Progressive Update

Discussion in 'Optometry Archives' started by Greg Beaulieu, Jul 23, 2003.

  1. I returned to my optician today with my list of problems and am feeling
    somewhat better about my chances. Several frame adjustments were made; to
    the nose pads, to the arms and to the bridge, all of which made them fit
    better and more importantly, lowered the lenses somewhat in relation to my
    eyes. What this has done is reduce the peripheral distortion in the
    distance portion at rest and I no longer have to put my head on my chin to
    watch TV. An unwelcome side-effect, at least for the moment, is that the
    amount of "swim" when I move around seems worse. If I turn my head side to
    side everything seems to go out of focus until it comes to the new
    position. Perhaps this will pass with time.

    I felt more reassured when I spoke to the owner. They do most of the work
    themselves and have used the Ovations very successfully. He took the time
    to explain the corridor height issue and in fact was wearing a set in a
    pair of very funky and short frames; as he put it, "they actually
    shouldn't work in these but I tweaked them and they do." But more
    importantly, he said they also use a whole variety of different lenses
    like Rodenstock, Nikon, Seiko, and Zeiss, and that if I still didn't like
    these after a time, not to worry because they would work with me to find a
    type that did. I guess that's all I can ask for.
     
    Greg Beaulieu, Jul 23, 2003
    #1
    1. Advertisements

  2. Greg Beaulieu

    Mark A Guest

    Yep, there is the manufacturer's non-adapt warranty. Just make sure you
    don't exceed the warranty period.
     
    Mark A, Jul 23, 2003
    #2
    1. Advertisements

  3. Mark A () wrote:
    : Yep, there is the manufacturer's non-adapt warranty. Just make sure you
    : don't exceed the warranty period.

    After just a few hours I think I see what's happening with these lenses.
    Where they sit right now my straight-ahead level vision is almost right at
    the bottom of the distance correction funnel. All it takes is a small
    amount of looking off-center very slightly and I lose sharpness. That
    tells me that despite the adjustments they are still sitting too high.
    Since all the adjustment is gone I think I will need new lenses if I don't
    adapt to this effect. For the last few days I was avoiding this by walking
    around with my chin on my chest. Returning to normal posture is possible
    now if I look straight ahead but the lenses are still not right. :-(
     
    Greg Beaulieu, Jul 23, 2003
    #3
  4. Greg Beaulieu

    Mark A Guest

    : Yep, there is the manufacturer's non-adapt warranty. Just make sure you
    To improve off-center vision with a PAL, you probably need a more
    sophisticated (and costly) lens design, but don't expect miracles or
    perfection.
     
    Mark A, Jul 24, 2003
    #4
  5. Greg Beaulieu () wrote:
    : Actually I think these would have been fine if she had just fit them at
    : the original dimension she took. Remember, she arbitrarily moved it up a
    : bit for some reason. All it would take would be a little bit more
    : adjustment upwards (which unfortunately cannot be done) and the swim would
    : be minimal. There appears to be plenty of reading correction space at the
    : bottom so assuming it remains a problem new lenses fit in the proper
    : location should solve it.

    D'oh! That should read "adjustment DOWNWARDS..."
     
    Greg Beaulieu, Jul 24, 2003
    #5
  6. Greg Beaulieu

    Mark A Guest

    Returning to normal posture is possible now if I look straight ahead
    Not only that, but the person, checking it should be the same height as you
    (or standing on something to adjust their height), which rarely happens. I
    have had opticians screw up the fitting cross because of this, both in an OD
    office and in chains.
     
    Mark A, Jul 24, 2003
    #6
  7. Robert Martellaro () wrote:
    : >Returning to normal posture is possible now if I look straight ahead

    : As it should be. Distance objects should be clearest when you hold
    : your head in a relaxed and typical posture. An increase in panto
    : (angle of the lens-looks like this from the side / ) may be called
    : for. Have a different optician (since the first optician let you walk
    : out with an improperly fit pair of glasses) check this and the
    : "fitting cross" position. The vertical position should always be
    : checked while standing.

    Hi Robert, thanks for the tips.

    In terms of progressives and the hourglass shaped correction patterns,
    where is the pupil supposed to be in relation to the distance portion? It
    feels like mine is just above where it transitions into intermediate and
    as a result if I look straight-ahead everything is fine, but the least bit
    of eye movement in any direction except straight-up and things go blurry.
    Is there a standard dimension?

    My progress seems to have stalled somewhat today. I have found them very
    troublesome again. The blur and distortion everywhere except dead-ahead
    has not improved and it seems to be bothering me more today than it did
    yesterday. Man, this is frustrating.
     
    Greg Beaulieu, Jul 25, 2003
    #7
  8. I went back again today to the optician. I was still experienceing what
    seemed to be swim and only had clear distance vision looking absolutely
    straight-ahead. Having worn single-vision glasses for distance
    correction for 30+ years this has been a very frustrating experience.

