Essilor - Accolade And Accolade Freedom Lenses

[NickJohnson2008]

Navy Chief,

I am sure you are right but I could not find this post adjacent to mine in which I mentioned the lenses sold to me as NIKON were inscribed with a small "eye" logo - which I looked up in a 14 page database of lens identifiers as Signet Armorlite. (So, I am not sure where my response is going on the forum.)

You are saying the "arc" extends above the VEE and that is different but I could easily have missed such a small difference - in fact until very close examination I did not see that there was an arc at all but thought it was a triangle -but what does that identify these lenses as?

Prior to that I emailed NIKON and received an image specifying what a NIKON lens:"should" bear and it was always an "N" followed perhaps by letter or numeral but "always" and "N" according to Nikon.

Are you saying the "eye" mark I saw on these lenses (whether the arc goes above the VEE or not) sold to me as NIKON were actually NIKON? Or Essilor?

If so that 14 page database definitely needs updating.

[NickJohnson2008]

http://www.laramyk.com/tools/pal_chart.html

This was the database I used to identify the lenses sold to me as Nikon Eyes as actually being Signet Armolite. As you can see there is no similar mark for any other manufacturer so I am very interested if I have misidentified these lenses as your earlier post implies and if so, what manufacturer made them. Thank you.

[NavyChief]

The annual PRogressive Lens Identifier book that most if not all opticals has, doesn't list it. But when I called Essilor to make sure I got the correct lens, they pointed out the differance. And I do notice the differance between the two .

[Fezz]

Addressed to Nick Johnson2008 whose post was removed due to guideline violations. hcj



Just what kind of -Other Eyecare-Related Field are you in?

Maybe a review of the posting guidelines is in order?


"This forum is for Eyecare Professionals. Consumers are allowed to post in the Just Conversation forum and non-optical topics only. Please be aware that any questions involving optics or eyecare may be removed. These kinds of questions should be discussed with a qualified eyecare professional who has examined you and is familiar with your situation."

[jessecd]

I have very little doubt that the accolade and physio are in their essence, the same lens. Similarly, Lenscrafters was selling exclusively (until recently) the Scotchguard AR...which amusingly was packaged exactly the same as Crizal Alize. I found that funny when I worked there a couple years ago before we started our own clinic. The point is that lenses and coatings are always marketed as the greatest things since sliced bread, often with very little noticeable benefit. Progressive lenses are the most ridiculously advertised optical product. I've bounced between Ovation and Physio 360 and had more non adapts from the Physio 360. Both are great lenses, the reality is however that there really is not the amazingly improved the marketing campaign suggests. For whatever reason, however, opticians continue to be swayed. We don't trust advertising anywhere else, but when Varliux announces a huge breakthrough we all get excited. odd. anyway, thats my 2 cents. That being said, for the 75 cent semi finished cost difference, im switching all of our semifinished lenses to accolade. It so far has proved to be just fine...perhaps slightly better than ovation...perhaps.

[Cherry Optical]

I have very little doubt that the accolade and physio are in their essence, the same lens.

Both are great lenses, the reality is however that there really is not the amazingly improved the marketing campaign suggests.

That being said, for the 75 cent semi finished cost difference, im switching all of our semifinished lenses to accolade. It so far has proved to be just fine...perhaps slightly better than ovation...perhaps.

I am going to break my silence from Optiboard as this post shows the reason I have left the forum.

The Accolade and Physio are not the same lens, especially when you blur the distinction between the two by mentioning the Physio 360, whose 'comparative' lens would be the Accolade Freedom. Very different lens styles, both of which (if fit properly) will provide excellent results.

Regarding your contention that 'there really is not the amazingly improved' you apparently haven't tried too many styles. Trying one Free-Form style (Physio 360) and saying they all don't deliver on the promises is horrible logic. My guess is you are a Obama supporter.

To top it all off you end your post by telling everyone that you are seeing improved results with the Accolade standard vs. the Ovation. Honestly, drunk, stoned, or just confused?

Adam

[Pete Hanlin]

Disclaimer- Essilor employee (Technical Marketing Manager)

Just to clear up a few items raised on this thread...
1.) Essilor's Accolade & Accolade Freedom are not the same as Varilux Physio and Varilux Physio 360. Read the literature and it becomes clear the designs use completely different technologies and approaches.

Varilux Physio- uses wavefront correction to create clearer distance vision, align intermediate astigmatism, and stabilize near power- Accolade Freedom uses a biometry concept to match the progression to the shape of the retina.

360 Optimization (applied to Varilux products) matches the front and back surface designs to create wider fields of vision by reducing the alteration of the progression by the distance power and optimizes the periphery to the wearer's correction. Framitization Technology (applied to Accolade Freedom), redistributes the visual zones of the lens to take best advantage of the frame shape.

2.) WalMart does purchase lenses from Essilor, and some of those lenses are made in Dallas, Texas (the lenses purchased by WalMart are made at Avisia, 360 Varilux products are made in Omega- which is about a mile down the street). Even if they were made in the same laboratory, I fail to understand how that makes them the same product. Oh, and I've been in Bentonville and have met the buyers personally (in fact, I was the one who initially presented the Accolade design technology to them). The product is not- nor was ever presented- as "the Essilor version of Varilux Physio 360. WalMart's buyers seek to provide the best products for their customers, which may be why they purchase lenses and laboratory services from Essilor.

3.) I take particular exception to the comment regarding "often with very little noticeable benefit" (to the wearer), since another one of the duties associated with my position involves oversight of our US based clinical studies. Since 2000, Essilor has spent over $1.2 billion researching and developing new ophthalmic products which are clinically proven to provide very real and measureable benefits to the end consumer. I don't know what products you choose to use, but chances are we've tested them in either a clinical or testing laboratory environment.

[Happylady]

Hi Pete, glad to see you stepping in here! Do you think one is better then the other in real life situations?

[Cherry Optical]

The product is not- nor was ever presented- as "the Essilor version of Varilux Physio 360. WalMart's buyers seek to provide the best products for their customers, which may be why they purchase lenses and laboratory services from Essilor.

I figure I'll through a little gas on this fire:

How about the True Clear and True Clear HD? Those have been marketed as a Physio 'like' PAL to VisionSource locations. And the price is out of this world low.

True Clear is the lens you all should be doing your saber rattling over.

-Adam

[gemstone]

I suggest caution here, as any *Essilor* named product usually winds up on the price-trumpeting, mass-warehouse chains menus.

Beware!

Barry

What would they sell a blank that has to be digitally sufaced before it becomes the product for?

[Cherry Optical]

What would they sell a blank that has to be digitally sufaced before it becomes the product for?

In the vast majority of Essilor's 'Free-Form' styles they use the same semi-finished blank you would use for a non 'digitally designed' PAL. So, 'the same price' as a normal blank.

-Adam

[gemstone]

In the vast majority of Essilor's 'Free-Form' styles they use the same semi-finished blank you would use for a non 'digitally designed' PAL. So, 'the same price' as a normal blank.

-Adam

Yes.. I was just trying to make the point that free form lenses will not become overstock or surplus because they are ground to order, not mass molded. You may find a bunch of Comforts in a warehouse and get a good deal. It will never happen with Physios.

[Cherry Optical]

Yes.. I was just trying to make the point that free form lenses will not become overstock or surplus because they are ground to order, not mass molded. You may find a bunch of Comforts in a warehouse and get a good deal. It will never happen with Physios.

They are both made the same way with 'digital' molds now.

You will find an inventory of Comforts, Ellipses, and Physios that could create regular Comfort, Ellipse, or Physio - OR - with the correct equipment and software they could be digitally surfaced to be Comfort 360s, Ellipse 360s, or Physio 360s.

Its not the lens blank that makes the difference in the 360 designs it is the surfacing equipment and software which creates a better design.

-Adam

[Pete Hanlin]

Adam is correct- Varilux 360 Optimization is a design component created through a calculation process which creates a complex surface on the back surface of the traditional version blank.

In effect, the design integrates the progression on the front and the distance power on the back. The result is a lens design as it would be were the engineer able to know exactly the distance power and orientation that will be mated to the progressive effect s/he is trying to create. I really like the format, because it gives the advantage of molding (extremely highly accurate reproduction) with the freedom of digital surfacing (high levels of customization).

As far as real life between Accolade Freedom and Varilux Physio 360, it will depend on the situation- as well as the setting. Accolade Freedom uses the Framitization Technology to redistribute visual zones to take advantage of frame shape. Varilux achieves this through specific designs (e.g., Varilux Ellipse is very specifically designed to work in short corridor frames).

So, if you are in a retail setting, and therefore cannot get Varilux Ellipse directly (yes, you can order it through a laboratory- but Essilor does not sell semi-finished Varilux to retail), Accolade Freedom is probably the best short corridor offering out there. If you are on the private side of things, Varilux Ellipse is the only PAL specifically designed for short corridor frames.

Also, if you have a distance Rx above -2.00 sph and/or -1.00 cyl, the 360 Optimization shows higher levels of performance in clinical trials. Likewise, if you have a need for exceptionally fast adaptation rates (usually of great interest to retailers who have larger customer volumes), the biometric design component of Accolade Freedom has been shown to decrease adaptation times.

As I've delved further and further into progressive technology, it has become apparent that there are a.) a lot of areas in which performance can be enhanced, b.) a lot of ways to do it, and c.) you usually have to make choices about what you want to in enhance and how. Between, Accolade Freedom, Varilux Physio 360, Varilux Ipseo, and DEFINITY, there are some really innovative technologies that really do enhance performance to measureable degrees.

[Lee H]

True Clear pricing is unbelieveably low and has been marketed as "Physio like"


On another note
Pete, in the real world, for the presbyope that works in an office environment and has < -2.00D of distance correction and <2.00 of cyl and about a 1.75 add, which lens would be best? Accolade, Physio, or True Clear, including the digitally surfaced versions?

Also, what percentage of patients do you feel, will believe the extra cost of digitally surfaced lenses, is worth the extra $$$?

I'm wrestling with the benefit/cost factor for the majority. In other words, are these patients getting their money's worth? I want to offer the best but not oversell....does that make sense?

Thanks in advance

[Pete Hanlin]

TruClear is manufactured by Essilor as a private label branded product owned by Vision Source!- which is a very large group of private practitioners. TruClear is its own unique product with its own unique design- it is not Varilux Physio (and any statement as such is false, not only from a marketing standpoint but from the fact that Varilux Physio and TruClear are based on completely different design technologies). TruClear is a great design- its just not Varilux Physio.

What lens would I recommend? The last PAL of choice I was using prior to joining Essilor in 2002 was Varilux Panamic. Although originally skeptical (having arrived at the conclusion that most PALs were basically the same and finding that Varilux Comfort was a very good design that provided almost universal adaption), I finally agreed to try Varilux Panamic as a "top tier" PAL for any patient who indicated that swim was a problem. Most patients were quite satisfied in their current PAL- but when asked if there was anything they would change if they could, a surprising number noted problems with stairs or the ground. Almost without exception (in fact, I cannot recall one- but there may have been one), Varilux Panamic provided more comfortable vision (I was previously using SOLA VIP and Varilux Comfort) and the patient was able to notice a difference. We got to where everyone was recommended Varilux Panamic and it worked just swimmingly for me (pun intended).

Based on what I see in comparisons today, I would recommend Varilux Physio for those with low Rxs. Is it worth the money? In my opinion (which I'll admit may be biased- but is based on clinical observation)- yes. In numerous clinical studies, 72% of patients noted a DEFINITE improvement (particularly with distance vision) with Varilux Physio- and these were patients who had paid for their lenses (there is an American Academy of Ophthalmology poster on this study).

Actually, some of the most noticeable results for Varilux Physio come with patients with low Rxs. These patients are relatively unmotivated to wear full time correction- because most are capable of functioning in distance without correction. For these patients, providing clean crisp distance vision while wearing correction is paramount to their tolerance and/or enjoyment of the lens. Varilux Physio does not significantly reduce contrast, because the modulation transfer function is very high (MTF is a measure of how well an optical lens or system preserves the contrast inherent to the image). Independent researchers have been able to demonstrate that Varilux Physio provides up to 30% better contrast over other PALs.

So, assuming a Varilux Physio is being sold for $50-100 more than a Varilux Comfort, yeah- I would pay the extra (and I'd certainly have no trouble recommending the technology to my patients). I'm going to use these lenses for two or so years, and every time I drive at night or go to a movie I will see better with them vs. anything else we've tested.

Above -2.00 sphere or -1.00 cylinder, I have absolutely no qualms whatsoever recommending 360 Optimization (and for those engineers who value every little iota of clarity, I'd feel like their best shot at being happy- assuming that is possible- is with 360). Again, we simply have the data which shows patients do see better with the design.

I believe pretty strongly in the PAL and AR products Essilor makes- which makes my job a lot easier! All that said, I still think the most VITAL component to performance is the fit and Rx. I'd rather have my parents in terrifically fit SOLA VIPs than sloppily fit Varilux Physios. Fit being equal, however, Varilux Physio is worth it.

[Lee H]

Thanks for your quick response Pete!

[Robert Martellaro]

I am going to break my silence from Optiboard as this post shows the reason I have left the forum.

The Accolade and Physio are not the same lens, especially when you blur the distinction between the two by mentioning the Physio 360, whose 'comparative' lens would be the Accolade Freedom. Very different lens styles, both of which (if fit properly) will provide excellent results.

Regarding your contention that 'there really is not the amazingly improved' you apparently haven't tried too many styles. Trying one Free-Form style (Physio 360) and saying they all don't deliver on the promises is horrible logic. My guess is you are a Obama supporter.

To top it all off you end your post by telling everyone that you are seeing improved results with the Accolade standard vs. the Ovation. Honestly, drunk, stoned, or just confused?

Adam

What's with the personal attacks?

[jessecd]

What's with the personal attacks?

This is all very amusing...we are talking about eyeglass lenses - not debating religious or political views. To get that upset because a difference of opinion about a lens design is funny...seriously funny - a little silly but still very funny. And again, my point is that regardless of the hype, historically new lenses offer *slight* improvements over previous generations...hence my statement that "perhaps, just perhaps, Accolade is better than ovation...perhaps" I did a 50 customer trial showed, and had one less non adapt than the ovation...but 50 patients is hardly statistically sound. HENCE THE "PERHAPS" and hence my reticence to accept the marketing reports from Varlix et all when they survey 200 patients (see varilux.com studies). 200 subjects is too small of a test group, Stats 101.

The issue here is not whether or not physio is the greatest thing since sliced bread, or if the accolade is the same lens, but of what we are telling our patients.

An optical down the road (friends of mine) have screwed themselves over the last year by selling the hell out of the Physio by essentially reiterating the marketing propaganda and charging $100 more than comfort. The result: a year later, patients are NOT coming back. They can get a cheaper (comfort, accolade, etc) elsewhere. This sort of selling, drawn from the marketing propaganda I slammed earlier, results in poor customer service and hurts business. It reminds me of the time les schwab tires finally convinced me to buy the proxes T tires. They were 100 bucks more and lasted about 2k miles more. Was that worth $100? No, not really, but there was slight improvement. Same thing for physio vs accolade.

Furthermore, lens companies do not pay for R&D to release new and improved lenses because they are generous and benevolent and care for the eyeglass wearers of the world - they do it for the competitive edge. So getting fired up about a lens design that is designed and marketed for purely business reasons, is again, just silly.

And I don't care for Obama. ;)

Jesse

[sharpstick777]

Hoya and TOG has replaced Essilor as my progressives of choice.

TOG? Does not compute, is not and in the acronym dictionary at http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/tog. Probably something pretty simple and I am not getting it.

I'm not really very sharp

Sharpstick

[Fezz]

TOG? Does not compute, is not and in the acronym dictionary at http://acronyms.thefreedictionary.com/tog. Probably something pretty simple and I am not getting it.

I'm not really very sharp

Sharpstick

Hey Sharpstick,

Here you go:

http://www.thaiopticalgroup.com/index_en.htm

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

[THE MEB]

having gone to "presbyopia 2000" brought to us by essilor down in tampa in february 2000, which ended up being an introduction to their panamic lens. After having sat through 2 days of trying to understand french exec's accents giving powerpoint demonstrations of double blind studies of the panamic compared to the comfort, one done in france, the other at the optometry school on illinois, I believe, they showed, through explanations and pie charts that clincal trials indicated people saw better in every quadrant of vision with the panamic. We now know what occured in real life usages. I'm just sayin'

[Metronome]

Delete.

[Patsy]

Our dispensary is going to change from one of our local labs to an Essilor lab and we have been instructed by our doc to use their Tru Clear and Tru Clear HD as our lenses of choice with most patients. I haven't seen this lens mentioned on any posts. Anyone using it? Any comments?

[sharpstick777]

I am not defending Essilor, but here is my take...

Digital Processing has openned up options to the manufacturer not available before:
1) designs can be changed with just a small change in algorithms (which effects can also be easily simulated on a computer)
2) increased processing accuracy enables the designer to focus on optical issues that they could not previously address (ie, both higher order and lower order abberations, variable asphericity, etc.)

And as such...
3) despite the improved accuracy, with only 2 surfaces on a lens, only 2 types of distortion/aberation can be address easily in one design (there might be exceptions to this but I want to keep it simple).
4) R&D discovers multiple ways to improve lens designs with different theories, but with the limitations of a single material and 2 surfaces not all of these designs can be used on the same lens
5) These improvements are added to a base progressive design on a computer with a change in algorithms, so that effectively and easily you have a new and slightly different progressive lens, and new digital front side molds can be produced in literally just hours.
6) marketing gets a hold of this, goes bonkers, then confuses an entire industry including experienced and knowledgable optical professionals... by micro-marketing a hundred different designs (do we have a progressive designed specifically for bowlers in the works somewhere?)

...who go back to dispensing Sola VIPs because at least we don't have any marketing hype to wade through.

Is this it in a nut shell? Care to comment Pete?

Sharpstick