Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: Digital progressives have narrower reading areas?

  1. #1
    Optician Extraordinaire
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Somewhere warm
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,130

    Digital progressives have narrower reading areas?

    My lab told me this, that the same progressive when digitized will have a smaller reading area.

    Input? Your experiences with this?

  2. #2
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Gold Supporter Judy Canty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    7,482
    I have not found this to be true. Did your lab have any data to back up that assertion?

  3. #3
    OptiBoard Professional RT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    CT
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    879
    What exactly do you mean by "the same progressive, when digitized"?
    RT

  4. #4
    Optician Extraordinaire
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Somewhere warm
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,130
    For example the Physio and the Physio DRX. This is what the rep at the lab told me, I have no data on it.

  5. #5
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter rdcoach5's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Rossford, Ohio
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    1,604
    Absolutely untrue. It's the opposite if it's an IOT- Younger design.

  6. #6
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Gold Supporter
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Maryland
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,103
    I always have seen Physio Enhanced reading areas looking bigger than Physio DRX designs, but only noticeable in ADDS over +2.50

    IMHO it is way way way way more important for the inset of the seg to be in exactly the right place that a patient is looking through than if it is 15-20% wider. If it is not digitally placed with the exact patient's RX and PD in mind than they are not looking out of the exact center of the seg.

    I probably don't know what I'm talking about. I like lenses using the Camber technology.

  7. #7
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    UK
    Occupation
    Optical Laboratory Technician
    Posts
    939
    It will often have a lower add power by about 0.12. Perhaps that's what they were thinking of.

  8. #8
    Optician Extraordinaire
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Somewhere warm
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,130
    So the consensus is that the woman I spoke to was mistaken?

  9. #9
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    canada
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    706
    "the same progressive when digitized"

    does this mean a conventional cast front side progressive which is then milled on the backside with a milling tool using CNC technology vs the same semi finished lens being surfaced conventionally (whatever conventional means these days).....

    OR

    A full backside milled progressive which purports to have the same "design" as a similarly named conventional front side lens.....

    I think this difference matters, but I might be wrong. And truth is, in answer to your question, I don't think anyone really knows scientifically.


  10. #10
    Optician Extraordinaire
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Somewhere warm
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    3,130
    She said digital lenses tended(can't remember her exact wording) to have narrower/smaller reading areas. Not just regular progressives that have been digitized, but I believe she meant in general.

    I hadn't heard that elsewhere and wanted to know what others thought.

  11. #11
    One eye sees, the other feels OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wauwatosa Wi
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,458
    Quote Originally Posted by Happylady View Post
    My lab told me this, that the same progressive when digitized will have a smaller reading area.

    Input? Your experiences with this?
    Placing the progressive optics on the back increases the zone widths by about 10%. This is due to a shorter back vertex distance.

    However, by placing the progressive optics on the back, the ocular rotation required to reach the near zone increases, decreasing the near vertical zone height.

    The lens designer might correct for this by reducing the corridor length, which reduces the zone widths by about 10%.

    The accuracy of your lab reps statement depends on how you define 'smaller reading area'. I'll assume it's the near zone surface area in square millimeters defined by .50 cylinder limits. I think the difference will be very small, probably insignificant.
    Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. - Richard P. Feynman

    Experience is the hardest teacher. She gives the test before the lesson.



  12. #12
    OptiBoard Professional RT's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    CT
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    879
    Placing the progressive optics on the back increases the zone widths by about 10%. This is due to a shorter back vertex distance.

    However, by placing the progressive optics on the back, the ocular rotation required to reach the near zone increases, decreasing the near vertical zone height.
    Which is precisely why HOYA's ID family (Integrated Dual Surface) puts the vertical elements of the progression on the front, and the horizontal elements on the back. Reduces the vertical ocular rotation while also increasing zone width.
    RT

  13. #13
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Gold Supporter Judy Canty's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Virginia Beach, VA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    7,482
    Well then, imagine all those folks who took her reasoning at face value and didn't think to ask anyone else.

  14. #14
    One eye sees, the other feels OptiBoard Silver Supporter
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Wauwatosa Wi
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,458
    Quote Originally Posted by RT View Post
    Which is precisely why HOYA's ID family (Integrated Dual Surface) puts the vertical elements of the progression on the front, and the horizontal elements on the back. Reduces the vertical ocular rotation while also increasing zone width.
    RT,

    When I started fitting the iD, I wrote this in response to a rather knowledgeable consumer at sci.med.vision...