    A different optician looked at me this time. I asked her to check the
    fitting and expected her to get me to look through the
    binocular-like device they used the first time. But instead she took my
    glasses out back and brought them back with circles and lines drawn on
    them and had me put them on.

    She said they seemed to be fitted properly. But I still couldn't see in
    what seemed to be a correct way. She took them back again and played with
    the frames to drop the lenses further. Now the arms on the frames have an
    arch to them that I am not too happy about. She also said she adjusted the
    angle (panto?) and the curvature of the frames. All of the refits were
    done while sitting at the fitting table.

    She said that I should "just relax" and try them for a week or so.
    Truthfully I can't tell if any of this has made a difference right now.
    This has been my third time back following the original fitting and I
    really am not very happy with not being able to see right. I'm starting to
    get depressed about this. I've been on vacation for the last 10 days and
    haven't been able to enjoy much of it because these damn glasses keep
    getting in the way of whatever I try to do.
     
    Greg Beaulieu, Jul 30, 2003
    #8
  9. Greg Beaulieu

    Kory Postma Guest

    Don't worry, they say your mind will get used to it and then
    everything will be all right. Just take tylenol or aspirin to get rid
    of the headache.

    Have you thought about just wearing your old prescription? Have you
    thought about not wearing glasses at all? If they bother you that
    much is it really worth it?
     
    Kory Postma, Jul 30, 2003
    #9
  10. Robert Martellaro () wrote:
    : I suspect that the lens design and fit can still be refined. It's also
    : possible but less likely that the Rx is inappropriate. I would get a
    : third opinion on the fit from an outside experienced optician. I would
    : also talk to the prescribing physician and have the Rx checked.

    : Before I can offer more advice more information is needed.

    : Previous and present Rx. This is your first multifocal correct?

    Here's my current Rx:

    Sphere Cylnd. Axis
    R -1.25 -1.25 75
    L -1.75 -0.75 105
    Add R +1.50
    Add L +1.50

    The only difference from previous ones is the reading add spec.

    : Have you been wearing glasses fulltime? Are you wearing your present
    : glasses fulltime?

    I have worn glasses fulltime since I was about 14. My distance vision went
    bad fairly early in life. Aside from a period of 6-7 years where I tried
    and failed to get totally comfortable wearing contacts, I have worn
    glasses every waking hour since I was in junior high school. Without them
    I cannot see much beyond a few feet.

    I have been trying to wear these new glasses fulltime. It has been a
    challenge. The first few days I had to take them off as they were causing
    headache, eyeache and nausea. After the second adjustment I have been able
    to wear them fulltime except when I am doing something like hitting a golf
    ball, which is impossible with these. However the discomfort in wearing
    them has not improved much. The effect seems like an auto-focus camera;
    whenever I move my head everything goes out of focus for a second before
    coming back. It's quite disturbing. Plus I have very blurry peripheral
    vision with these; for example, my television set is approx. 10 feet from
    where I sit. If I don't move my head and adjust my eyes to one side to
    look at objects that are off to the side of the TV by about 5 feet they
    are very fuzzy. Plus the slightest upward tilt of my head - for example,
    if I rub my nose or take a drink - and everything goes fuzzy. In the
    intermediate portion there is a pronounded "tunnel vision" effect but I
    understand that is typical and I really don't need that correction anyway.

    : The manufacturer and model of lens. For instance if this is your first
    : multifocal, and the add power is +1.50 or higher, and Rodenstock's
    : "XS" lens was used, bingo, there's the problem. Get the material
    : and/or the index of refraction also.

    They are Essilor Ovation Airwear lenses, polycarbonate material.
    Supposedly a fairly new short corridor lens designed for compact frames. I
    don't think my frames are particularly compact at approx. 30mm x 50mm but
    that's what they used.

    : Ask the optician for these measurements, seg height, the "A" and "B"
    : which is the horizontal and vertical dimensions of the lens, base
    : curve. monocular PD, and the "wearers vertex distance". The last
    : measurement will not be on file and will have to be taken. If they do
    : not have the correct tool make sure that the lens is very close to the
    : eye; almost touching the eyelashes and almost touching your cheek.

    Obviously I would have to go back to the optician for these and since I
    was just there earlier today and promised to try this latest setup for a
    week I'm hesitant to go back tomorrow and ask - I think I'm probably on
    their "problem customer" list already! I can tell you that her most recent
    adjustment has put the bottom of the lens very close to my cheek, actually
    a little too close for comfort. It was hot today and when I worked up a
    sweat I had the lenses fogging up. They didn't do that before.

    If you can answer, I wonder, should I accept the bent arms on these
    frames? It seems to me that they are a very obvious way to try and get a
    badly-fit set of lenses to work. She put quite an arch in them and I think
    they look unsightly. This has added to my frustration - not only do my
    $600 glasses not help me see clearly but now they look like a pair of
    hand-me-downs.

    Robert, I hope this helps a little. Thanks for any insight you can
    provide.
     
    Greg Beaulieu, Jul 30, 2003
    #10
    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.