Hi,
Has anyone familiar with the Digital Ray Path Technologies from IOT for producing DS PALs.
Would just like to know how the PALs made with this technology preform in comparison to
the technologies from the big manufactures (Essilor, Zeiss, Hoya, etc).
Sorry typing error - should have mentioned "Is" anyone familiar with... instead of "Has" - beg your pardon
Yes, I'm wearing one of their designs by Toledo Optical. It is better for my high minus Rx than GT2 3D. Smoother and wider int. It's much better for my int than Physio or Kodak Unique. It's also less expensive.
Hi RdCoach5,Originally Posted by rdcoach5
Thanks for your reply. Appreciate your feedback.
However, I'm expecting to know technically what is the difference between this design and and the big names like Physio, G2 3D (as you mentioned), Impression, Anateo (BBGR) and ofcourse the new upcoming revolution: The S-Series.
Thanks to all in anticipation for your reply.
Last edited by rdcoach5; 11-12-2012 at 09:39 AM.
Thanks RdCoach5
Optical Ray Tracing has been around since the 1930's and has been digitally available on computer programs OSLO and HEXAGON released in the 1970's. Sure computers are faster, and parameters have increased, but Ray Tracing is nothing new.
Its just marketing hype. Everyone uses it, and has for some time.
Thank you sharpstick777. I get your point.
Digital Ray-Path patented technology is the state-of-the-art technology based on a revolutionary eye-lens model. The lenses (because the model is fully binocular) can be at any position with respect to the eyes, they can have prism, pantoscopic tilt, wrapping angle, any shape contour, and can be located at any distance from the eye. Digital Ray-Path will manage back and front surfaces with any complexity, not just spherical, torical or standard aspherical or atorical surfaces. The object space is variable. Depending on the lens that we want to optimize, each object is located at the distance it will really be in the real world. The rays will come from any point of the object space into the retina of the eye. Skew rays are possible, and finite size pupils are considered. Finally, image quality is computed by means of an imaging model taking into account eye and lens characteristics.
See all ---------------> http://www.iot.es/drp.html
Dear Chris,
Thanks for your elaborate reply.
So can we assume that the lenses made with this technology are comparable to the more sophisticated designs from top lens manufacturers.
Besides, with this technology we can have a double sides digital PAL (not just a back-side digital surfaced one). Please correct me if I'm wrong. Also thanks for the link, I did see their video as well on youtube some time back... quite interesting.
No, not at all. In fact, this approach is one of the biggest problems in our industry at the moment in my opinion. It's so much harder for the customer to make a choice when one optician is advising true premium lenses like Zeiss Hoya Shamir etc's best offerings, and another is selling what they call equivalent lenses for half the price. Stop trying to cut corners! Sure, Freeform and Digital Ray Path are excellent technologies (the two are intertwined really), but they certainly don't make a good lens by themselves. Whilst the technology used to engineer and manufacture the lens is very important, most crucial of all is the lens design itself, and that's where the true innovators come into their own.
Think of it like this. Let's say you have a Mercedes manufacturing plant. If you wanted, you could use that equipment to make a Ford. You would be making a Ford from the best manufacturing processes, but how much better would you expect the car to be? Since it was being made to the original specifications, not a lot... perhaps 10% better performance? But that same facility could be used to manufacture a Mercedes, a state of the art vehicle made possible by the same high-precision equipment that didn't really improve the Ford. What was different? - The original design, research and innovation.
Dear Robert,
Thanks for your detailed reply and the example as above.
I understand that the big manufacturers invest a lot in creating innovative products/designs with research and development. So inevitably their products are of superior performance.
Thanks again.
The proof is in the wearing. When I take an identical Rx in an identical frame, and the only variable is the progressive design I think the comparison is very valid. I agree Zeiss has the most advanced designs available, however, IOT and others are not only capable in matching their designs but have done so. Again, I was wearing the Zeiss GT2 3D and considered it a big improvement to GT2. To my amazement and delight, my IOT design by Toledo Optical, Visionary Max, is superior in all zones to the GT23D. Everyone who has been up-graded to the Visionary Max, about 300 pt's, has very much liked it better than GT2 or 3D. Also they prefer it to Definity.
The GT2 3D is a relatively old design now so I don't think that's a fair comparison.
Hi Rdcoach5,
Thanks for your feedback with the practical experiences. What concerns me as a professional ECP is ultimately the wearer comfort with optimized vision. If Visionary Max is better in visual performance then GT23D and less expensive then why not suggest it to our patients. In most cases, what I have noted is that the end-user would trust more on the recommendations of the ECP then on a particular brand because they don't really understand the technicalities of lens design and process.
Hi Robert,
If that's the case then as per your expertise, which designs are comparable to/or better in performance then the Visionary Max and from which branded companies.
I'm sorry but I'm not familiar with the lens. My experience in the UK is that independent manufacturers can produce great lenses and awful lenses, but the very best lenses come from the companies that spend the most on research, excluding Essilor. If Rd Coach says it's a good design, I absolutely believe him.
Last edited by Robert_S; 11-30-2012 at 06:31 PM.
I would add that to my knowledge there is no better design than the new Hoya ID (based on Seiko core designs but enhanced by them) as an all-purpose lens. I am a strong believer in front and back surfacing, when the calculations are done well. At the same time, for best performance in distance I think the Zeiss Individual II is easily the best out there, particularly when coupled with iScription. Of course it's good at the rest but the ID is softer and smoother.
Last edited by Robert_S; 11-30-2012 at 06:45 PM.
Agreed, frosting is thin without the cake.
The Hoyas offer incredibly narrow distance zones in my RX, noted by others on here. I can only see clearly a few degrees. I am leaning toward the theory their front side dual directional cyl effectively creates yoked prism away from OC. We always think that prism if its balanced is OK, but Sheedy found differently. People have varying wide tolerance to Yoked Prism of about 2D, so my theory is that people with low yoked prism tolerances will not see well through Hoya lenses. The difference could be cultural as well, we drive a lot here in the US so people who take the train or public transportation will not be affected as much with the loss of distance width.
Sharpstick, I absolutely agree with you! But have you tried the new ID Lifestyle, which was released here last month? We've dispensed around 50 pairs and not had one complaint of loss of peripheral acuity in the distance. Again, I do agree with you that it was the only issue with the previous edition.
We do 100% IOT lenses and love them. We used the Shamir Attitude prior for wraps and the reading is much better in the IOT lenses, not even close.
The design is important, but thickness, material, quality of coatings all add up to patient satisfaction. The design's all seem to wrk better with less hocus-pocus optics!
For 90% of the RX's any well made product will yield excellent patient satisfaction and there is not a reason to pay 2x for most folks IMHO.
Craig- I have used as much free form as possible for at least 8 years.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks