Ordering glasses online

Discussion in 'Glasses' started by KC, Oct 4, 2007.

  1. KC

    KC Guest

    Hi all,

    I posted to this group about a month ago and got really great
    responses, thanks!

    I as looking at ordering glasses online. Basically where I would
    send a frame and prescription in to them and a week or so later I
    would receive a complete pair of eyeglasses.

    I think my prescription is straightforward, I need single vision
    lenses, prescription about 5.0. I was going to go with Trivex.

    Some of the local practitioners that have the material want you to use
    their frames and I don't really like any of the frames that these
    specific people have hence my search online.

    Does anyone see any issues with ordering this way and then getting a
    "fitting/adjustment" done at a local optometrist? Apparently the
    only thing I need other than my prescription is the Pupilary
    Distance(?).

    Would appreciate any advice/recommendations,

    Thanks,

    Kevin
     
    KC, Oct 4, 2007
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. You get the service you pay for. If all goes well, you will be happy with
    an online purchase. If not, you will be unhappy. I think the on-site
    service is worth the extra cost.
     
    Scott Seidman, Oct 4, 2007
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    Pupillary Distance (PD) is the distance (usually measured in
    millimeters) between the centers of the pupils in each eye. This
    measurement is used when making prescription eyeglasses. Positioning
    lenses correctly in relation to the pupil centers is especially
    important for higher powered lenses. (Wiki)
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #3
  4. KC

    Neil Brooks Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    For that matter, you may wish to explain issues like pantoscopic tilt
    to the original poster.

    Thanks.
     
    Neil Brooks, Oct 4, 2007
    #4
  5. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes
    What it means is that, in the case of a minus lens, if the pantoscopic
    tilt is not fitted correctly then it can be a very big problem for
    patient because if done incorrectly, unwanted extra minus cylindrical
    and spherical power will be induced on the 180 axis. In the case of
    plus lens extra plus spherical and plus cylindrical power in induced
    on the 180 axis. Basically the end result being that the person will
    not see correctly through the lenses even though the power of the lens
    may be perfect. Well yes, that is the explanation.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #5
  6. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    Problems like this is a good demonstration of the uselessness of
    glasses, and the infinite issues the maker has to consider. The worse
    the error of refraction, the greater the level of stupidity in wearing
    the glasses.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #6
  7. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    Pantoscopic tilt can be defined as a rotation around the 180 meridian
    of vision.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #7
  8. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    Pantoscopic tilt can be defined as a rotation around the 180 meridian
    of vision.So in the case of this patient Kevin, who is farsighted, a
    flaw in the pantoscopic tilt would cause unwanted plus spherical and
    plus cylindrical power to be added, if he was using a + prescription.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #8
  9. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    Problems like this is a good demonstration of the uselessness of
    glasses, and the infinite issues the maker has to consider. The worse
    the error of refraction, the greater the level of stupidity in wearing
    the glasses.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #9
  10. KC

    KC Guest

    Neil / Zetsu,

    When would someone like a Lenscrafters do that? I got my prescription
    and handed it into them. This woman walked me around and helped me
    pick out a frame. She took measurement with these binocular looking
    things (I guess to figure out PD) and that was it. I came back an
    hour later and she handed me my new glasses.

    I put them on, she heated and twisted the ends (around the ears) so
    they would be tighter and not move around... and that was it.

    When I went back to complain about the spherical and chromatic
    abberation, she heated and bent the frame basically tightened the
    curve so it would be closer to my face on the edges and fit more
    snugly. Anyway, that didn't do anything for the abberations.

    That was it. Is the Pantoscopic tilt built into the lens? Did she
    measure that with the binocular-like tool?

    My prescription is +5.00/+5.25, I'm farsighted.

    Thanks,

    Kevin
     
    KC, Oct 4, 2007
    #10
  11. a rotation of WHAT?

    --
    Nicolaas.


    .... Arse-deep in alligators, one can sometimes lose sight of the purpose
    of one's presence: to drain the swamp.
     
    Nicolaas Hawkins, Oct 4, 2007
    #11
  12. KC

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Kevin:

    The thing that "Zetsu" and I have in common is that neither of us has
    ANY expertise in this area.

    Where we DIFFER is that "Zetsu" will still try to give advice.

    Ignore it.

    Along with the eye docs and vision researchers, there's a very
    talented, compassionate, and helpful optician named Robert Martellaro
    who frequents s.m.v.

    You'd do well to get their input on this. I'm highly farsighted,
    too. Every single element from refraction (the order in which the
    trial lenses are placed into the trial frame), vertex distance,
    pantoscopic tilt, etc, etc., etc. is critical for high degrees of
    refractive error.

    More specifics should come from better qualified people. I'm sure
    they'll chime in.

    Take care,

    Neil
     
    Neil Brooks, Oct 4, 2007
    #12
  13. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    Hello,
    Wasn't it you who told me to give advice in the first place, stupid?
    Let me quote, to wake you up from your poor ability to remember the
    short term:
    "For that matter, you may wish to explain issues like pantoscopic tilt
    to the original poster. " So you shouldn't be a hypocrite!
    Yuck! I don't want to have anything in common with you, old man.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #13
  14. KC

    Neil Brooks Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    No. I was simply pointing out to Kevin that you can do no better than
    to cut and paste from a website.

    That's not being helpful.

    Smart people know when to say "I don't know." You're not in that
    group.
     
    Neil Brooks, Oct 4, 2007
    #14
  15. KC

    Zetsu Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    I never cut and paste unless I put a reference at the end.
    Like it will say: 'Wiki', or 'PubMed' at the end.
    But if I do not add a reference in the end of the post, then it means
    I am not copying and pasting. Then it is my own words. What makes you
    think I am copying and pasting, anyway! I never ever plaguerise work
    as that is very dishonorable.
     
    Zetsu, Oct 4, 2007
    #15
  16. KC

    Neil Brooks Guest

    X-No-Archive: yes

    Res ipsa loquitur
     
    Neil Brooks, Oct 4, 2007
    #16
  17. KC

    otisbrown Guest

    otisbrown, Oct 5, 2007
    #17
  18. KC

    Neil Brooks Guest

    So ... based on Kevin's high hyperopic prescription, you don't foresee
    any issues?

    Never mind. Don't answer that. YOU wouldn't.

    Kevin: you need a very good refraction -- possibly even by an
    optometrist who specializes in "low vision optometry" and who
    understands issues like vertex distance, pantoscopic tilt, etc. When
    your Rx is over 5.00d, the little things can make a big difference.

    Here's the usual disclaimer. Looks like it's needed again:

    Sorry. Rishi Giovanni Gatti (Zetsu), Lena102938, and Otis Brown are
    trolls who haunt s.m.v.

    Rishi has published, and is trying to sell worthless books.

    Otis is pathologically dishonest and actually hurts people.
    Following his advice can induce double vision in those
    not working closely with an eye doctor.

    Lena102938 uses anti-eye doctor rhetoric as a substitute for ANY
    actual information. It seems she now has to wear glasses and has
    developed a pathological (and ILLOGICAL) resentment toward the
    industry that "foisted these glasses upon her."

    You'd do well to ignore them and wait for responses from the
    caring, compassionate eye doctors who DO also participate in this site.
     
    Neil Brooks, Oct 5, 2007
    #18
  19. KC

    otisbrown Guest

    Dear Kevin,

    A caring, compassionate eye doctor wrote you a highly
    accurate prescription after a complete review.

    You have the written prescription (as required by law) in you hand.

    You can fill your prescription anywhere you wish.

    Best,

    Otis
     
    otisbrown, Oct 5, 2007
    #19
  20. KC

    Neil Brooks Guest

    Otis?

    Can you tell me about the impact of vertex distance on accuracy when
    an Rx of +5 is written?

    In other words, if the vertex distance is not accurately taken into
    account WHEN THE refraction is performed, AND is not noted on the Rx,
    can you tell me how much difference (in diopters) results from, say, a
    10mm discrepancy in vertex distance?

    Thanks.

    Kevin: since this is the kind of thing that Otis seems to know nothing
    about ... and cares even LESS about ... then:

    a) You may want to review the following to see why I point it out,
    and

    b) You may want to simply ignore Otis

    c) Actually, I'd do both

    http://www.drweiss.com/portals/15/pdf/Vertex_article_published.pdf
     
    Neil Brooks, Oct 5, 2007
    #20
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.