-1.00X093
L +0.50-2.00X082
Add +2.00 OU

I must add that I read a lot and always use half eyes at home. I wouldn't think of wearing progressives to read a book.

There isn't a general purpose PAL that can compete with the field of vision that you're getting with SV readers. Morover, you can peak over the readers and get satifactory distance vision for the TV, leaving little motivation to read with your PALs.

There are PALs that have better near utility than your present PAL, without compromising the distance vision, and in some cases with better distance peripheral vision than the Definity (although my analysis of this lens dates back to the JJ version). I would recommend that you try is the Autograph 2 fixed 18mm. It won't have the smooth linear corridor/power gradients of the Definity, and that may be an issue for you if your sensitive to that, especially if they're not worn full-time. But it's likely that you won't be lifting you chin as much, which appears to be your primary concern, although as mentioned above, you'll still probably wear readers, both out of habit and expectations.

Hope this helps,

[uncut]

I would agree with all posters who mentioned your add power strength may be insufficient. As opticians we work at a much closer distance, inadequate lighting and on minute details. More add helps. If you measure your preferred reading/working distance, and calculate the required add, it might suprise you. At eight years into presbyopia you are also at the galloping add stage... what worked 6 months ago might be weak. my 2 cents..... I use an office style lens for lab/fitting work.

[DragonLensmanWV]

I still have one frame left that has the adjustable bridge- Hi-Rise 2000 by Engelhardt, probably made at the old Menrad factory in Australia. I used it for hobbists- model building and such, where they had to see at eye level frequently, but wanted the eyeglasses to serve as a spare pair, or on occasion, their everday pair of eyeglasses.

Concerning the chin lift required on many of today's PALs, I believe that PAL designers make the corridors too long for Adds over +1.75 for two reasons- because they are trying to make the lens feel more refined with easier adaptation, and to maximize the zone widths, the latter making this design more tolerant of improper positioning, especially on the horizontal meridian. The Definity PAL that you are presently wearing is a good example of this type of lens.

This works reasonably well for those who aren't avid readers, assuming you fit center pupil with at least 18mm of usable seg height. I always warn these clients that in exchange for the wider zone widths (some of these designs have outstanding on and off-axis distance vision) and smoother power gradients, very fine text (footnotes, Rx instruction inserts), the top of the book page, and middle of the newspaper will be a tad soft, if not very difficult to see without a chin lift. Some will require a 2x mag for very small text if the lens is fit below the pupil center, or without enough depth to develop the full power.

Not pretty, but it works. I nabbed a couple of these as a hedge against discontinuation, but since Shuron still seems to have Nuladys, maybe that's not so much of a worry.
http://www.shuron.com/convertible.htm

[Happylady]

Are you a hyperope? If so, which lenses do you like for everyday wear? I'm a moderate myope, and don't have any moderate hyperopes around me to use as a guinea-pig!

No, I'm a moderate myope, too. My distance is about a -2.00 and my add is a +2.50. My new favorite lens is the Physio Short. I know most people around here hate Essilor but I won these lenses in a drawing and I just love them.

I have Varilux Ellipse in another pair and I'm not crazy about the lens. I can wear it but I just notice that I am wearing a progressive more.

The Physio Short I don't notice. I can use it on the computer with no problems, the distance is great and even the reading is good. I like the shorter corridor and reaching the reading quickly. I think the long corridor is why I didn't love my Gradual Top lenses I had a few years ago.

I will actually read with these glasses on which for a -2.00 myope is saying a lot. My boss also has a pair. She is about a -4.00 or -5.00 and also thinks they are the best progressive she has worn.

[Striderswife]

My thoughts may end up mirroring what others have said, but I wanted to chime in, too. My first instinct would be to say the seg is too low, but you've got that covered. The next suggestion is the add is too weak. By lifting the glasses higher, your eyes are searching for a stronger region of the lens.

One thing I don't think has been brought up: how deep are your lenses? What's the B, and your seg that you've got set?

In my own experience, I really didn't like my Ellipse at all. I thought reading was okay, but computer was horrible. I've since been weaned out of a bifocal, but I'm having lots of great feedback from the Physio Short. It's my pick for short corridor now.

[Robert Martellaro]

Not pretty, but it works. I nabbed a couple of these as a hedge against discontinuation, but since Shuron still seems to have Nuladys, maybe that's not so much of a worry.
http://www.shuron.com/convertible.htm

Look at all of those classics! I would have thought Peabody and Sherman were the only ones who could bring these back. That red, Stars and Stripes Ronsir looks like fun, although the last Ronsir I saw was not very good quality.

No, I'm a moderate myope, too. My distance is about a -2.00 and my add is a +2.50. My new favorite lens is the Physio Short. I know most people around here hate Essilor but I won these lenses in a drawing and I just love them.

I liked the Physio Short also. It's really more of a medium corridor length, positioned between the very short Ellipse and long Physio.

[snotbagel]

Try Pentax Perfas premier wide..or Autograph 2. you can choose a shorter corridor..
I find it makes a huge difference when I'm trying to read the frame info on the inside of a temple.

I love Hoya's ID lifestlye and Zeiss individual for routine wear, but demanding near tasks are best adressed by customizing your lenses. A good cheaper compromise is the Indo lifemade expert short.

[optiman37]

I would find out what they recommend for the seg height for that lense. Do you have to measure it higher than normal. It also depends a little on the height of the person. some progressive wearers like the marking higher some like it lower. Some progressive lenses require measuring 2 to 3 millimeter above fitting cross and vice versa

[optiman37]

one other solution might be to increase pantoscopic tilt or add retroscopic tilt in frame

hope i was able to give you some ideas