Is the right READING DISTANCE a subjective thing.....???

I happen to notice that when I put on a pair of reading glasses that I
buy inexpensively over the counter that even using a lower power lense
like 1.0 or at most 1.25 I can see very well for reading as long as
I'm no more than 14 inches or so from my material.

I used to notice with my PRESCRIPTION reading glasses that I could see
best at a much farther distance.

My questions are as follows. Is there really a correct reading
distance or does this vary by person and/or the type of glasses one is
wearing?

And also... I cannot understand how the cheapie glasses can enable me
to see so well to read when I have been told I have some astigmatism
in BOTH eyes. Do these inexpensive reading glasses IN ANY WAY work
towards correcting the astigmatism?

BTW... without any type of reading glasses, it's very challenging to
read without squinting my eyes.

Thanks in advance

LEESA (I)

On Sep 13, 5:15*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I happen to notice that when I put on a pair of reading glasses that I
> buy inexpensively over the counter that even using a lower power lense
> like 1.0 or at most 1.25 I can see very well for reading as long as
> I'm no more than 14 inches or so from my material.
>
> I used to notice with my PRESCRIPTION reading glasses that I could see
> best at a much farther distance.
>
> My questions are as follows. *Is there really a correct reading
> distance or does this vary by person and/or the type of glasses one is
> wearing?

The correct reading distance is the distance at which your arms, neck,
head and back feel comfortable. Once your personal comfortable
distance is established, the power of the lens should be selected so
that print is clear at that distance. Your prescription lenses were
set for a further distance, the +1.25 ready mades are set for closer.


> and also... *I cannot understand how the cheapie glasses can enable me
> to see so well to read when I have been told I have some astigmatism
> in BOTH eyes. *

After age 40, the eye loses it's ability to focus at near and + power
glasses are needed. If you have a small amount of astigmatism, you
will be able to see without correcting it but would likely find in a
direct comparison that glasses with astigmatism correction are even
clearer than the ready made.


Do these inexpensive reading glasses IN ANY WAY work
> towards correcting the astigmatism?

No they don't. And the fact that they don't may also be why you need
to hold things so close.

Judy

In article
<1bf84aaf-fb20-4d54-8212-(E-Mail Removed)>,
LEESA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> I happen to notice that when I put on a pair of reading glasses that I
> buy inexpensively over the counter that even using a lower power lense
> like 1.0 or at most 1.25 I can see very well for reading as long as
> I'm no more than 14 inches or so from my material.
>
> I used to notice with my PRESCRIPTION reading glasses that I could see
> best at a much farther distance.
>
> My questions are as follows. Is there really a correct reading
> distance or does this vary by person and/or the type of glasses one is
> wearing?

I think that it is both subjective and objective, and there are so many
factors that I can't list them all (besides, I don't understand them all
either). Print size and quality, paper color and quality, distance, age
and glasses strength all affect reading distance.

> And also... I cannot understand how the cheapie glasses can enable me
> to see so well to read when I have been told I have some astigmatism
> in BOTH eyes. Do these inexpensive reading glasses IN ANY WAY work
> towards correcting the astigmatism?

The biggest factor for *me* is light level. This isn't true for my
children, who forever give me funny looks when I turn on a light for
them when they are reading. Increased light level makes the pupils
constrict. Once thing this does is increase your depth of field (just
means your range of focus). Just increasing the light level,
constricting your pupil, means that you can see both closer and further
with the very same glasses. This also fixes astigmatism for many
people. Your OD should be able to tell you what kind of astigmatism you
have. Many people (like me) have corneal astigmatism. My cornea is not
regularly shaped. This means that light hitting different parts of the
cornea is not all focused to the same part of the retina, causing blur.
By turning up the lights, the pupil constricts, meaning that only the
light hitting the very center of the cornea hits the retina. I get two
extra lines on the Snellen chart with my right eye by using the pinhole,
because that eliminates much of my astigmatism.

> BTW... without any type of reading glasses, it's very challenging to
> read without squinting my eyes.

Welcome to the club. Neither my wife nor I can read anything but large
type without reading glasses.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
(E-Mail Removed)

Thanks for all the replies guys. I will tell you one area where the
"cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
computer screen.

To need to be within 14-16" (for me) is just too close for comfort.
Prescription glasses allow you to see clearly and there is quite a bit
of flexibility. In other words, you don't have to stay within such a
limited range where everything is clear and in focus.

Thank You

LEESA (I)

On Sep 14, 8:45*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for all the replies guys. *I will tell you one area where the
> "cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
> computer screen.

Perhaps a pair of the "cheapie" glasses ... in a different
prescription (one specifically FOR the computer viewing distance" ...
would work just fine.

That's presuming yours is simply presbyopia or hyperopia....

On Sep 14, 11:24*am, Neil Brooks <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> On Sep 14, 8:45*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Thanks for all the replies guys. *I will tell you one area where the
> > "cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
> > computer screen.
>
> Perhaps a pair of the "cheapie" glasses ... in a different
> prescription (one specifically FOR the computer viewing distance" ...
> would work just fine.

Won't work Neil, the lowest plus power in OTC is +1.00 and that is
already too strong for her.

Judy

On 2009-09-14, LEESA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
> Thanks for all the replies guys. I will tell you one area where the
> "cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
> computer screen.
>
> To need to be within 14-16" (for me) is just too close for comfort.
> Prescription glasses allow you to see clearly and there is quite a bit
> of flexibility. In other words, you don't have to stay within such a
> limited range where everything is clear and in focus.
>
> Thank You
>
> LEESA (I)

Have read in a couple of places that "reading glasses" for computers
should be about 1/2 the optics for regular reading glasses.

I was prescribed for +2.50 for reading & have bought cheapie
+1.25 reading glasses for the computer screen; the +1.25 works
very well for seeing the computer screen.

Also if you don't need glasses for distance, then a pair of bifocals
with clear on top can be had relative cheap at $16 to $25; there are
much higer prices as like designer frames. No line bifocals are
higher priced than the standard.

There are also combo computer/reading glasses available.

In article
<205ec3bc-c3c8-4089-9dcb-(E-Mail Removed)>,
Neil Brooks <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> On Sep 14, 8:45*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks for all the replies guys. *I will tell you one area where the
> > "cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
> > computer screen.
>
> Perhaps a pair of the "cheapie" glasses ... in a different
> prescription (one specifically FOR the computer viewing distance" ...
> would work just fine.
>
> That's presuming yours is simply presbyopia or hyperopia....

I was going to reply to her, but I'll reply to both of you. I suspect
hyperopia. She's getting the 14-16" with +1.0 glasses. As far as I
know, you cannot get less than +1.0 in OTC glasses, you have to go with
prescription plus lenses for that.

I just went with less powerful OTC glasses for computer use, +1.5 vs my
previous +1.75. The hinge had broken on the old glasses, so I needed
new ones anyway. With the higher power, I had to be so close that I had
to move my head to see the whole screen. Now I can see the whole screen
by just moving my eyes. I got a terrific deal at Costco. They were
marked at US$18.00 for three pairs, with an instant rebate at the
register of US$6.00.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
(E-Mail Removed)

On Sep 14, 10:01*am, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers.com> wrote:
> On Sep 14, 11:24*am, Neil Brooks <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 14, 8:45*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Thanks for all the replies guys. *I will tell you one area where the
> > > "cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
> > > computer screen.
>
> > Perhaps a pair of the "cheapie" glasses ... in a different
> > prescription (one specifically FOR the computer viewing distance" ...
> > would work just fine.
>
> Won't work Neil, the lowest plus power in OTC is +1.00 and that is
> already too strong for her.
>
> Judy

That'll teach me to jump in without reading the entire thread.

Thanks for the ... correction (pun intended), Doc!

Judy is almost correct.

In fact, in some stores they start at 1.25 diopters.

But if the issue is low-cost plus lenses for computers, you can obtain
them here:

http://www.zennioptical.com/cart/home.php

Just specifiy you need READING glasses of +0.75 diotpers.

There is no law against obtaining weak plus lenses (for about $15.00)
over the Internet -- or is there?

If so, please explain WHY there would be such a law.

Enjoy,



On Sep 14, 12:01*pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers.com> wrote:
> On Sep 14, 11:24*am, Neil Brooks <neil0...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > On Sep 14, 8:45*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Thanks for all the replies guys. *I will tell you one area where the
> > > "cheapie" glasses just don't cut it.... and that's working with the
> > > computer screen.
>
> > Perhaps a pair of the "cheapie" glasses ... in a different
> > prescription (one specifically FOR the computer viewing distance" ...
> > would work just fine.
>
> Won't work Neil, the lowest plus power in OTC is +1.00 and that is
> already too strong for her.
>
> Judy