I have a wrap compensation problem...

[Laurie]

Hello Again,

We are all on the same page here.

DRK - I do not believe that HOA's are more important...I don't see where my posts would indicate that... My point was focusing on best form corrective curve theory, and compensating (in the mold, or, ultimately, through freeform/indivilualized designs) to acheive the best possible optics.

If everything were made by Freeform technology, we would not even have this discussion... it is the best of the best, and I hope we switch over all of our processes to this method of manufacture. Then, when we are all doing the same processing, we can get back to debating about design.

: )

Baby steps - we will get there,

Am stuck at the airport trying to get to VEE...one of the American Airlines travelers.


Laurie

[HarryChiling]

Hello Again,

We are all on the same page here.

DRK - I do not believe that HOA's are more important...I don't see where my posts would indicate that... My point was focusing on best form corrective curve theory, and compensating (in the mold, or, ultimately, through freeform/indivilualized designs) to acheive the best possible optics.

If everything were made by Freeform technology, we would not even have this discussion... it is the best of the best, and I hope we switch over all of our processes to this method of manufacture. Then, when we are all doing the same processing, we can get back to debating about design.

: )

Baby steps - we will get there,

Am stuck at the airport trying to get to VEE...one of the American Airlines travelers.


Laurie

Laurie,

FF processing doesn't do anything, it's the numbers that are input and manipulated that has the most effect with FF processing. The problem I have is that many of the designs available now I can order through for instance Vision Web, it's a great service and I enjoy using VW as it saves me a ton of time, but their is no place to specify panto, faceform, or vertex distance. How is the lens individualized without these measures, vertex distances are used in corrected curve theory so they would be essential in reduceing aberrations, tilt causes defocus and astigmatism which cannot be correted without these variables. In essence what happens is global variables are applied to these measures if they are not supplied, what's the difference between global variables being applied to the mold vs. the lens direct? Their are advantages to directly applying these variables to the lens direct my analogy is making a photocopy of a photocopy, you can make it as detailed as you like but it will never be exactly the same and every copy has a loss in details. This is the biggest advantage, yet the focus seems to be on HOA which I don't believe is being fully corrected to the machines capabilities. This is not a fault with the manufactureres directly or the labs, it's the fault of poorly trained opticians. In another thread one a majoprity of people thought that HOA's were of more significance than first order optics which is absurd. HOA's are insignificant compared to their first order counterparts. Unless opticians are taught these concepts I don't see FF taking off as everyone would hope. I would like to see more manufacturer's step up to the plate and offer more information as to at least what variables are required to process their lenses.


Yes I believe that the FF processing does bring very large advantages to the table but what is being marketed today is tommorows technologies.

[Barry Santini]

If everything were made by Freeform technology, we would not even have this discussion...
Baby steps - we will get there.
Laurie

Well, I beg to differ. If everything were free form...

then all we'd have left to focus improvements on would be...(ta dah!):

The Refraction!

...which is what we should be addressing all along, anyway!

Barry

[HarryChiling]

Barry and Laurie it seems like your both passionate on the subject I will bring a rough draft of a paper I am writing on the subject fro you two to check out at VEE, I have a feeling I might be adding to it.

[drk]

The hierarchy of importance to visual outcome:
1.) Patient sensitivity level
2.) Accuracy of refraction/biometric measurements (pd, level MRP, vertex, panto, face-form)
3.) Manufacturing quality and tolerance
4.) Conventional lens design employed (corrected curve issues, asphericity, molded progressive technology)
5.) Material choice
6.) Frame adjustment
7.) Advanced lens design factors (atoricity, reduction of wearer's HOA, additional reduction of lenses' aberrations)

[Barry Santini]

1. Shamir's completely iterated, free-form SV and progressive wrap solution...all done on the back side (licensed to MJ).
2. Hoya "bi-aspheric" SV solution, with iterated free form done on BOTH sides (using 2 lens surfaces promises more overall correction possible). Only available for normal ophthalmic frames now, wrap soon.
3. Zeiss will use a portable, HOA-determining device that will download the person's wavefront error (or some-distilled part of it), and other Eye Terminal-derived stuff for use with a new, iterated Gradal progressive solution. ????!!!!

and...as far as I can see, none of the iterated wrap solutions even *tries* to (also) add Definity's "ground view advantage", which I thin would be *excellent* for any leisure/sports sun wrap use.

Comments?

Barry

[drk]

#7

[Laurie]

Barry - I agree...the refraction is crucial.

Harry - I also agree that first order optics are the priority. HOA corrections may be great for CL/Lasik, but not for spectacle lenses. They are fun to talk about, but not the focus of optimization.

We have alot of work to do to educate opticians in FF, and fitting techniques. Panto, Wrap, and Vertex measurements will be important. And, the wrap angle will change depending on PD, so we also need accurate measuring devices that will take this into consideration.

In one of my seminars this weekend, it became evident that there are alot of misconceptions in our field in regard to measurements. For example, when I mentioned that it is important for the optician to close one eye at a time while spotting pupils, so that our dominant eye doesn't take each measurement (causing cross-parallactic error), this came as a surprise to many. Also, we still see Rx's coming in with adds bumped for PALs, which should not be done anymore...

One thing for sure...these new technologies and methods of manufacture are very exciting. Call me corny, but I cannot remember a time in opticianry (have been in this profession since 1979), when I have been so excited about our field. The new technologies are amazing, and we are finally into the fashion scene. Geek Chic at its best!

: )

Laurie

[Barry Santini]

I took your "understanding the relationship...Refr/Rx" course, and definately feel I came away impressed with many important points you made.

Very Enjoyable!

Barry

PS Sorry I couldn't stay afterward to chat...I was already late for an apptmnt.

[Laurie]

Hi Barry,

Thanks!

I can't believe that we were in the same room and didn't meet! : (

Maybe next time.

Laurie

[HarryChiling]

Also, we still see Rx's coming in with adds bumped for PALs, which should not be done anymore...

Ahh Hah, this is somewhere that I both agree and don't agree. It shoudl never be done but as opticians we are being forced into this as a solution especially since many manufacturers are now using the minimum fitting height as 85% of the add instead of 100%. I have no way of knowing anymore where 100% of the add lies, I have a way of guesstimating it, but what good is accuracy in all other areas when the lens data is so obscure?

Laurie and Barry, neither one of you showed at the Cadillac booth at 2:00PM Saturday. Shame lots of awesome boarders there:

1. Docinchina
2. Warren McDonald
3. Diane Drake
4. tntborden
5. Bill Swain
6. Scott McLeod
7. Beverly Heishman
8. Alvaro Cordova
9. me and my wife
10. and others I didn't get to meet since I had to leave shortly after.

[Barry Santini]

i was only at the show on Sat from 7AM to 9:40AM (I participated in the sport/fashion panel).
Then, I went back to work!

Barry

PS Hope to have a chance to see you all again!

Barry

[HarryChiling]

i was only at the show on Sat from 7AM to 9:40AM (I participated in the sport/fashion panel).
Then, I went back to work!

Barry

PS Hope to have a chance to see you all again!

Barry

Man Barry I really wanted to pick your brain. I was looking forward to putting the face with the name. It was amazing meeting everyone there and it was my pleasure, I just wish I had more time to spend at the show to meet up with everyone else. There's always other times.

[shanbaum]

Ahh Hah, this is somewhere that I both agree and don't agree. It shoudl never be done but as opticians we are being forced into this as a solution especially since many manufacturers are now using the minimum fitting height as 85% of the add instead of 100%. I have no way of knowing anymore where 100% of the add lies, I have a way of guesstimating it, but what good is accuracy in all other areas when the lens data is so obscure?

Laurie and Barry, neither one of you showed at the Cadillac booth at 2:00PM Saturday. Shame lots of awesome boarders there:

1. Docinchina
2. Warren McDonald
3. Diane Drake
4. tntborden
5. Bill Swain
6. Scott McLeod
7. Beverly Heishman
8. Alvaro Cordova
9. me and my wife
10. and others I didn't get to meet since I had to leave shortly after.

Sorry I couldn't make it - got stuck in a meeting.

I know, I know, our booth was impossible to find...

[Barry Santini]

Man Barry I really wanted to pick your brain. I was looking forward to putting the face with the name. It was amazing meeting everyone there and it was my pleasure, I just wish I had more time to spend at the show to meet up with everyone else. There's always other times.

Harry,

I'm going to be doing the Vision Ease CE Roll-out for there Coppertone lenses, starting in 7 days.
Here's my "face":
http://www.jobsoneducation.com/2020/...ge=faculty.htm

Hope to see you soon!

Barry

PS - right now, I can't do the 7/22 CE in Pittsburgh, but things may change.

[Fezz]

PS - right now, I can't do the 7/22 CE in Pittsburgh, but things may change.

Any chance of a Philly meeting?

[Barry Santini]

Not that I know of, but VE may schedule more seminars in the fall, depending on the reception of the first go around.

Maybe I'll just make a trip to Philly anyway...yes?

Barry

[Fezz]

Maybe I'll just make a trip to Philly anyway...yes?

Barry

YES!

[HarryChiling]

Not that I know of, but VE may schedule more seminars in the fall, depending on the reception of the first go around.

Maybe I'll just make a trip to Philly anyway...yes?

Barry

That would be great, any plans for Baltimore, MD?

[Eyeguy842]

How's that paper coming? What would you classify as a "wrap frame"? Eyesize, frame curve, panto, BC of demos? And at what break point, 54 eye is not and a 55 eye is ect. I'm trying to help write a lab SOP form a wrap frame program and am looking for a consensus.
Jerry