Originally Posted by NAICITPO
now that's priceless!! LOLZ
I feel like you haven't been paying attention to the conversation - it's already been pointed out that the abbe value difference just isn't going to affect the vast majority of people. Some, yes, I will grant you, but you can't pretend the minority is the whole. Saying that that fact doesn't matter, well you might as well be saying that only that 0.01% of people matter to you.
Also, you don't need to turn things into a personal attack on my intelligence and character - I was only trying to be a mediator and introduce myself to optiboard.
No the worst material ever was the old 1.56 resin in early 2000 y (like hyperal essilor don't sure if It was avaibile in U.s.a) so brittle and yellowish, low impact resistance
Anyway Everyone make his choice, abbe or not, I don't want a plastic that scratch so faster like poly for myself.
Cheers
No one is saying that 0.01% of people don't matter, but should you build a policy around the 0.01%? For example should we as a society outlaw peanuts, burn all the peanut plants and erase them from the earth because 1 in 50 children and 1 in 200 adults have a peanut allergy?
I need a more compelling reason than abbe value. I am open to the conversation, but it has not been a conversation. I wholly agree that if we started from scratch right now and we had no idea of either material and one presented the case for trivex and one presented the case for poly and both were equally available and both were equal cost, we would all choose trivex. That is not the question though and it is disingenuous to present it this way.
Someone please explain why trivex has better optics without talking about abbe.
Was not trying to denigrate you at all, I was being facetious. The main barb was and is directed towards the people who can't come up with compelling reasons for why Trivex over Poly. I used your introduction as a reason to poke fun at the Trivex is the best material ever camp. But nothing was personal, I know nothing about you.
Welcome to Optiboard, I harbor no ill will towards you. I hope you will understand that my sardonic statement was not an attack, just my attempt at hyperbolic humor.
Here's what AI had to say on the matter
Trivex and polycarbonate are both materials commonly used for eyeglass lenses, and while Abbe value is one important factor to consider when evaluating lens materials, there are several other aspects in which Trivex can provide better optics compared to polycarbonate:
- Optical Clarity: Trivex tends to have better optical clarity than polycarbonate. It has a higher Abbe value, which means it disperses light less and can reduce chromatic aberration and distortion in the periphery of the lens.
- Higher Index of Refraction: Trivex has a slightly higher refractive index than polycarbonate. This means Trivex lenses can be thinner for the same prescription, reducing lens thickness and providing a more cosmetically appealing option.
- Impact Resistance: Both Trivex and polycarbonate are highly impact-resistant materials, but Trivex has a slightly higher impact resistance in some cases. This can be important for safety and sports eyewear where protection from impact is crucial.
- Durability and Scratch Resistance: Trivex is known for its excellent scratch resistance, which can help maintain lens clarity and reduce the need for anti-scratch coatings. Polycarbonate also offers good scratch resistance but may not be as robust as Trivex in this aspect.
- Lighter Weight: Trivex is lighter than polycarbonate, making it a more comfortable option for some wearers, especially for higher prescriptions, as it reduces the weight of the lenses on the nose and ears.
- UV Protection: Both Trivex and polycarbonate naturally block 100% of UV radiation, providing excellent UV protection for the eyes.
- Abbe Value: While you mentioned excluding it, it's worth noting that Trivex's higher Abbe value still contributes to its superior optical quality, as it reduces chromatic aberration and color fringing in the periphery of the lens.
I think that material was called Ormex. Lenscrafters used to sell it. Terrible stuff.
It's good to know that AI isn't going to take over the optician game just yet. Lower specific gravity but also lower index of refraction. Please don't kill me computer overlords!Here's what AI had to say on the matter
Trivex and polycarbonate are both materials commonly used for eyeglass lenses, and while Abbe value is one important factor to consider when evaluating lens materials, there are several other aspects in which Trivex can provide better optics compared to polycarbonate:
- Optical Clarity: Trivex tends to have better optical clarity than polycarbonate. It has a higher Abbe value, which means it disperses light less and can reduce chromatic aberration and distortion in the periphery of the lens.
- Higher Index of Refraction: Trivex has a slightly higher refractive index than polycarbonate. This means Trivex lenses can be thinner for the same prescription, reducing lens thickness and providing a more cosmetically appealing option.
- Impact Resistance: Both Trivex and polycarbonate are highly impact-resistant materials, but Trivex has a slightly higher impact resistance in some cases. This can be important for safety and sports eyewear where protection from impact is crucial.
- Durability and Scratch Resistance: Trivex is known for its excellent scratch resistance, which can help maintain lens clarity and reduce the need for anti-scratch coatings. Polycarbonate also offers good scratch resistance but may not be as robust as Trivex in this aspect.
- Lighter Weight: Trivex is lighter than polycarbonate, making it a more comfortable option for some wearers, especially for higher prescriptions, as it reduces the weight of the lenses on the nose and ears.
- UV Protection: Both Trivex and polycarbonate naturally block 100% of UV radiation, providing excellent UV protection for the eyes.
- Abbe Value: While you mentioned excluding it, it's worth noting that Trivex's higher Abbe value still contributes to its superior optical quality, as it reduces chromatic aberration and color fringing in the periphery of the lens.
Michael - your AI is drunk again! LOLZ I love it!Here's what AI had to say on the matter
- Optical Clarity: Trivex tends to have better optical clarity than polycarbonate. It has a higher Abbe value, which means it disperses light less and can reduce chromatic aberration and distortion in the periphery of the lens.
- Higher Index of Refraction: Trivex has a slightly higher refractive index than polycarbonate. This means Trivex lenses can be thinner for the same prescription, reducing lens thickness and providing a more cosmetically appealing option.
- Impact Resistance: Both Trivex and polycarbonate are highly impact-resistant materials, but Trivex has a slightly higher impact resistance in some cases. This can be important for safety and sports eyewear where protection from impact is crucial.
- Durability and Scratch Resistance: Trivex is known for its excellent scratch resistance, which can help maintain lens clarity and reduce the need for anti-scratch coatings. Polycarbonate also offers good scratch resistance but may not be as robust as Trivex in this aspect.
- Lighter Weight: Trivex is lighter than polycarbonate, making it a more comfortable option for some wearers, especially for higher prescriptions, as it reduces the weight of the lenses on the nose and ears.
- UV Protection: Both Trivex and polycarbonate naturally block 100% of UV radiation, providing excellent UV protection for the eyes.
- Abbe Value: While you mentioned excluding it, it's worth noting that Trivex's higher Abbe value still contributes to its superior optical quality, as it reduces chromatic aberration and color fringing in the periphery of the lens.
1. Sure...when fitting -11.00s maybe!
2. GO HOME A.I - YOU'RE SOOOOO DRUNK! LOLZ
3. The impact force required to actually show any impact resistance difference here would shatter facial bones. Got anything else?
4. Prove it. Further - prove any patient can actually tell the difference, or actually cares given ubiquitous 1-2 year warranties for scratching from almost every vendor available today.
5. Again, prove it on a pt's nose. As poly is higher index, it is thinner. Less material washes out lighter weight in a thicker material.
6. Same as every material these days, excepting CR which even still blocks the majority uncoated, and 100% coated. Move along A.I.
7. Newsflash! EVERY material has C.A.! Glass has it. CR has it. Trivex and poly have it. Human eyeballs have it. Good luck avoiding C.A. entirely. In ophthalmic powers appropriate for either Trivex or poly, the difference has always been, and remains below human detectable limits.
FIGHT ME A.I.!
I want it to be known to our future AI overlords that I do not stand with this person!FIGHT ME A.I.!
I want it to be known to our future AI overlords that I do not stand with this person!
At 26(?) Loki is new to us you need to /s when you write something like this.
So Loki keep posting and get an elephants hide of thick skin like I have.
Read everything you can in the Opticampus Forum. When, like me, the room you are in gets too full of the smoke coming out of your head take a break and read it again and again. You'll find as you learn more it will eventually start to sink in.
Opticampus is Darryl Meister's tour de force of optics! I especially like the one on progressives. Darryl left us mere mortals a few years ago but was a Titan in his day and is missed by everyone here.
Become a subscriber so we can let this forum thrive under Steve Machol's love and guidance while he tries to herd cats like that groovy hippy beatnik drk.
fwiw..Always remember my only fault is modesty.
I thought I made a mistae once... but I was wrong...
Got to go. My mahout is poking me...
Last edited by Uncle Fester; 11-11-2023 at 09:33 AM. Reason: tweak...
I had hoped that the line where I said that I forced my doc to write his prescriptions in 8ths of a diopter for the most precision possible would make it known that everything I was saying was to be taken as a joke.you need to /s when you write something like this.
And you are right, I feel sorry for Steve trying to keep the peace
FEZZ WEARS POLY!
*runs and ducks for cover*
It finally happened...I had a patient call who claimed to have been working on something in the garage (like woodworking) and claimed to have had a chunk of metal launched into their left lens. Had they not been wearing poly or trivex they definitely would be missing an eye right now. Now I didn't initially sell him the glasses as he was a patient months prior to me coming in, so I would have mentioned the importance of it for him, but I definitely think the impact resistantance is a little more important than what has otherwise been said in this thread. Saying "well out of all the glasses you made, how many people actually benefited from impact resistance?" I can now comfortably say one, and that one is a huge deal. Just thought it was interesting. Obviously you shouldn't use non protective eyewear as protective eyewear though.
That's pretty interesting. 50% of all injuries occur at home so maybe that is a decent argument to put more customers in poly or trivex. Then again if you put any kind of coating on top of the lens the impact resistance goes down. I don't know by how much, I'm sure it is still more resistant than CR39. Would love to see the difference in resistance with coating vs without coating and compare that to other lenses with coatings and without coatings. Is there a white paper on this?
Edit: https://www.laramyk.com/resources/ed...polycarbonate/
Just listened to this and it looks like scratch coatings plus AR reduce the impact resistance around 65%.
Last edited by NAICITPO; 11-09-2023 at 02:17 PM.
Wow! I didn't know it had that much significance on the impact quality of the lens. I might be overthinking it, but to me it sounds like a legal nightmare to have a patient have trauma to the eye involving lenses we made. Even if we are in the right who knows how much we might be strung through the mud on that. What about car crashes also? I wonder if some people here who are anti poly would give leniency, and sell them to perhaps a police officer, or somebody who is involved with potentially extreme scenarios.
My biggest argument is that CR-39 should be the last case scenario in terms of peoples prescriptions, and unless you don't like money, you should always default to selling poly over CR-39, AND you might wind up protecting somebodies vision just by sheer numbers.
The impact resistance is effected by the thickness of the coating too thick and you have a problem. If your lab does it right and checks every run you will never have a problem. We used to put a test lens in every run and drop ball test it if failed the whole run was rejected. It did not happen to often.
Reading through this thread, and I’m shaking my head.
Get over yourselves re poly. I’ve been in the industry long enough to see the improvements in poly processing.
Trivex isn’t the holy grail. Poly non adapts are negligible, unless you don’t wtf you’re doing. Period.
The perfect ophthalmic material is glass. But almost no one produces blanks, nor processes them for multiple reasons.
Also, WTF! Why would anyone add AR to safety/sports eyewear? AR reduces impact resistance. Safety is more important than cosmetics and spiffs. Be a f’n optician. Get over your personal biases.
Rant over.
I bend light. That is what I do.
I got a fever!
And the only prescription...
...is more lensmanmd rants.
Ok, now I'm thinking...
Aren't mirror coatings essentially the same as AR coatings?
IS NIKE GOING TO BLIND MY PATIENTS??
But abbe value...
Here we go. I'm not going to make an Anti-Poly rant, and I'm going to try to keep negative comments out of this comment. I'm just going to give examples of why I use Trivex, a lot.
- Weight. It's remarkably lightweight. You can tell even just picking up the uncuts that it is feather light. If you are pairing it with a lightweight frame, such as a Lindberg, Silhouette, OVVO, etc. It's a combination made in heaven. Even in higher powers.
- Unbreakability. Now I'm not just talking about the impact resistance here, but if that floats your boat, it fits that bill too.SIDEBAR: I think anyone relying on their dress wear glasses to protect themselves, is no better than just using the good ol' safety squints. Glasses wearers should take the same precautions as non-glasses wearers when engaging in activities which necessitate safety. HomeDepot isn't hemming and hawing about selling you gloves, safety glasses, and chainsaw pants before you can buy a chainsaw. I shouldn't be worried about making a pair of quasi safety glasses for patients because of their lack of foresight and self preservation. I would also add that by promoting dress wear as being "safer" or more impact resistant you are setting people up for failure. They may now think their dress wear glasses are in fact safety glasses, not take the proper precautions and not wear the appropriate PPE they should when engaging in such activates. "My optitrician told me these lenses are unbreakable, even told me a story about how they saved a guy from a flying chunk of metal, why would I bother with safety glasses" :SIDEBAR OVER
- As I said, I'm not talking about impact breakage here. I am talking about grooves and drills(which I do a ton of). Boy howdy is Trivex the bees knees for these frames. What kind of minimum edge thickness do labs make for grooves or drill mounts? Most common I think I've seen is for a .6mm groove they do at least a 2.4 edge thickness sometimes thicker. You know what I order for uncut trivex? 1.5 edge. Do you know when the edges of that lens with crack around the groove? Never. The thickness saving with a higher index is completely negated by being able to have paper thin edges. I don't think another material is going to compare here. Same thing applies to drilled rimless. I will NEVER have to worry about lenses cracking, holes enlarging or stress cracking, drops, etc, when using trivex, regardless of thickness. This opens up the Rx range in which Trivex outperforms other materials. Low to moderate powered lenses that don't need to be made purposely thicker for these frames. check. Plus lenses of nearly all powers, check.
Now who's ready to touch the 3rd rail with me?
- Optics and $$$.
- Let's start with cost. There's a lot penny pinchers complaining about the cost. I will grant you if you go straight across a price list, lens for lens, Trivex will be more expensive than that which shall not be named. (though on my price lists is a small pittance). HOWEVER if we refer to the points made above, what costs more? A stock trivex lens? or a higher index lens that needs to surfaced in order to make it thick enough? hmm thats a lotta dough. This applies in many more situations than most think, especially if opticians are doing their job with frame fit. Not just with grooves and drills though. Zyl mounts as well. What's a .5mm thickness difference going to make when all, or nearly all of the lens thickness is contained within the frame? Say up to ~ -5.00 with 5 or less decentration per eye in a reasonable frame. This plays into the next firestorm of a topic
- Dun, Dun, Dun... ... Abbe. OMG he said it. Put your pitchforks down. If you have followed along with my plan so far, (regardless of whether or not you have agreed with it) you can see that I am going to be using Trivex(and C39 when appropriate) for nearly all plus lenses, and minus lenses quite higher than most would. On "normal frames" up to maybe -5.00 or -6.00. (But have also made them up to -11.00s in a 42-24 fit on center for a patient who, when they walked in, insisted on 1.74 lenses. After dispense they declared them to be the best glasses they have ever had.) So what's left? -5.00 or so and stronger. When does Abbe matter again? Oh yeah here. So the next logical step when a lens gets too thick for trivex... ... 1.60(1.67 if you must).
- Prism jobs. CR, Trivex and 1.60 are the head and shoulders winners here. Period. No debate needed. But the same things apply from above to these jobs as well.
- A couple of caveats.
- There are always exceptions. Am I going to fit a -8.00, PD of 55, 58-18 in Trivex? of course not. But I'm not selling that combo with any index. Remember kids, just say no! But again, expand the range out of the comfortable and easy. My good friend is +3.00 -7.00 x 180, PD 62, 53-15 1.1 metal groove Lindberg frame. Trivex is pure magic here. 1.8mm edge thickness ordered and they are beautiful. 1.67 would be thicker, heavier, cost more, and have worse optics. Same applies to poly for this job except the cost.
- This works for My practice. What works for one may not work for another. I have simple package lens pricing and I decide what the patient gets after discussing their needs. Higher dollar Lower volume sales are going to tend to premium materials, and the clients expect it. Would a Mercedes come with stock goodyears. I don't think so.
Thank you for listening to my TED talk, I look forward to your thoughtful and polite replies.
No they pass drop ball test.
Anyway for the guys hited by wood
Safty frame and Lens for some job like wood cut etc are a separate business from others.
Safty can have a poly ar Lens with High impact resistance.
Safty have a much resistente regulamentation
Last edited by dima; 11-11-2023 at 07:19 PM.
First, nice job Kwill you make a good case! You have me, a dedicated poly user and almost zero Trivex user, reconsidering. However, you and a few others have mentioned how your price difference between poly and Trivex is small enough to be almost negligible. I don't know if my lab is different (it's either great poly pricing or egregious Trivex pricing), but Trivex is 25% more expensive, much closer to 1.60 pricing. For VSP Trivex is 50% more than poly. These are a significant enough difference that I can't just easily upsell everybody, nor just upgrade to Trivex for the same cost. That forces me to make the value calculation. If the prices were the same, sure I would opt for Trivex a lot more, but as it stands in my mind poly is still the winner.
Agreed. This is something that can be digested better than an irrational hatred of all things poly.
I think this is where most of the people who sell poly are at. If they were the same cost and availability I wouldn't hesitate to put many of my customers in only trivex.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks