Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: question for Darryl and others

  1. #1
    opti-tipster harry a saake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    lake norman, north carolina
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,099

    question for Darryl and others

    Yesterday one of the OD,S i work with showed me a test he did to see how good plano sunglasses are. He turned on the projecter and on the chart was the standard snellen chart. He then held the various glasses in front of the projector, ocular side facing the projecter. I was amazed how many of them , including big brand names that were not clear and in fact some of them were terrible, others were great, even some of the glass polarized lenses were not clear. I am not going to name any brands right now until i can get an opinion on whether or not this is a valid test.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996

    Exclamation

    That's why they have drug store shades @$2.00 and Cartiers@$850.00. I have seen upper tier polarized lenses that: Had the polarization 90 degrees off, others were trash after exposure to water. Some that the lenses "shrunk" and would not stay in the frame although were quite firm when new, once even a new pair shrunk after being lost in the house for six months without exposure to sunlight or heat.

    Many lines will have excellent quality frames and junk sunglasses because they find a load if **** overseas at a cheap price and think it will sell with the addittion of thier name. And we all know of lines that have an opthalmic line for $50.00+ and a department store line for $15.00 selling under the same name.

    Chip

  3. #3
    opti-tipster harry a saake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    lake norman, north carolina
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,099

    test

    Chip , happy birthday,,lest i forget, i agree with what you say in your reply, but the point i am trying to ascertain is the test test the OD is doing, a valid way of testing the lenses for clarity. If it is it might explain why some people come in on occasion and tell you, these non prescription sunglasses give me a headache.

  4. #4
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996

    Aberration test.

    Harry:
    Hold them up and look at a flourescent tube across the room. Wiggle them, if aberrations are present you should be able to detect them.

    No fancy equipment required. Also works on lenses of all types including contact lenses.

    Chip

  5. #5
    OptiBoard Apprentice
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Seattle
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    19
    It is not allowed to see things distorted when you look through a good pair of plano sunglasses. The easiest way to check is to look at 2 perpendicular lines. They should remain the same.

    Sorry for my english...

  6. #6
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    I would be curious about window glass in this test. Any material has a refractive index higher than air, so we would expect some effect on optics. I don't think the test is properly being made. The lenses are just held up, and may not be straight with the light source. Maybe testing a pair that is good from the patient view in this way would reveal some insight. Interesting concept though :0)

  7. #7
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    Shutterbug:
    This test will show a lot (all) flaws in window glass. Anyone who ever worked in a surface room is familiar. Instruments only measure small areas, above covers the whole lens. However for those of you who must have an instrument to document everything: See: Virgil Hancock: Modern Arc.

    If you want to cause problems for a surface lab, just start inspecting everything with a Modern Arc. In fact one of the reasons a Modern Arc is no longer used for inspection, is there has never been a plastic lens that could pass a Modern Arc inspection.

    Now back to plano quality: Many manufactures feel that just pressing or heat sagging a piece of plano glass/plastic will result in a meniscus lens of the optical quality the original sheet had. Others do not realize that the front curve on a plano must be longer than the posterior by 1/3 of the thickness. These are just a few of the reasons so many of them are junk.

    Chip
    Last edited by chip anderson; 10-11-2004 at 12:30 PM. Reason: Mo' Stuff

  8. #8
    Master OptiBoarder rinselberg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Sunnyvale, CA 94086
    Occupation
    Other Eyecare-Related Field
    Posts
    2,301
    http://www.oakley.com/private_pilot/

    Objective: Contract testing of refractive and prismatic properties of various sunglass models purchased at retail.

    This WEB page (above) on the Oakley website presents an optical testing of sunglasses under the title "Private Pilot 2004". There are three PDF format (Adobe Acrobat Reader) documents that you can link to read the full test report on Polarized, Men's Sport and Women's Sport lines. If you want to download the PDF documents, don't click on the "document icon", click on the text that says "Click here to download complete test results". (Wasn't the smartest web page designer!)

    Are you reading more posts and enjoying it less? Make RadioFreeRinsel your next Internet port of call ...

  9. #9
    Master OptiBoarder Darryl Meister's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Kansas City, Kansas, United States
    Occupation
    Lens Manufacturer
    Posts
    3,700
    I haven't given this type of test any consideration before, but it would probably be acceptable for detecting gross errors (such as surfacing aberrations). It could also be used for detecting unwanted sphere or cylinder power, but a lensometer would be better. However, I doubt that this kind of test would be terribly applicable to assessing the off-axis optical performance of a plano lens, since you are not actually assessing the lens as a human eye would. This would be more critical for steep/wrap lenses or lenses with exotic designs.

    Best regards,
    Darryl

  10. #10
    Bad address email on file
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Cedar Rapids, Iowa
    Posts
    238
    Others do not realize that the front curve on a plano must be longer than the posterior by 1/3 of the thickness.
    Chip - could you explain this a bit more? I had assumed that the two curves would be close to identical (depending on index). Thanks!

    shutterbug

  11. #11
    Banned
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Only City in the World built over a Volcano
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    12,996
    Simple: Draw a straight line. Now take a compass and scribe an arc. Now move up the line any discernable distance and draw an arc of the same radius.

    You will find that you have drawn a plus lens. The difference between the two circle centers represents the thickness. Now measure the distance between the two starting points on the straight line. Add 1/3 (or precisely .3375) of this to the radius of your compass. Put the point of the compass on the straight line at the starting point of your second arc, you will have described a plano (as compared to the original arc).

    Simple geometry.

    Chip

    P.S. The shorter the arcs the more this is a factor in very long radii (as in most spectacle lenses) the effect is near negligible, with short radii (contact lenses) it makes quite pronounced difference.

  12. #12
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,388
    Here's what I learned at OSU C.O. That test is invalid. What you're doing is placing a lens in front of a projected image. Any power in there at all will cause defocus. Any abberation in the lens at all will cause waviness. It is the "sum total" of all abberations in the lens that will show up on that test (probably even a smudge). The eye doesn't look through the sum total of the lens, just the optical axis + 4 mm or so. It will exaggerate the distortion in a lens.

    Heck, just look through the stupid lenses. Do they look clear? Enough said!

  13. #13
    I agree with drk. Unless you can improve the optics in my interocular lens, you don't impress me.


    Distortion free = Glass

    enouph said.

  14. #14
    threadkiller? eromitlab's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Location
    the state of confusion
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    226
    Quote Originally Posted by harry a saake
    Yesterday one of the OD,S i work with showed me a test he did to see how good plano sunglasses are. He turned on the projecter and on the chart was the standard snellen chart. He then held the various glasses in front of the projector, ocular side facing the projecter. I was amazed how many of them , including big brand names that were not clear and in fact some of them were terrible, others were great, even some of the glass polarized lenses were not clear. I am not going to name any brands right now until i can get an opinion on whether or not this is a valid test.
    one of the old guys I work with did the same thing for me a few years back when I asked him about distortions in polycarb lenses. He grabbed several stock plano poly and CR lenses and held 'em up to the projector... sure enough the same thing happened with the poly lenses as you described above. The CR lenses were free of any distortions or aberrations.

    I don't know if it is "valid" as a test method, but it did show me one of the few drawbacks of polycarb to plastic.

  15. #15
    Rising Star
    Join Date
    Jun 2000
    Location
    Beer-Sheva, Israel
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    59

    Eye vs other tests

    Quote:

    Heck, just look through the stupid lenses. Do they look clear? Enough said!

    I wonder, if the lens looks good according to this looking-through test, does this mean that there's nothing in it which would make one's eyes tired during a two-hour drive? In other words, long-term effects should be more sensitive to flaws. Another case would be a lens having sphere of, say, 0.3D - uniform and no aberrations. Such a lens may pass the look-through test as well as Rinselberg's imaging quality, but the wearer will feel uncomfortable with it as wearing it gets longer. Of course, a lensometer would easily pick that. So, the conclusion is clear: There's no standard for the quality of planos, and there should be one!

  16. #16
    opti-tipster harry a saake's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    lake norman, north carolina
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    2,099

    plano,s

    Raanan, welcome to optiboard, i agree there should be a standard, though since it is not prescription i doubt we will see that. DRK, repectfully for the minute until i pursue further tests, i will have to disagree with you for the simple fact, of all other things being equal, why are some of these lenses perfectly clear? With your theory it seems to me that all of them would be off. i think my next test is going to be just a straight light source from the projector and put an already printed snellen chart on the wall. Should have some info by friday.

  17. #17
    What's up? drk's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Ohio
    Occupation
    Optometrist
    Posts
    9,388
    I, too, had experimented with the famous lens test above. I could find no significant on-eye optical difference with the samples. And I would, since I am a picky myope. Scientific? You be the judge.

    Defocus by even an eighth diopter causes a projector screen to blur hideously, and any power would ruin the test completely, and I'd be willing to posit that that is why some lenses fail and some don't, and not necessarily optical quality per se. The tolerance of this test for power is vastly more sensitive than the eye's, and the eye-lensometer system.

    Generally speaking, there are few things that would cause "strain after several hours of wear" that would not show up immediately: Yes, Pulfrich phenomenon, prism, would be binocular problems that could cause strain, but wouldn't show up on this test, anyway! Of course, about 1/8th-1/4 diopter would maybe show some symptoms, too, but you could detect this with a lensometer, as you mentioned, or the projector test.

    Bottom line: I think the test uncovers likely insignificant amounts of unwanted power.

    And, by the way, if you do take time to do the test you describe, Harry, you will find that all the lenses are the same. Why? Because illumination of an eyechart will look the same to you regardless of the vergence of the light used. Sorry.
    Last edited by drk; 11-04-2004 at 04:00 PM.

  18. #18
    Manuf. Lens Surface Treatments
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    in Naples FL for the Winter months
    Occupation
    Other Optical Manufacturer or Vendor
    Posts
    23,240

    Wrong.....................................

    Quote Originally Posted by mrba

    Distortion free = Glass

    enouph said.
    Wrong...............................

    When I started in the optical trade there was no plastic. Glass lenses were the only means at the time which lasted well into the 70's.

    Cheap plano sunglass lenses were NOT of optical quality unless they were of the surfaced quality. Most of them were hot moulded colored glass lenses and many where full of distortion.

    When we sold high quality sunglasses we showed the customer how to look at the shop entrance door frame through the lenses, and move the glasses in a circular motion. If the vertical line started to move and look like a snake the lenses were no good.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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

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
  •