Should I ask for INTERMEDIATE RANGE glasses...???

As I've stated before I am soon going for an eye exam, which will be
my first in many years. I definitly need glasses for reading and have
boght some over the counter +1.00 glasses which work just fine for
reading in the 14-16 inch range.

What I am looking for now is kinda what you might call an INTERMEDIATE
range. When I use a PC, I am about 20-25" from the screen and from
what I understand, that's a little out of the effective range for
reading glasses.

What should I ask for when I go for my exam next month? Obviously I
will explain my situation in detail however I feel if I can get the
"stupid" questions out of the way here... lol I'll be better prepared
for the exam and save some time.

Also... I am thinking of getting one of those small NETBOOK PCs,
which come with a very small screen. (about 10") Should I also ask
for another pair which will not only correct my visual issues but add
some magnification into the mix as well?

Thanks guys for listening.

LEESA (I)

In article
<ae4d2c21-1b94-46cf-bc6c-(E-Mail Removed)>,
LEESA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> As I've stated before I am soon going for an eye exam, which will be
> my first in many years. I definitly need glasses for reading and have
> boght some over the counter +1.00 glasses which work just fine for
> reading in the 14-16 inch range.
>
> What I am looking for now is kinda what you might call an INTERMEDIATE
> range. When I use a PC, I am about 20-25" from the screen and from
> what I understand, that's a little out of the effective range for
> reading glasses.

Only for a few people who require reading glasses. As discussed before,
although you certainly aren't any kind of freak, most people who need
reading glasses can't use +1.00 for 14-16", but might find they work
for 20-25". Best thing to do is get a small tape measure, and find the
exact distance that you find most comfortable for you, and give that
distance to the eye doctor. Explain that you use shorter distances for
reading, and give that number also. Also, give the eye doctor the size
and type of your monitor.

> What should I ask for when I go for my exam next month?

Be sure to emphasize to the doctor what you have posted here, that you
can't read without reading glasses, but +1.00 OTC are the most powerful
that work.

> Obviously I
> will explain my situation in detail however I feel if I can get the
> "stupid" questions out of the way here... lol I'll be better prepared
> for the exam and save some time.

Sounds to me like you don't have any stupid questions. The doctor will
help you determine what strength is best for you, and also how important
the astigmatism is.

> Also... I am thinking of getting one of those small NETBOOK PCs,
> which come with a very small screen. (about 10") Should I also ask
> for another pair which will not only correct my visual issues but add
> some magnification into the mix as well?

The magnification and the visual issues generally go hand in hand, one
comes with the other, unless you get some really ugly telescopes built
into your glasses. Simple reading glasses work by letting your eyes
focus up close. This also gives you magnification. You cannot get one
without the other without going to multiple elements.

Take that same tape measure to the store and try to figure out whether
you want the tradeoff of a smaller font and more words on the screen, or
a larger font and more scrolling.

For both home and the netbook, the tape measure might be hard, since it
sounds like you won't really know what things are like until you have
the right reading glasses.

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

In article <SalmonEgg-(E-Mail Removed)>,
Salmon Egg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> "Mike Tyner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> > Better yet, concentrate on communicating your _problems_ accurately, and
> > let
> > them suggest the _solutions._ Don't fix problems you don't have.

Good advice, but not always easy to follow.

> I am not a vision professional. Nevertheless, simple lens calculations
> do not require one to be a rocket scientist.

They also don't work, whether or not you are a rocket scientist,
depending on how many factors the simple calculations ignore.

> Assuming Leesa has NO
> accommodative capability

At her age, this is possible but unlikely.

> or astigmatism, some simple conclusions can be
> drawn.

She's already stated that she has significant astigmatism.

> To see clearly at 15 inches, a power of 2.625D is required by someone
> with an emmetropic eye. Leesa does that with 1.00D lenses. That means
> that her slightly myopic eye provides the additional 1.625D.

I had this backwards before. You are correct, though, she is myopic,
not hyperopic, based on these numbers.

> So without
> glasses, Leesa should clearly at a distance of 24 inches. What is wrong
> with that conclusion?

Again, I was wrong, so this is a good question.

> So Leesa, take off your glasses and tell us how well you see a monitor
> at 24 inches.

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

On Sep 21, 10:34*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> As I've stated before I am soon going for an eye exam, which will be
> my first in many years. *I definitly need glasses for reading and have
> boght some over the counter +1.00 glasses which work just fine for
> reading in the 14-16 inch range.
>
> What I am looking for now is kinda what you might call an INTERMEDIATE
> range. *When I use a PC, I am about 20-25" from the screen and from
> what I understand, that's a little out of the effective range for
> reading glasses.

You have also said you are 35 years old, so your distance or near
glasses should work for 25". Just tell the doc you want glasses for a
computer; measure the actual distance to your actual screen and take
that number with you.

> Also... *I am thinking of getting one of those small NETBOOK PCs,
> which come with a very small screen. *(about 10") *Should I also ask
> for another pair which will not only correct my visual issues but add
> some magnification into the mix as well?

Magnification can only do so much, if the font is too small, it's too
small. Take the notebook along with you to the exam, so the doc can
see how small the font is. Trying to see anything smaller than 12pt
font is going to be uncomfortable, glasses or no glasses.

Judy

Salmon Egg <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in part:
> In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
> "Mike Tyner" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>> She's 35. If you assume no accommodation you should expect
>> meaningless results.
>>
>> At 35, it would also be a mistake to assume her distance
>> Rx has not changed.
>>
>> At 35, most people see fine at 24 inches with the same Rx
>> they use at 20 feet.
>
> Forget most people for now. Take Leesa's statement that she
> sees well at a distance of 15 inches using 1.00D glasses at
> face value. What would be the terrible consequence if Leesa
> took off her glasses to look at a screen 24 inches away?


To focus at 15", the eye and corrective lens combination
must have an effective power of +2.62 D

Assuming simple +1D readers (no astimatic correction power),
her eyes are only comfortable providing 1.62 D which
as you say, focus in the same accommodative state at 24.2".

Unfortunately, that is not the end of the story. Yes, she
can focus fine at 24". However, the apparent image size is
only 62.5% the size at 15". 37.5% smaller. Like going from
12pt type to ~8pt typeface.

This may be "too small", giving her difficulty distinguishing
letters, particularly if she has residual (uncorrected) astigmatism.

You can play whatever games you like with lens power,
but all you do is achieve focus. Distance from the lens
to the object and the eye controls size.


-- Robert

Hi... For the record, I was told around 1999 (my last eye exam) that
I had some astigmatism in BOTH eyes. At that time... I went to Wal-
Mart and had the exam.

They prescribed two pairs of glasses, which I no longer have. A few
months ago, I lost the reading glasses which still worked decently for
me. One thing I did notice a few months ago is that the reading
glasses worked fairly well at distances of about 10 to 20 feet also..
That was not the case when I first got them..

I never did get used to the glasses that were prescribed for
distance. I really don't think I needed them thruth be told. I can
still see road signs quite clearly unless they're poorly lit.

Thanks guys for the replies.

LEESA (I)

PS: Does the fact that the reading glasses also work well at 10 to 20
feet
mean anything? Or is it that simply because the astigmatism has been
corrected.
Just wondering.....

"LEESA" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:e90ebfce-3259-41b3-85cd-(E-Mail Removed)...
> PS: Does the fact that the reading glasses also work well at 10 to 20
> feet
> mean anything? Or is it that simply because the astigmatism has been
> corrected.
> Just wondering.....

It probably means you are getting older and you distance vision now needs
some correction, but it is hard to know for sure without seeing your Rx.

In article
<e90ebfce-3259-41b3-85cd-(E-Mail Removed)>,
LEESA <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

> Hi... For the record, I was told around 1999 (my last eye exam) that
> I had some astigmatism in BOTH eyes. At that time... I went to Wal-
> Mart and had the exam.
>
> They prescribed two pairs of glasses, which I no longer have. A few
> months ago, I lost the reading glasses which still worked decently for
> me. One thing I did notice a few months ago is that the reading
> glasses worked fairly well at distances of about 10 to 20 feet also..
> That was not the case when I first got them..
>
> I never did get used to the glasses that were prescribed for
> distance. I really don't think I needed them thruth be told. I can
> still see road signs quite clearly unless they're poorly lit.
>
> Thanks guys for the replies.
>
> LEESA (I)
>
> PS: Does the fact that the reading glasses also work well at 10 to 20
> feet
> mean anything? Or is it that simply because the astigmatism has been
> corrected.
> Just wondering.....

It is pretty usual for myopes to get worse as children, and then get
better as they age. It also happens other ways. Some people's eyes
don't change much over time, but some do. That's why it is recommended
that people go to the eye doctor every year (although many conscientious
people let it go to every other year if they are paying out of pocket).
It's pretty hard for a layperson like myself to evaluate my own vision,
despite what Otis claims. There are just too many variables. In the
eye doctor's office, all of the variables are controlled, and numbers
are assigned to everything.

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

On Sep 22, 5:44*am, LEESA <taylorlee...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi... *For the record, I was told around 1999 (my last eye exam) that
> I had some astigmatism in BOTH eyes.

> They prescribed two pairs of glasses. One thing I did notice a few months ago is that the
> reading glasses worked fairly well at distances of about 10 to 20 feet also..
> That was not the case when I first got them..

> Does the fact that the reading glasses also work well at 10 to 20
> feet mean anything? *

Yes. It means that likely you are hyperopic or farsighted, not
myopic, along with the astigmatism. As you get older your hyperopia
will manifest. You well may find that whatever is prescribed for
distance now will work well at intermediate and for near.

Get thee to an eye doctor, 10 years between exams is too long.

Judy