    >I was impressed by Hoya's (realistic?) illustration of reduced swim
    >effect on stairs. I'm surprised they don't tout it as a safety
    >issue. But I wonder if anything in particular is attributable to the
    >front-back split of the reading correction. Couldn't a ray-tracing
    >program compute a back-only surface with identical performance?

    "I'm told that what can be done on two surfaces can also be done on one surface,
    at least in regards to power and astigmatic error, and maybe unwanted surface
    astigmatism. However, Hoya is not just splitting the Add power on both surfaces,
    they're combining two plano cylinders on the front and back surface that sums
    the cylinder power to equal the Add power. This is said to reduce skew
    distortion, to a degree that can't be done working only one surface."

    http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Arch.../msg00133.html

    My concern is that the iD is not particularly optimized WRT prescription and POW. Does the MyStyle use the same surface configuration, that is, for a +2.00 add, summing a PL +2.00 x 180 and Pl +2.00 x 90, or some combination thereof, what other optimizations are available besides work distance, corridor length, and zone widths?
    Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself. - Richard P. Feynman

    Experience is the hardest teacher. She gives the test before the lesson.



  15. #15
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Jeddah K.S.A
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    7
    Absolutely wrong perception. It's the opposite and it might be slipping tongue statement by lab.

  16. #16
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    3,137
    partly true ... not because they are digital. When the Comfort was launched it was still competing against the ST-28 primarily. As the add power increases in every progressive the usable area inherently shrinks (if left alone). The Comfort was the first adaptive design which means the Comfort is a different lens at every add. Their target was to keep the reading area large no matter what. So the lens gets a little harder and the distance width shrinks in every add power.

    Fast forward today and most lenses are not reading emphasized, but distance emphasized. What that means is that as the Add power increases the reading and intermediate zones narrow a little, and generally the lens gets a little harder in design as well.

    So the more modern designs will shrink the reading in most cases. I am not sure what you mean though when you say "the same lens" when in fact the digital versions are usually different and newer designs, thus they move to a more distance emphasis.



    Quote Originally Posted by Happylady View Post
    My lab told me this, that the same progressive when digitized will have a smaller reading area.

    Input? Your experiences with this?

  17. #17
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    3,137
    The intermediate and reading are great, but the effective distance width is terrible. Concave front curves have a negative impact on net usable area esp in the distance zones.

    Quote Originally Posted by RT View Post
    Which is precisely why HOYA's ID family (Integrated Dual Surface) puts the vertical elements of the progression on the front, and the horizontal elements on the back. Reduces the vertical ocular rotation while also increasing zone width.

  18. #18
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    3,137
    Quote Originally Posted by Robert Martellaro View Post
    RT,

    However, Hoya is not just splitting the Add power on both surfaces,
    they're combining two plano cylinders on the front and back surface that sums
    the cylinder power to equal the Add power. This is said to reduce skew
    distortion, to a degree that can't be done working only one surface."
    Interestingly patented in 1907 by Aves. it did work but was impossible to apply spherical or toric power in addition the progression.

  19. #19
    Master OptiBoarder
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Seattle WA
    Occupation
    Optical Wholesale Lab (other positions)
    Posts
    3,137
    They do because the design emphasis and market has changed, not because of a technological shortcoming per se. See above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Happylady View Post
    She said digital lenses tended(can't remember her exact wording) to have narrower/smaller reading areas. Not just regular progressives that have been digitized, but I believe she meant in general.

    I hadn't heard that elsewhere and wanted to know what others thought.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Digital Progressives
    By Mlindy in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-14-2012, 12:53 PM
  2. Lab ? for Digital Processed Progressives
    By sharpstick777 in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-20-2009, 12:55 PM
  3. computer/reading glasses...2 range progressives??
    By plum in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 08-25-2006, 01:51 PM
  4. wide reading area progressives?
    By Sheryl in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 109
    Last Post: 08-08-2006, 07:58 PM
  5. How wide of reading area in progressives?
    By plum in forum Progressive Lens Discussion Forum
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 08-02-2006, 10:49 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •