> I have heard that Hoya ID has a wider intermediate area (at the expense of
> reading and distance area) as compared to the Rodenstock ILT. Is that
> correct?

> Are these two about the same price?

> I'm sorry but the optician has the only copy of the new
> prescription I'm talking about. However, I do have a
> prescription from a year ago which would probably provide
> some of the information:
> DV
> OD spherical plano , cylindrical +2.50, axis 85
> OS spherical -0.75, cylindrical +3.25, axis 80
> ADD
> OD spherical +2.75
> OS +3.00

> I have one eye problem I know of: I've had a few accidents
> over the years and have several abrasions on both corneas.
> Periodically, these abrasions become irritated and
> problematic. I'm supposed to use Muro 128 when they are
> really irritated and lubricating drops such as Systaine
> during the day. I still have problems at night and often
> wake up with my eyes burning and irritated.

> I apologize for not having a copy of the present
> prescription - I foolishly went directly from the eye doctor
> to the optometrist and didn't make a copy but I hope the
> previous prescription can shed some light on the problem.

> Thanks for your help.
> Louise

> > Louise
> The first thing to consider is reducing the add power. That might be
> enough to
> make any of the lenses that you've mentioned much more wearable. Either
> way, if
> you want an increase in visual refinement and comfort, I'd consider Hoya's
> ID
> and Rodenstock's Impression ILT designs.
> Hope this helps,
> Robert Martellaro

> I'm sorry but the optician has the only copy of the new prescription I'm
> talking about. However, I do have a prescription from a year ago which
> would probably provide some of the information:
> DV
> OD spherical plano , cylindrical +2.50, axis 85
> OS spherical -0.75, cylindrical +3.25, axis 80
> ADD
> OD spherical +2.75
> OS +3.00
> I have one eye problem I know of: I've had a few accidents over the years
> and have several abrasions on both corneas. Periodically, these abrasions
> become irritated and problematic. I'm supposed to use Muro 128 when they
> are really irritated and lubricating drops such as Systaine during the
> day. I still have problems at night and often wake up with my eyes
> burning and irritated.
> I apologize for not having a copy of the present prescription - I
> foolishly went directly from the eye doctor to the optometrist and didn't
> make a copy but I hope the previous prescription can shed some light on
> the problem.
> Thanks for your help.
> Louise

> On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 19:34:54 -0500, louise <louise[at]invalid.invalid> wrote:
> Louise,
> You're leaving out a lot of information- Rx, visual acuities, eye health- so the
> best I can do is throw out some educated guesses...
> > I've been wearing progressives for many years and finally
> > ended up with the Varilux Comfort because I was able to
> > adjust to it. However, the poor peripheral vision
> > performance of the lens has made me look further now that I
> > have a new prescription.
> The peripheral blur is probably due to the astigmatism, not the Varilux Comfort
> design.
> > I am highly astigmatic and the reading section of my lenses
> > has just been altered to +3.25
> Do you mean the "add for reading/near" is +3.25? If so, that implies that there
> are some medical problems with your eyes.
> > At first the reading was at +3 and I was given the Definity
> > lens. However, I got headaches and the eye doctor re-did
> > the prescription and moved the reading to 3.25. I could no
> > longer use the Definity lens.
> Increasing the add power will increase off-axis blur, general discomfort, and
> decrease the field of vision at all distances. One might decide to keep the add
> power in the +2.50 to +2.75 range, especially if you are using separate readers
> for extended near tasks.
> > Now the Shamir Creation is being recommended. I've looked
> > at the Shamir site and I don't fully understand how to
> > assess whether the Creation, or another kind, would be
> > better for me. I understand the central column, but I don't
> > understand the yellow and green sections that look like
> > footprints :-).
> Shamir's Autograph lens might be a better option if the astigmatism is more than
> three diopters. These types of designs incorporate atoric surfaces, increasing
> the field of clearest vision when there is a considerable amount of astigmatism.
> > I use the glasses mostly for driving, movies, museums and
> > only for reading when I'm out in the world. I have a
> > separate pair of reading glasses for the house and a
> > separate pair of computer/office glasses.
> Well, that makes the choice of a +3.25 add extremely suspect for the everyday
> glasses. Make sure you're comfortable reading at 12" if that's the power they
> feel is necessary for the readers.
> > How does the Shamir Creation compare to the Definity? Or
> > perhaps the better question, given that my lenses are around
> > $500 and I don't want to make a mistake, how do I figure out
> > what might be best for me?
> > Louise
> The first thing to consider is reducing the add power. That might be enough to
> make any of the lenses that you've mentioned much more wearable. Either way, if
> you want an increase in visual refinement and comfort, I'd consider Hoya's ID
> and Rodenstock's Impression ILT designs.
> Hope this helps,
> Robert Martellaro
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Optician/Owner
> Roberts Optical
> Wauwatosa Wi.
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> "An expert is a person who has made all the mistakes that can be made in a very narrow field."
> - Niels Bohr

> I've been wearing progressives for many years and finally
> ended up with the Varilux Comfort because I was able to
> adjust to it. However, the poor peripheral vision
> performance of the lens has made me look further now that I
> have a new prescription.

> I am highly astigmatic and the reading section of my lenses
> has just been altered to +3.25

> At first the reading was at +3 and I was given the Definity
> lens. However, I got headaches and the eye doctor re-did
> the prescription and moved the reading to 3.25. I could no
> longer use the Definity lens.

> Now the Shamir Creation is being recommended. I've looked
> at the Shamir site and I don't fully understand how to
> assess whether the Creation, or another kind, would be
> better for me. I understand the central column, but I don't
> understand the yellow and green sections that look like
> footprints :-).

> I use the glasses mostly for driving, movies, museums and
> only for reading when I'm out in the world. I have a
> separate pair of reading glasses for the house and a
> separate pair of computer/office glasses.

> How does the Shamir Creation compare to the Definity? Or
> perhaps the better question, given that my lenses are around
> $500 and I don't want to make a mistake, how do I figure out
> what might be best for me?

> Louise