Computer glasses question

Doctor said if my new PALs don't work too well for the computer (I'm at that
age!) I should get computer progressives with the top for mid-range and
bottom for reading.

Are these as 'critical' as progressives, or can I get good results from
cheaper outlets like Costco? With PALs I've learned that you 'get what you
pay for" and it pays to get good lenses (i.e. Verilux, etc.) I'm wondering
if these computer specs are easier to make such that I can go with a less
expensive solution.

Also, what does "high aspect" mean on the perscription for these?

Al

Al. C wrote:
> Doctor said if my new PALs don't work too well for the computer (I'm
at that
> age!) I should get computer progressives with the top for mid-range
and


Glasses never work well at any age, despite the stupid doctors who wear
them and try to persuade you of the contrary.

Wake up!

Time is short.

"Al. C" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:bcIXd.15115$(E-Mail Removed) om...
> Doctor said if my new PALs don't work too well for the computer (I'm at
that
> age!) I should get computer progressives with the top for mid-range and
> bottom for reading.
>
> Are these as 'critical' as progressives, or can I get good results from
> cheaper outlets like Costco? With PALs I've learned that you 'get what you
> pay for" and it pays to get good lenses (i.e. Verilux, etc.) I'm wondering
> if these computer specs are easier to make such that I can go with a less
> expensive solution.
>
> Also, what does "high aspect" mean on the perscription for these?
>
> Al
>
Same considerations apply for computer lenses. In fact, some opticians just
use regular progressives for these and just adjust the Rx accordingly.

There are a couple of well known brands of computer lenses, including the
Sola Access and Zeiss Gradal RD. The Access has two different (.75 and 1.25)
ranges (difference between the mid and the near) and the Zeiss only has one
(.50), unless the optician deliberately wants to change the Rx to get the
exact final results they want. Some people think the Zeiss range is too
small, but it depends on your Rx.

My experience is that some discount stores like Costco, Sams, and Wal-mart
do carry some top-quality brands of progressives, but the selection is often
limited. But if they have what you want, then it may be a good deal, but
check with them regarding the remake warranty and adaptation warranty.

I assuming that high aspect means the difference between the mid and near,
so it would mean choosing the 1.25 range on the Sola Access.

in article bcIXd.15115$(E-Mail Removed), Al. C at
(E-Mail Removed) wrote on 3/9/05 11:33 AM:

> Doctor said if my new PALs don't work too well for the computer (I'm at that
> age!) I should get computer progressives with the top for mid-range and
> bottom for reading.
>
> Are these as 'critical' as progressives, or can I get good results from
> cheaper outlets like Costco? With PALs I've learned that you 'get what you
> pay for" and it pays to get good lenses (i.e. Verilux, etc.) I'm wondering
> if these computer specs are easier to make such that I can go with a less
> expensive solution.
>
> Also, what does "high aspect" mean on the perscription for these?
>
> Al
>
Right now, I am sitting in front of my computer wearing my regular street
glasses as well as a pair of 99¢ Store 1.5 diopter reading glasses. I am
happy with that solution. That may not be what you want or what a vision
professional suggest for you. You can call me six-eyes.

Bill

Repeating Rifle wrote:
>
> in article bcIXd.15115$(E-Mail Removed), Al. C at
> (E-Mail Removed) wrote on 3/9/05 11:33 AM:
>
> > Doctor said if my new PALs don't work too well for the computer (I'm at that
> > age!) I should get computer progressives with the top for mid-range and
> > bottom for reading.
> >
> > Are these as 'critical' as progressives, or can I get good results from
> > cheaper outlets like Costco? With PALs I've learned that you 'get what you
> > pay for" and it pays to get good lenses (i.e. Verilux, etc.) I'm wondering
> > if these computer specs are easier to make such that I can go with a less
> > expensive solution.
> >
> > Also, what does "high aspect" mean on the perscription for these?
> >
> Right now, I am sitting in front of my computer wearing my regular street
> glasses as well as a pair of 99¢ Store 1.5 diopter reading glasses. I am
> happy with that solution. That may not be what you want or what a vision
> professional suggest for you. You can call me six-eyes.

Before I succumbed to the lure of bifocals, at large meetings I wore my
reading glasses in front of my eyes and my distance glasses above them
on my forehead, cleverly switching between the two. That was before I
knew about drugstore readers, which would have been infinitely better.

--
Cheers,
Bev
<><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><><> <><><><>
"I've seen a look in dogs' eyes, a quickly vanishing look
of amazed contempt, and I am convinced that basically dogs
think humans are nuts." -- John Steinbeck

"Joe Stella" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Do you know for sure that Costco is a lot cheaper than what your
> doctor can do for you? Have you asked?
>
> Even if the doctor is (say) $50 more, your glasses will be good for at
> least two years which translates to less than 50 cents per week. If
> your doc is doing well for you, it might be a good idea to help them
> out too.
>
Maybe he should publish the name and address of his OD so we can send him
donations.

> >Maybe he should publish the name and address of his OD so we can send him
> >donations.
> >
>
> There are some forms of human behavior which I'll never understand
> even if I live to be 100.
>
> People will spend huge amounts of money on alcohol, cigarettes, and
> various kinds of junk food. But let someone suggest that they
> spend a few dollars more once every two years on quality eyecare, to
> support the people who provide the quality care, and he is met with
> sarcasm and scorn.
>
> To each his own I guess.
>
I do spend a few extra dollars on the eye exam (as service) from and
independent OD, but I like to shop around for the lenses (a specific
product). I bet you shop around when buying name brand products in the
industry I work in.

I myself have always been dubious about progressives, being
as they require you to swivel your *head* to look left and
right, whereas bifocals -- "executive" bifocals, that is (the
different refractions separated by horizontal *straight* lines,
not the curved half-moon ones) let you swivel your *eyes*
left and right -- keeping your head oriented as-is.

Now, for using the computer (19" screen), I use bifocals,
the low half set for close reading (books, paper, etc),
and the *upper* half set for visions at 18", for the screen.

So, with that "executive" design, I end up with just over 50%
of the area ends up being for the screen, the remainder for
reading.

To my mind, whe wider the screen, the better for the
executive bifocals, and the worse for progressives.

With mine, I get the entire 19" screen seen 100% within
the upper part, with room to spare.

Seemed like an obvious choice to me!

----

I spent some time down at the library of a large optician-college
(nyc, manhattan) going through books on lens design, progressives,
etc. (maybe 7 or 8 years ago, this was)

The topology of what you can do with glass, for progressives,
meant that you had to end up with an hourglass-shape for
clear vision -- pretty darn narrow at the middle.

The way I use my computer (for programming), set up (via emacs)
with two columns each 75 (ascii) chars wide, 57 lines of chars
vertically -- that's pretty small, and the bifocals gives
me identical focus across the entire screen -- and up and
down too, so I just swivel the eyes to study anything
on the screen.

Seems ideal to me.

Hope this helps.

David

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 16:25:23 -0700, "Mark A" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>> >Maybe he should publish the name and address of his OD so we can send him
>> >donations.
>> >
>>
>> There are some forms of human behavior which I'll never understand
>> even if I live to be 100.
>>
>> People will spend huge amounts of money on alcohol, cigarettes, and
>> various kinds of junk food. But let someone suggest that they
>> spend a few dollars more once every two years on quality eyecare, to
>> support the people who provide the quality care, and he is met with
>> sarcasm and scorn.
>>
>> To each his own I guess.
>>
>I do spend a few extra dollars on the eye exam (as service) from and
>independent OD, but I like to shop around for the lenses (a specific
>product). I bet you shop around when buying name brand products in the
>industry I work in.

Rx eyeglasses are a custom designed and manufactured medical device, not a
product bought "of the shelve". Branding, especially with ophthalmic frames, is
essentially a marketing ruse, and has little if any bearing on the function of
the final product. If you need an off the shelve appliance, then "shop around"
for service, price, convenience, and reputation. If you need eyeglasses, and
the lens is a multifocal or anything more than a weak and simple Rx, shop for an
optician who is ethical, experienced, and has much above average optical skills
and knowledge.

Robert Martellaro
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Optician/Owner
Roberts Optical
(E-Mail Removed)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
"Science is a way of trying not to fool yourself."
- Richard Feynman

Robert <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in
news:(E-Mail Removed):

> Branding, especially with ophthalmic frames, is
> essentially a marketing ruse, and has little if any bearing on the
> function of the final product.

So you don't have any preferred brands you like to deal in, with a
reputation for service and dependability?

Scott