Shamir DUO emergency

**Tallboy** · 08-20-2014, 02:19 PM

I need to edge this pair of Shamir Duos, but I want to double check the seg drop.

It looks like it should be a 4 drop to the PRP but the lab I ordered them from says "the person in charge of blocking" says it should but blocked on the 180

That looks like just where the blurry line begins I just cannot believe that is where I would block it up, Please someone who has edged and/or surfaced these help a guy out!!!

(PS they look like a neat visual solution from the blanks)

EDIT: I found the centration charts
http://www.shamirlens.com/images/DUO-CEN-F15-013014.pdf

So the fitting point DOES look like it was on the 180, but does that mean it was supposed to be measured like a Flat top? I'm pretty sure who ever did this on the floor measured it pupil height...

argh

**merrymaker** · 08-20-2014, 03:08 PM

the duo is supposed to be measured at pupil

**Tallboy** · 08-20-2014, 03:10 PM

Okay so measured at pupil and then blocked at the 180 PRP... Okay.... it is making me nervous but thats what I am doing.

**merrymaker** · 08-20-2014, 03:29 PM

curious to how it turns out. I haven't dispensed a pair yet but i do find the design very intriguing.

**Boldt** · 08-20-2014, 03:40 PM

Of all things it's a 3 drop...
if you have a centration chart dot it at the mid way point between the normal cross and the bottom of the fitting cross. I just had to check with my lab about that.

**Tallboy** · 08-20-2014, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Boldt

Of all things it's a 3 drop...
if you have a centration chart dot it at the mid way point between the normal cross and the bottom of the fitting cross. I just had to check with my lab about that.

The Shamir Centration chard above looks like it has the "FP" which I'm assuming means fitting point right on the PRP 180 line. Above that there is a dot that says "Far"

The lab I ordered them from swears it is to be blocked at the 180, and the centration chart seems to hint at that as well. I blocked at the 180... but dropped it just a smidge because my gut instinct told me too.

Trivex in a Red and Tortoise zyl Cinzia frame, they look MAHVELOUS BABY. I hope she loves the vision also!

**golfnut** · 08-20-2014, 08:53 PM

I fit my personal pair on the 180 and did NOT like them! Dropped it 3 and was much better but still not happy with the lense overall..

**Fezz** · 08-20-2014, 10:02 PM

Originally Posted by golfnut

I fit my personal pair on the 180 and did NOT like them! Dropped it 3 and was much better but still not happy with the lense overall..

Why?

What didn't you like?

**Uilleann** · 08-21-2014, 04:31 PM

We're about to fit our first here as well (edging in house). Will report our initial impressions momentarily...

...Standby one Houston...

**golfnut** · 08-21-2014, 07:49 PM

Originally Posted by Fezz:491362

Originally Posted by golfnut

I fit my personal pair on the 180 and did NOT like them! Dropped it 3 and was much better but still not happy with the lense overall..

Why?

What didn't you like?

The blend line was way too noticeable and I felt like it was constantly in my line of sight. Reading area was impressive though.

**Jstanfast** · 08-22-2014, 09:06 AM

Originally Posted by golfnut

The blend line was way too noticeable and I felt like it was constantly in my line of sight. Reading area was impressive though.

second that.

**golfnut** · 08-22-2014, 11:23 AM

Also, I fit 8 when they first came out, 6 ended up being remade. Had a mix of previous pal non adapts, lined bifocal wearers, and first time bifocal wearers. All with same complaint of blend line interference?? The ones that I fit lower were better but still not great. All loved the wide reading area.

**Boldt** · 08-22-2014, 11:28 AM

Golfnut: how did they end up? Any complete non-adapts? Are you fitting at the 180?
I'm wanting to try these out, but the doctor I work for is wanting to wait to see how they do so I'm getting everything I can on them.

**golfnut** · 08-22-2014, 07:17 PM

Originally Posted by Boldt:491456

Golfnut: how did they end up? Any complete non-adapts? Are you fitting at the 180?
I'm wanting to try these out, but the doctor I work for is wanting to wait to see how they do so I'm getting everything I can on them.

Out of the 6 non adapts 3 went to lined bifocals the others went back to sv. I fit the first 3 at the 180. After a few complaints I fit the rest at 3 below but still wasn't any better. It's definitely not what I had hoped it would be. The blend line is just too noticeable to be effective. It is really not much better than a blended round seg IMHO. I really like shamir products and commend their efforts to push new technology but this falls a bit short.

**edKENdance** · 08-22-2014, 07:23 PM

Possibly off topic but when a company releases a product like this how many wearer trials do they perform before releasing it? Why does there seem to be so much confusion about how to fit it?

**Tallboy** · 08-23-2014, 08:57 AM

Originally Posted by edKENdance

Possibly off topic but when a company releases a product like this how many wearer trials do they perform before releasing it? Why does there seem to be so much confusion about how to fit it?

Not off topic at all. When I had the lens in hand, and compared it to all I had been told/read as far as how to edge and lay it out - when I looked at the blend line (which goes all the way across the lens like an executive bifocal) I said... no way can I keep this seg so high.

She hasn't come to get them... I hope she likes them but I will remake into a flat top if necessary.

Or maybe I'll convince her to try for something using Younger's Camber Technology, though she was reluctant to try a progressive.

**Barry Santini** · 08-23-2014, 09:13 AM

Originally Posted by edKENdance

Possibly off topic but when a company releases a product like this how many wearer trials do they perform before releasing it? Why does there seem to be so much confusion about how to fit it?

What do you expect from any company that thinks that fitting FF engraved circles belong in-lin with the wearer's pupil.

???????!

B

**edKENdance** · 08-23-2014, 09:15 AM

Originally Posted by Barry Santini

What do you expect from any company that thinks that fitting FF engraved circles belong in-lin with the wearer's pupil.

???????!

B

Honestly, I would expect anything that's classified as a medical device to be put through rigorous trials.

**Uilleann** · 08-23-2014, 10:37 AM

So we edged ours approx. 2 mm lower than the 180. Pt was not overtly thrilled with them at dispense, but they were a "slight" improvement over his previous PAL in terms of general wear-ability. Interestingly, the pt stated he felt the reading area was no wider, clearer or easier to use than the previous PAL.

He's trying them for a few days and will report his impression over time.

**Boldt** · 08-25-2014, 10:13 AM

****** I was hopping that they would do better. Still have to try them, but am a little reluctant now. Sad face.

**cheshire1970** · 10-19-2015, 02:38 PM

I had listened and edged at the 180 for both patients and both rejected, now is the fitting cross on the sHAMIR Duo at 4 ABOVE the 180 line

**Paul Smith LDO** · 10-19-2015, 03:10 PM

Originally Posted by cheshire1970

I had listened and edged at the 180 for both patients and both rejected, now is the fitting cross on the sHAMIR Duo at 4 ABOVE the 180 line

I have had success with the Dual, when using it as a second pair option for PAL wearers not willing to spend extra money for a dedicated sun. I trial frame the ADD to suit an intermediate use, dash board etc... and fit at lower eye lid. The Dual has, for a lack of better explanation, a shape not unlike a Hershey's Kiss. The patient is required to muddle through some soft distortion, the top swirl of the Kiss, until they reach the ADD.
I do not sell these as an alternative to a FT nor a substitution for a PAL.