OT Eye Glasses

Page 2 of 2  


Try the progressives. You can do so at not cost if yo don't like them. Most every optical house offers a 30 to 60 day warranty on them and will take them back at no cost to you.
I was not sure myself, but once I got progressive lenses, I was hooked. Been wearing them for over a dozen years and I'd never go back to regular bi-focals.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Interesting.
Will think about it.
Thanks!
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That's what I did. Reading glasses tend to have a focal length of 12-14 inches - the distance you hold a book from your eyes. If you have a big monitor, you can easily double that focal length. I had my computer glasses done to a 30 inch focal length. Eye doc's machine wouldn't go that far, but I insisted. They work fine.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What you really need is a good optician. One that understands your needs and can make the proper lenses. Since I'm not an optician, I'm not going to give you exactly what you need, but it does exist. I've been wearing lasses for 55 years or so and I'm very fussy about them.
Most likely, that bifocal lens should be made into a progressive lens. That gives you different strengths at different angles so a minor tilt of the heat gives you perfect vision for the distance at hand. You may want to measure the normal distance from eye to monitor.
Progressive lenses can take a day or three to get used to, but once you do, there is not going back. Consider a no glare coating also. Makes night driving easier and makes using the computer easier when there is other light around.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Metspitzer wrote:

More "X"s (diopters) = ability to get closer to what you want to see. Since your monitor is further away than printed reading material for which you use +2 diopters, you should have decreased the strength instead of increasing it.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What I do is use bifocals, bottoms for reading distance, tops ground for screen distance. (Distance: over the top)
One trick I use:
For me, it's critical that my left and right eyes go into and out of focus at EXACTLY the same distance.
Now, the optician and her machines/lenses "which is better -- this -- or that" procedure isn't precise enough to do that. Here's how to get it not just right, but PERFECT:
After she's written down you prescription, ask her to put the lenses that add up to that into those test (and heavy) metal eyeglasses, AND to give you a couple of quarter diopter and a half diopter "hold up in front" lenses, and go out into the waiting room.
(Of course you've brought your measuring tape with you, and already know the exact distance from your slouched-down in your chair eye-distance to the screen.)
Then get a magazine with fine print, close one eye, looking at the magazine via the other, and bring it in until (with eye relaxed) it goes out of focus -- write down that distance, and extend away until it again goes out of focus, and write that down.
Then do the same with the other eye.
Now, how do he two eyes compare? (that will tell you how good her procedure was) Then start holding the quarter diopter lens up close in front of your test frame, etc, until you get what you want.
Oh, also ask her to give a "minus" (thicker at the edge ie rim than at the center=thin) quarter dioopter, to give you more freedom.
Anyway, when done, both eyes go into and out of focus (relaxed eye!) at the same distance, OR one range is totally WITHIN the other one.
That's about as good as you (or anyone else) is going to get it. Adjust your prescription by adding on the exter lenses diopters (that works for small amount of diopters, because then the sine of the angle (radians) is almost equal to the angle itself. I think that's the assumption behind much of this eye-optics stuff.)
-----
One other scheme I've read about is exactly the opposite. Have her prescribe for one eye at screen distance, and the other at near (or far?) distance, and presto, no bifocals needed. Not for me!
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/14/2011 5:20 PM, Metspitzer wrote:

Try a smaller number. I use +2.0 reading glasses for reading, and +1.5 reading glasses for the computer. You may just be going the wrong way.
Bill
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

I think I will get a pair of 1.5x and 1x. I will have to just try them to see if it will let me see my monitor and keyboard (which is about half the length to the monitor) I don't think I would ever get trifocal. Maybe a set of bifocals for reading/computer. My long vision is off slightly, but I don't really need glasses for far off.
Thanks everyone
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Reduce your resolution to 1024X768 - it will make ALL text, including your desktop icons etc, larger. If it is still too hard to read, go to 800X600
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Fri, 15 Jul 2011 22:26:48 -0400, snipped-for-privacy@snyder.on.ca wrote:

A much better solution is to make the icons and text larger. LCD displays suck when not run at their native resolution. "Larger" characters on a higher resolution display will be better formed and easier to read, too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Why do "LCD displays suck when not run at their native resolution."?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/16/2011 8:24 AM, LouB wrote:

Pixelization (sp?). Unless you happen to get lucky with a multiple or fractional resolution, something on screen will have a jagged edge, like when you zoom the weather radar image on most weather pages too close.
But having said that- modern LCD displays have pixels a lot smaller than the early ones. My father is damn near blind, and no way would the1400x1050 native rez on his Samsung monitor would have worked for him. I spent a couple hours fussing with various resolutions and windows custom settings, and came up with settings that while not perfect, are at least tolerable, and round stuff is pretty close to round. It's a trial and error thing, very monitor and video chipset dependent.
I love flatscreens just for the desk space they free up, and will never buy another glass monitor again. But at home, I'm still using a couple 19" Trinitrons- damn things just won't die, and they are sharper than any LCD in my current budget range.
--
aem sends....

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I bought this 24" (1920x1200) monitor four years ago for $270. It'll beat any 19" glass tube. ;-) LCDs have gotten incredibly cheap.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/16/2011 9:49 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

I bought these 2000-vintage Dell p991s for about $25 each maybe six years ago. They do 1600x1200, but my eyes aren't that good any more. I run them at 1152x864, with default XP font and icon sizes, and find them comfortable.
Yeah, LCDs have gotten cheap, but I'm cheaper. Until these die, I can't justify replacing them. And I haven't seen many LCD monitors make it to the 5-year mark (Judging by the 1700 or so at work), much less 11 years. Like I said, I'll never buy another glass monitor, but with these 2 19s, and half a dozen 17s stacked up in the other room, they may outlast me. (I can't even give the 17s away- Goodwill won't even take them. And I refuse to trash working equipment. It Just Ain't Right.)
--
aem sends...

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

As I said, this one is four years old and I have another (a 21") that's six, though it's not used much (I'd run a third monitor on this laptop but I haven't figured out a way to do it, that works).
I've thrown away three 19s and have another that's only in my way. It'll go as soon as I can figure out how to get rid of it.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/16/2011 8:49 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

I have a pair of Nokia 21" shielded CRT monitors with a .22 dot pitch and it's like looking at a film projection. As you may know, a .22 dot pitch on a large monitor like that is a bit unusual and high resolution. I think the original price on the boat anchors was $1,100.00 each years ago when they were new. I don't use them now due to their unwieldy character and my big LCD monitors that don't require a fork lift to place on a desk. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Sun, 17 Jul 2011 03:02:13 -0500, The Daring Dufas

If I didn't screw up the arithmetic, something like 1900 x 1500. If the geometry were perfect it would challenge a modern LCD. None were perfect. That's one of the little appreciated advantages of LCDs. There is no pin-cushion, trapezoid, rotation, or any other geometric distortions to deal with.

There's that too.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 7/17/2011 12:05 PM, snipped-for-privacy@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz wrote:

The first 17" monitor I bought back in the early 90's was $549.00 wholesale because I was a dealer. What a wonderful picture it had. When I got the monster Nokia monitors years later, I was blown away by the resolution even though they weighed a ton apiece. Now I have all these big LCD monitors and think back about how complicated it was to get a clear big image on CRT displays. Ah, progress and the technology marches on. I can't wait for the direct implant for the brain's visual cortex. ^_^
TDD
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.