Color Perception Altered through Progressive Lenses?..

[Bok]

Hi there,

RE: +1.75/-0.50x53
LE: +1.50/-1.00x130
Add: +1.25
Lens: Physio + A/R Multicoated

the client is having color perception issues through these lenses, base curves and frame fit are all perfect there is no pathological problems that could cause this to happen and the client is not color defficient in any way.

when the client is in the cockpit of the plane and coming in to land there are 4 lights, two red and two white lights which guide the client in the correct angle, height and position to land safely and correctly. these lights change from time to time and can sometimes be 3 red 1 white and or 3 white 1 red etc depending on approach to the runway. the client cannot see the red lights correctly and is mixing the white up for "pink" so the client thinks that the plane is approaching incorrectly so adjusts the landing accoring. Could the anti-reflection coating cause this issue or is there something else going on that I am missing?

much appreciated for any input cheers

[jpways]

What was the material used and is this the patient's first pair of eyeglasses?

[braheem24]

When landing not only is the plane's nose up, so is the pilot's.

Wondering if there's a vertical imbalance at the down gaze causing the red lights to align with the white causing a pink light.

[Bok]

What was the material used and is this the patient's first pair of eyeglasses?

This is the first pair of specs, index used is 1.498. Doesn't appear to be any vertical imbalance and this has been tested and checked for. If anything the frame pd is slightly big for the client pd. frame PD 67 client pd 61.5.

[braheem24]

Does the A.R. have a blue reflex instead of the usual green?

[Bok]

Does the A.R. have a blue reflex instead of the usual green?

That's immediately what I jumped to and sadly it's the usual green..

[braheem24]

Is he taking Viagra.


...sorry that would be seeing blue, but always wanted to have a reason to ask.

[Robert Martellaro]

Hi there,

RE: +1.75/-0.50x53
LE: +1.50/-1.00x130
Add: +1.25
Lens: Physio + A/R Multicoated

the client is having color perception issues through these lenses, base curves and frame fit are all perfect there is no pathological problems that could cause this to happen and the client is not color defficient in any way.

when the client is in the cockpit of the plane and coming in to land there are 4 lights, two red and two white lights which guide the client in the correct angle, height and position to land safely and correctly. these lights change from time to time and can sometimes be 3 red 1 white and or 3 white 1 red etc depending on approach to the runway. the client cannot see the red lights correctly and is mixing the white up for "pink" so the client thinks that the plane is approaching incorrectly so adjusts the landing accoring. Could the anti-reflection coating cause this issue or is there something else going on that I am missing?

much appreciated for any input cheers

Rule out Rx problems (too much plus/cyl/oblique axis). Rule out lens positional errors, primarily too high of a fitting point. Consider a highly optimized PAL design for the oblique axes. Minimize or eliminate prism thinning. Consider segmented multifocals for trouble-shooting or permanent use.

[NCspecs]

When landing not only is the plane's nose up, so is the pilot's.

Wondering if there's a vertical imbalance at the down gaze causing the red lights to align with the white causing a pink light.

This is EXACTLY what first popped into my head when I read the first post. Progressives are super tricky for pilots. They almost need something occupational with intermediate distance on the inverted seg so they can see instrument panels above.

[Robert Martellaro]

The lights are probably PAPI, or the Precision Approach Path Indicator. They're usually to the left of the beginning of the runway, but the second video shows it on both sides.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rC2CSsenClM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OErn1MCeGXg

[uncut]

Hi there,

RE: +1.75/-0.50x53
LE: +1.50/-1.00x130
Add: +1.25
Lens: Physio + A/R Multicoated

the client is having color perception issues through these lenses, base curves and frame fit are all perfect there is no pathological problems that could cause this to happen and the client is not color defficient in any way.

when the client is in the cockpit of the plane and coming in to land there are 4 lights, two red and two white lights which guide the client in the correct angle, height and position to land safely and correctly. these lights change from time to time and can sometimes be 3 red 1 white and or 3 white 1 red etc depending on approach to the runway. the client cannot see the red lights correctly and is mixing the white up for "pink" so the client thinks that the plane is approaching incorrectly so adjusts the landing accoring. Could the anti-reflection coating cause this issue or is there something else going on that I am missing?

much appreciated for any input cheers

I "highlighted" a phrase in your post.........I would question whether this person is red/green deficient.

[Robert Martellaro]

I "highlighted" a phrase in your post.........I would question whether this person is red/green deficient.

Red-weakness might be a factor, but the way I'm reading this seems to place the symptom as post eyeglasses only.

and the client is not color defficient in any way.

Not a factor.

[braheem24]

Not a factor.

Robert, You missed your calling. You should be a lawyer for engineers.

[rdcoach5]

SIMPLE suggestion. ADD -0.25 in trial lens and see if dist vision is better. You can add -0.25 cyl also to see the result. Use red/green chart

[HindSight2020]

Hi there,

RE: +1.75/-0.50x53
LE: +1.50/-1.00x130
Add: +1.25
Lens: Physio + A/R Multicoated

the client is having color perception issues through these lenses, base curves and frame fit are all perfect there is no pathological problems that could cause this to happen and the client is not color defficient in any way.

when the client is in the cockpit of the plane and coming in to land there are 4 lights, two red and two white lights which guide the client in the correct angle, height and position to land safely and correctly. these lights change from time to time and can sometimes be 3 red 1 white and or 3 white 1 red etc depending on approach to the runway. the client cannot see the red lights correctly and is mixing the white up for "pink" so the client thinks that the plane is approaching incorrectly so adjusts the landing accoring. Could the anti-reflection coating cause this issue or is there something else going on that I am missing?

much appreciated for any input cheers

I flew commercially for a few years. Basically, 'red is dead' and indicates you're too low on the approach - alternatively 'white is high' above the approach path. When the white transitions to red just before the gear touches down (last 100 FT or so), there is a very brief period of pink. This is why there are 4 lights on the approach PAPI and nothing less.

It has nothing to do with lens design, material or residual colour of AR. Perhaps if his issue is greater, I'd suggest a trip to the ophthalmologist for a more thorough full ocular exam.

[Robert Martellaro]

Robert, You missed your calling. You should be a lawyer for engineers.

There's another Robert here, aka Shanbaum, who wears both hats!

Questions for the OP- is the problem at all airports? http://www.37000feet.com/report/4202...-colors-at-lga

Was he non-symptomatic before eyeglasses?

How long has he been wearing the eyeglasses?

It has nothing to do with lens design, material or residual colour of AR. Perhaps if his issue is greater, I'd suggest a trip to the ophthalmologist for a more thorough full ocular exam.

Might a loss of contrast and blur make it more difficult to differentiate between colors though? This is a difficult Rx for any first time wearer, especially with PALs, where the oblique cylinder will interact with the unwanted astigmatism in the PAL design, possibly increasing blur into zones where it was not intended, with a narrowing of zone widths. Fitted too high...

[HindSight2020]

There's another Robert here, aka Shanbaum, who wears both hats!

Questions for the OP- is the problem at all airports? http://www.37000feet.com/report/4202...-colors-at-lga

Was he non-symptomatic before eyeglasses?

How long has he been wearing the eyeglasses?

Might a loss of contrast and blur make it more difficult to differentiate between colors though? This is a difficult Rx for any first time wearer, especially with PALs, where the oblique cylinder will interact with the unwanted astigmatism in the PAL design, possibly increasing blur into zones where it was not intended, with a narrowing of zone widths. Fitted too high...

Perhaps the contrast is the culprit. My question....if this is his first Rx, I'd be very concerned on his flying skill capabilities when operating uncorrected! Can't always blame rough landings on the crosswind!

[Andrew Weiss]

There's another Robert here, aka Shanbaum, who wears both hats!

Questions for the OP- is the problem at all airports? http://www.37000feet.com/report/4202...-colors-at-lga

Was he non-symptomatic before eyeglasses?

How long has he been wearing the eyeglasses?

Might a loss of contrast and blur make it more difficult to differentiate between colors though? This is a difficult Rx for any first time wearer, especially with PALs, where the oblique cylinder will interact with the unwanted astigmatism in the PAL design, possibly increasing blur into zones where it was not intended, with a narrowing of zone widths. Fitted too high...

I'd forgotten how thorough you are, Robert.

This appears to be a perect storm: a brief period of pink lights with perception exacerbated by progressive lens aberrations. I'd trust both of the posts quoted here. And agee with Robert that trouble-shooting all of the factors he enumerated, with special emphasis on fitting height (center pupil is 'way too high, probably) and cross-cyl. A line-style might work better here, even the occupational trifocal that puts the intermediate Rx at the top of the lens and the near Rx at the bottom.

[sharpstick777]

is the shift color the same throughout the field of view? or only on the periphery?

[Robert Martellaro]

is the shift color the same throughout the field of view? or only on the periphery?

On axis. Watch the videos I posted above to see what the client is seeing.

Perhaps the contrast is the culprit. My question....if this is his first Rx, I'd be very concerned on his flying skill capabilities when operating uncorrected! Can't always blame rough landings on the crosswind!

The low add power implies plenty of reserve accommodation, probably enough to mask this amount of hyperopia. I'm guessing 20/15 minus or thereabouts. His CC was probably the charts and maybe instruments.

So you flew commercial? Are you a presbyope? Sure would like to pick your brain if so!

I'd forgotten how thorough you are, Robert.

This appears to be a perect storm: a brief period of pink lights with perception exacerbated by progressive lens aberrations. I'd trust both of the posts quoted here. And agee with Robert that trouble-shooting all of the factors he enumerated, with special emphasis on fitting height (center pupil is 'way too high, probably) and cross-cyl. A line-style might work better here, even the occupational trifocal that puts the intermediate Rx at the top of the lens and the near Rx at the bottom.

Just peeling the onion.

I agree about PALs, but you know how emerging presbyopes feel about that (segmented multifocals).

Glad to see your back. Missed you.

[Bok]

Perhaps the contrast is the culprit. My question....if this is his first Rx, I'd be very concerned on his flying skill capabilities when operating uncorrected! Can't always blame rough landings on the crosswind!

This is this clients first Rx, Red,green test in the test room shows over +. So this could be the cause. But I doubt an 0.25 decrease in sphere will cause color perception issues.

Fitting height is set 0.5mm below pupil center. PD is spot on and has been measured monocularly. panto tilt of frame is set around 10 degrees and facial wrap around 6 degrees.

client is noticing color changes through central and peripheral. Visual fields testing shows no vision loss at all. color perception test shows no problems perfect color vision.

BIN V/A 6/5 uncorrected (corrected V/A 6/4) so technically does not need progressive lenses but requires near correction for gauges in aircraft so progs best of a hard world.

[jpways]

I'd say the most likely answer is a progressive lens adaptation issue. While the progressive lens might have give the patient the most focal lengths the central and peripheral distortion is leaning me towards non adaption. You can try dropping the seg height through adjustment to see if that alleviates the central distortion, but I'll be shocked if you can eliminate the perpherial distortion to satify the patient. And what is being accomplished by that extra line of vision? You're already better then 6/6 does the patient really need to read letters that small at 6 m? Is the patient complaining about the loss of focal length at distance.

But that brings up a question that I don't know the answer to, would the additional prescription (and I hope I'm saying this so someone else understands because I know I'd don't have the right words to describe the situation I'm picturing) but is it possible that with this correction you're bringing his point of optimal distance focus in too close putting the point sufficiently in front of the lights that the images are combining because the area of focus is going to diverge at the point it hits the lights and cause the patient to see the 1 red and 1 white light in the same image causing the brain to interpret the image as a single pink light?

If this shows up I made an image (not to scale) to show what I am picturing.

[Bok]

I'd say the most likely answer is a progressive lens adaptation issue. While the progressive lens might have give the patient the most focal lengths the central and peripheral distortion is leaning me towards non adaption. You can try dropping the seg height through adjustment to see if that alleviates the central distortion, but I'll be shocked if you can eliminate the perpherial distortion to satify the patient. And what is being accomplished by that extra line of vision? You're already better then 6/6 does the patient really need to read letters that small at 6 m? Is the patient complaining about the loss of focal length at distance.

But that brings up a question that I don't know the answer to, would the additional prescription (and I hope I'm saying this so someone else understands because I know I'd don't have the right words to describe the situation I'm picturing) but is it possible that with this correction you're bringing his point of optimal distance focus in too close putting the point sufficiently in front of the lights that the images are combining because the area of focus is going to diverge at the point it hits the lights and cause the patient to see the 1 red and 1 white light in the same image causing the brain to interpret the image as a single pink light?

If this shows up I made an image (not to scale) to show what I am picturing.

Exactly the case well explained, through further examination in the testroom, we have come to the conclusion that the client doesn't require that extra line of correction thus causing the issue, the reduction in hyperopia should solve this issue. I await the order back from the lab and will post an update if the reduction in + power solves the issues.

[Chris Ryser]

Having been a pilot for over 20 years who wore glasses (Lasik ended the
need) and having worked for an eyeglass lens manufacturer in the past here's
what I have learned.

Progressive lenses are not for pilots. In fact there have been several
accidents where progressive lenses were cited as a contributing factor. The
reason is that progressive lenses are not uniform from side to side. The
progression begins wide at the top and narrows at the bottom. If I were to
draw a diagram for you of the progressive area it would look somewhat T
shaped. What this does to the pilots peripheral vision is to distort it
considerably. All the accidents where progressives were cited as a
contributing factor involved landings.

Pilots who purchased progressives from the company I used to work for would
often complain to the customer service dept. of the problems they had with
them, specifically the distortion. The company's response was generally to
just give them a full refund or credit towards bifocals to be put in their
frames.

The latest from the FAA is that they are considering a ban on the use of
progressive lenses in the cockpit. The two largest manufacturers of
progressive lenses, Essilor (AKA Varilux) and Sola, are not putting up a
fight on this because they want to avoid the publicity and because they know
there are problems.


copied
from the internet

[Robert Martellaro]

Having been a pilot for over 20 years who wore glasses (Lasik ended the
need) and having worked for an eyeglass lens manufacturer in the past here's
what I have learned.

Progressive lenses are not for pilots. In fact there have been several
accidents where progressive lenses were cited as a contributing factor. The
reason is that progressive lenses are not uniform from side to side. The
progression begins wide at the top and narrows at the bottom. If I were to
draw a diagram for you of the progressive area it would look somewhat T
shaped. What this does to the pilots peripheral vision is to distort it
considerably. All the accidents where progressives were cited as a
contributing factor involved landings.

Pilots who purchased progressives from the company I used to work for would
often complain to the customer service dept. of the problems they had with
them, specifically the distortion. The company's response was generally to
just give them a full refund or credit towards bifocals to be put in their
frames.

The latest from the FAA is that they are considering a ban on the use of
progressive lenses in the cockpit. The two largest manufacturers of
progressive lenses, Essilor (AKA Varilux) and Sola, are not putting up a
fight on this because they want to avoid the publicity and because they know
there are problems.


copied
from the internet

The post after that from rec. aviation.student from 13 years ago...

https://groups.google.com/forum/#!to...nt/2kzOf_SQsBw

I wear Varilux progressives and have noted no problems VFR or in IMC. I see
no difference in flying an airplane or driving a car in terms of peripheral
distortion or disorientation.

I have worn the progressives for about 10 years now, bifocals before that.
There are disadvantages to progressives, mainly for me that you have to turn
your head and point your nose at whatever you are looking at, whereas with
bifocals you can just use your peripheral vision or shift your eyes. But I
have adapted and have no desire nor perceived need to change.

Stan

Personally, I'd take the train.