Options for an 8.50 Add

[edKENdance]

Have a gentleman with a +12.00 distance and an 8.50 add. Wearing an aspheric lenticular round seg style. Wants to know what other options are available. My lab guru is away for the day so I thought I'd throw this out here. He'd really prefer a flat seg.

[chip anderson]

Franklin?

[TLG]

Younger has a FT28 and FT35 "Special Adds"; maybe not special enough for you tho as they only come to +8.00.

[Robert Martellaro]

Have a gentleman with a +12.00 distance and an 8.50 add. Wearing an aspheric lenticular round seg style. Wants to know what other options are available. My lab guru is away for the day so I thought I'd throw this out here. He'd really prefer a flat seg.

http://www.aire-o-lite-optical.com/ But they are not aspheric.

[tmorse]

Have a gentleman with a +12.00 distance and an 8.50 add. Wearing an aspheric lenticular round seg style. Wants to know what other options are available. My lab guru is away for the day so I thought I'd throw this out here. He'd really prefer a flat seg.

This looks like a Low Vision Rx, where adds are 2X, 3X, etc adn every X= +4.00. So your +8.50 Add is actually a 2X add.
www.eyeassociates.com/PDFs/Low%20Vision%20Eyewear.pdf

[finefocus]

Younger has a FT28 and FT35 "Special Adds"; maybe not special enough for you tho as they only come to +8.00.

With 20 diopters to work with, getting an extra half by vertex adjustment will be easy enough; inevitable, in fact, unless you use the rivet gun technique.

[Jacqui]

Franklin?

Ditto

[sharpstick777]

We just had a Free-form round seg-bifocal with a backside add in +13.50sph +3.50 cyl with a +3.50 add. The front was spherical, but if you stacked the adds you could do the same with one on front, one on back. You could get to +8.00 in theory by using a bifocal blank vs spherical.

It was an ICE-TECH dual zone and came out very thin in 1.74. It looked amazing, like it was only a +7 or so.

[RIMLESS]

http://www.designsforvision.com/

[edKENdance]

Thanks for all the options. The only one we're right out rejecting is the Franklin.

/sorry Jacqui :)

First things first is getting this guy into the right frame. He's interested in using his own. I'll have to see if the nose cheese is holding it together.

[edKENdance]

Here's the +11.50 with the 8.50 Add. 350 on the front seg and 5 on the back in a 1.67 blended. 4.9 at thickest point on the back bubble.

[Robert Martellaro]

[ATTACH=CONFIG]8598[/ATTACH]

Here's the +11.50 with the 8.50 Add. 350 on the front seg and 5 on the back in a 1.67 blended. 4.9 at thickest point on the back bubble.

Nice.

I'm getting dizzy counting all of the optical centers (four)!

Did you start with a 1.67 ST lenticular? I didn't know that was an option. The back was surfaced on a free-form generator, creating the power curve and the round seg? What are the front and back curves, and are they aspheric or optimized in any way? Most importantly, how is your client getting along with them?

[edKENdance]

Nice.

I'm getting dizzy counting all of the optical centers (four)!

Did you start with a 1.67 ST lenticular? I didn't know that was an option. The back was surfaced on a free-form generator, creating the power curve and the round seg? What are the front and back curves, and are they aspheric or optimized in any way? Most importantly, how is your client getting along with them?

Heh! Front curve is an 8 base. I didn't clock the back. I'm uncertain of the rest but as far as he's concerned his vision was noticeably better from the first second he put them on.

[Uncle Fester]

So how far away is he focusing at near?

What a great job btw.

New slogan for your place-- "We do the ridiculous. The impossible takes one more week."

[edKENdance]

So how far away is he focusing at near?

What a great job btw.

New slogan for your place-- "We do the ridiculous. The impossible takes one more week."

About 6-8 inches. His best corrected is 20/100. Oddly enough his hobby is making telescope lenses....by hand!