I don't "cover my ***" at all: I simply don't put a lens material where I don't think it will stand up to normal client *abuse*. If I guess wrong, then I simply make it right...at no charge.
Period.
Barry
I don't "cover my ***" at all: I simply don't put a lens material where I don't think it will stand up to normal client *abuse*. If I guess wrong, then I simply make it right...at no charge.
Period.
Barry
T-Bar metals are "banned?" No wonder I can't get Charmant to bring it's best models back.
I have patients that would rather hang on to one of these with 6 repairs on it than have anything "new." Same patient's would go $500.00 a pop if Charmant would go back to making them.
Chip
And that's completely your choice. I, like Crazy, am in the corporate optical world and when the person wants what they want, what we can do is explain why it's not a great idea then document it. There's less chance of an annoyed patient coming back saying "they didn't tell me" with a chipped up lens, plus that bit of knowledge and reasoning at the beginning often removes the feeling that "you're just trying to get me to spend money"Originally Posted by Barry Santini
FWIW, I know that the Brooks Brothers line has a few in it.
You Guys are the BEST
:D Wow .... when i joined the forum the other day and posted this thread i never thought i would have gotten so much help with this subject... i thank everyone that has posted...
i may have to rethink my thinking of semi rimless frames ... and cr-39.. my concern never was really the breakage any optician with the experience should be able to handle that just fine ... my main concern was the over all experience of the glasses for the patient.. i just want them to be happy with here glasses and have no regrets... i fully explain the difference between different materials to the patients. as some one else said earlier what would you want done if you were the patient.. i myself would want to know the difference between what is out there..
in the past i would walk a sale if they refused some other material other then cr-39 ... but now i may rethink this concept... i thank you all...
thanks
The Wondering Optician...
Actually what I was referring to was the fact that since *I* am not the one in the lab actually making the glasses (Drilling,grooving etc) and that with the lab *I* am at, the techs, many of which have little to no experience, can not think beyond what they have been told and do not know the true meaning of craftsmanship, I am not comfortable putting CR39 in a semi-rimless frame. I still get jobs out of the lab with scratches on them, let alone having a +5.00 in CR39 in a semi-rimless.
I've worked in private practice for 3 years and ended up back at LC for convenience since I only work Sundays. I would also like to think myself somewhat competent(Exclusions may apply ;-) and since I care about the final product beyond "making the sale" *I* do have a problem putting a +5.00 in a semi-rimless as I know what is ultimately going to happen. Just noting that the Pt wants CR39 and just going "Ok" and noting it in the file I hardly think would qualify as "doing my job"
When I have control over the whole process beyond being the Optician who just writes up the order, Then I will be comfortable with CR39 in a semi-rimless frame.
~Crazy ;)
I agree. I put most of my patients in Trivex in grooved rimless, but if the shape has round corners (cushion shape) and the RX is a mid-minus CR-39 is OK for grooved rimless. I get more chips and cracks with poly lately so if they don't go with Trivex or 1.6 I will put a few patients in CR-39. No problems with returns if the frame and RX is good.
Sharpstick
"you're just trying to get me to spend money" (on eyeglasses).
This goes right to my premise that the public is very negative/adversarial about eyewear. Look around, and you'll see the stuff we've taken for granted for so long is evidence-prima that we have alot of work to do, and attitudes to change.
Heads-up, people, or you'll end up in 10 years where you don't want to be!
Barry
I put CR 39 in rimless all the time, no problem. In fact I prefer it....go figure.
Gotcha. that makes sense.Actually what I was referring to was the fact that since *I* am not the one in the lab actually making the glasses (Drilling,grooving etc) and that with the lab *I* am at, the techs, many of which have little to no experience, can not think beyond what they have been told and do not know the true meaning of craftsmanship, I am not comfortable putting CR39 in a semi-rimless frame. I still get jobs out of the lab with scratches on them, let alone having a +5.00 in CR39 in a semi-rimless.
But you'll notice I didn't say to be a mindless drone, agree to what the customer wants right off the bat and process the transaction. If after explaining to them that their material.frame choice isn't optimal, then your only course of action is to proceed with what they want. Or tell them to get out. And I don't think that'll fly. :DJust noting that the Pt wants CR39 and just going "Ok" and noting it in the file I hardly think would qualify as "doing my job"
We have a woman that comes in every year for new glasses. She's a +6. Wants only semi rimless, and only wants plastic. Every year we try to get her to opt for something different whether it be frame or lens choice. It's all done in a friendly, familiar fashion. And every time, she won't budge. So we make her glasses and she leaves as happy as can be. Only once has she ever returned with chipped lenses and that was when she sat on them.
I see what what you're saying but I wonder if it's really more about a one on one sale than optics specifically. Furniture, carpet, cars, jewelry, eyewear, electronics, shoes. The buyer often feels like the sales person is trying to get them to spend more cash.This goes right to my premise that the public is very negative/adversarial about eyewear.
And I wonder if the only true way to change peoples' way of thinking on it is to make eyewear something of which there are no choices and are dispensed in a way most similar to a pharmacist. BC glasses, here we come! ;)
CR-39 is much more likely to chip than poly or Trivex. And is isn't only gross abuse by the patient which can cause a lens to flake; with a relatively thin lens it's very easy for the lens to chip if the frame flexes.
It's my opinion cr-39 should be used selectively for nylor frames and shouldn't be used for most drilled rimles orders.
This is what I have read and what I have learned on the job when it comes to the material to put in drill mounts. With 1 being the best
- Trivex-impact resistant yet hard throughout; therefore it will not widen and loosen at the drill holes and will hold the frame in a more stable position. Also, does not develop stress cracks as easily
- hi-index-same as above but without the impact resistance
- poly-impact resistant yet soft throughout;it will loosen at the drill point
- CR-39- no impact resistance, hard throughout but has a tendency to crack at chip at stress points
Ophthalmic Optician
Society to Advance Opticianry
I don't use CR-39 in drill mounts but, I totally disagree with its lack of impact resistance in any mounting.CR-39- no impact resistance,
[quote=FullCircle;287830 Furniture, carpet, cars, jewelry, eyewear, electronics, shoes The buyer often feels like the sales person is trying to get them to spend more cash.
And I wonder if the only true way to change peoples' way of thinking on it is to make eyewear something of which there are no choices and are dispensed in a way most similar to a pharmacist. BC glasses, here we come! ;)[/quote]
Again, it's interesting to note the items you grouped for comparison to eyewear are *not* "medical" in nature at all.
Does this mean you also agree with me that eyeglasses are not medical in nature, or that the public thinks eyewear is not inherently *medical* in nature?
This again goes to my point.
Barry
I'm not sure eyewear has been around as long as "medical." But I am real sure that the two co-existed for a long time before they were even aware of each other. I am also sure that eyewear has been around for far longer than optometry was even a word.
CR-39 actually does have quite a bit of impact resistance. Not nearly the flexibility of Poly or Urethane or Poly-Urethane but quite a bit all the same. Even glass has some and tempered glass quite a bit. I once had a pair of "dress hardened" 2.2 glass lenses stop a reciprocating (jig) saw blade right in the center of what would have been my right eye had it not been stopped.
Chip
Last edited by chip anderson; 03-07-2009 at 06:10 PM. Reason: Paragraph 2
no impact resistance....................
When CR39 was introduced by Orma, then actually known as Orma lenses into the world market the fanfares were going that finally a unbreakable material was available to make good lenses. We do forget fast..............
Impact resistance is measured with the drop ball test and CR39 always passed it, if lens was done the right way for this purpose.
If a lens is properly mounted into the rim of a frame it is supposed not to have any stress points. Stress shows up in a polariscope and every job should be checked for stress. Any material will get fatigue if continuously stressed and then crack chip or craze, and this is valid for optical lenses as well as for airplanes.
And the people said: Amen. For those of you neophytes, Amen translates from Hebrew as Truth, not "the end."
Chip
Ok, I miss "spoke"
I was in a hurry when I typed this yesterday in between CEs. :hammer:I apologize for the confusion. :shiner: Compared to poly and trivex, CR-39 has much less impact resistance and does have a tendency to crack where the lens is drilled. This is because most patients, no matter how much you tell them not to, have a tendency to take their glasses off with one hand, put them on top of their head, don't keep them in the case, etc.... In these instances the other materials just hold up better
Ophthalmic Optician
Society to Advance Opticianry
I prefer it too . . . for my competition to use;)
When someone comes in with a chipped or flaked lens, I will point it out and mention that we always put an impact resistant lens in our rimless frames, and that is why we can offer a "no questions asked" warranty. I go on to ask "did the optical shop that provided these offer to warranty these?" and/or "Our basic lens is much thinner, lighter weight and won't chip like this"
If they don't want to pay for poly . . . CONGRATULATIONS! Mr Client reveived a FREE upgrade!
All the history and relative performance of CR may be interesting but is mostly irrelevant to the discussion.
I would suggest to do what is best for the client.
AND
do what is best for your business.
CR-39 meets neither of these criteria in rimless.
When selling a pair of eyewear, I try to avoid putting semi-rimless lenses is CR-39. I Tell the customer what I recommend and why. I even twist the frame in front of them, so they can visualize how a lens might be chipped by rough handling. Once they are given the options, I let them make an informed decision. Often, people who are just using their vision benefits, will go with what their insurance covers (CR-39.)
When I put my lab coat back on and go back into the lab (where I belong in the first place !!) I don't have a big problem with manufacturing semi-rimless eyewear in CR-39. I make sure the lens thickness is properly set to "rimless", it amazes me how often the people on the sales floor will "forget" to put that on the order.
When I groove them I tend to groove on the shallow side. On a poly or 1.67 lens I usually groove it deep enough for the entire nylon string to be in the groove. However on CR-39 I only groove it so 1/2 to 2/3 of the string is in the groove. I find that this reduces the chances of the lens chipping while still holding the lens in the frame securely.
You are forgiven..................................:)
I have, on occasion, been known to intentionally put a chipped demo lens or 2 on the floor in some of our lower end, groove-mount frames.
This makes it a little more visual for the patient.
A lack of planning on your part DOES NOT constitute an emergency on mine!
Yes, it's medical in that the script is written by a doctor. But it's not in that the patient/consumer has choices. Rarely in the medical world is a patient given as many options and choices for one item as they are given in eyewear. I don't recall my grandmother having many choices in walkers when her doc had her get one.
I dont' believe I've ever disagreed with you that the public's thoughts on eyewear are not medical. I firmly believe it. Prime example is my own mother. The woman wears a +7.75 with a +2.50 add. She'll get her mamogram done yearly but won't get an eye exam until she's cleaned the AR coating off her glasses. Makes me nuts.
Other than removing all choice and fitting people with government issue eyewear for a few years I'm not sure I know of any ideas. A former aquaintance of mine suggested at one time that the only way people begin to take various body parts seriously is introduce some seious, potentially dealy disease to the media and get some big money to back a charity to fight against it.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks