Corrected for Distance or Near?

#34 03-22-2009, 03:39 PM

On Mar 21, 9:13*pm, Firewalker <master.firewal...[at]gmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

> On Mar 21, 11:14*am, Horus <horus...[at]hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Mar 21, 1:57*pm, "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
> > Hope they nominate
> > you for US Presidency someday.
> > Horus
> That's if there *is* such a thing as a President (or a US for that
> matter) after the current one and his cronies get done socializing
> us.

> *-=# Firewalker #=-

While we have sporadic issues with Otis, s.m.v. stays BLISSFULLY free
of political crap.

Please keep YOURS to yourself.

Thanks :-)

#33 03-22-2009, 03:13 AM

On Mar 21, 11:14*am, Horus <horus...[at]hotmail.com> wrote:
- quote -

> On Mar 21, 1:57*pm, "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:

> Hope they nominate
> you for US Presidency someday.
> Horus

That's if there *is* such a thing as a President (or a US for that
matter) after the current one and his cronies get done socializing
us.

-=# Firewalker #=-

#32 03-21-2009, 03:14 PM

On Mar 21, 1:57*pm, "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
- quote -

> "Horus" <horus...[at]hotmail.com> wrote
> > By putting covering each eye alternately with one hand, I can
> > see about 2mm vertical jump when using the glasses. No
> > vertical jump in contact lens or just 0.05mm.
> 2 mm vertical jump is meaningless if we don't know how far away you're
> measuring 2 mm.
> At 40 cm, a 2 mm vertical jump works out to about 0.4 prism diopter.
> At 6 m, *a 2 mm vertical jump would be difficult to detect.
> > Well. I have 4 pairs of glasses. One has horizontal displacement
> > of 5mm, one by 3mm, one by 2mm, one also by 2mm.
> We don't know whether you mean displacement of the optical centers, or
> phoria. If you mean phoria, you have to tell us how far away you're
> measuring that 5mm or 3mm.
> > Vertical is
> > off by 1mm.
> Do you mean 0.25 prism diopters? That's a 1 mm jump at 16" from your eye...

I mean displacements of the optical centers. With the
-7.0D power, it translates to about -7.0 x 2mm = 1.4 diopters.
It may be within the fusion reserves of the eyes but 0
prism diopters would be optimum. Anyway, thanks for
your superb technical assistance. I'll let them fabricate
more pairs, so statistics says out of 5, 1 will be superb.
And if it won't happen, then I'll learn eyeglass making
myself and just handle the machine directly. Also I talked
to one of the boss who demo me the machine and I
discuss stuff with the optician. I'll be there when he
fabricates my glass watching every step of the way.

Thanks again. You are a Godsend amidst a world of
darkness and ocular ignorance. Hope they nominate
you for US Presidency someday.

Horus

- quote -

> > Now I want glasses that is dead center vertically
> > and horizontally. Its ok if I have very slight phoria but at least I
> > want my glasses to be accurate so the phoria won't be from
> > many sources.
> > Say. Have you encountered eyeglasses frames that have collimination
> > screws that hold the lens? This means the lens are not stuck to the
> > frame body but by the collimination screws entirely holding them
> > (floating the lens just like in SCTs telescope)?
> http://www.nealjguns.com/ss_store/Sh...Glasses.htmlor maybehttp://www.optivision2020.com/trial-lens-sets.html
> This is the ultimate in frame design and centering.
> I think you should find an experienced optician and ask him to make you a
> good pair of glasses and relax and let him do his job.
> > is zero then prestiss rule = power x zero = zero. In this case,
> > how do you solve for the vertical prism diopter of the -7 and -8
> > when there is no displacement in distance but by power??
> In most cases you don't read through the optical centers.
> If you read 10 mm below OC in each eye and the glasses are made "perfect",
> your -7 eye will experience 7 pd base down and your -8 eye will experience 8
> pd base down when reading 10 mm below OC.
> The difference is 1 pd. You probably have managed pretty well. If you want
> to do better, have the optician put the OCs _low_ in the frame, or whereever
> you happen to be looking when you read.
> Then you might experience vertical diplopia when looking up, but in down
> gaze the glasses should be very comfortable.
> > One can tolerate 2 prism diopters of vertical displacement? I thought
> > you said 1.5 prism diopters vertical displacement can already cause
> > headache.
> It's silly to think everyone is the same. 1.5 vs 2 but what does it matter?
> Bottom line: do you have vertical phoria when you read?
> > I know we have fusion reserves. But why stretch the reserves when
> > one can get a pair of glasses with dead center optical centers?
> Reason number one: you don't read through the optical centers.
> > and then send it to me after paying then I'll treasure your spectacle
> > forever

> Sorry, I'm not in that business.
> -MT

#31 03-21-2009, 05:57 AM

"Horus" <horusocu[at]hotmail.com> wrote

- quote -

> By putting covering each eye alternately with one hand, I can
> see about 2mm vertical jump when using the glasses. No
> vertical jump in contact lens or just 0.05mm.

2 mm vertical jump is meaningless if we don't know how far away you're
measuring 2 mm.

At 40 cm, a 2 mm vertical jump works out to about 0.4 prism diopter.

At 6 m, a 2 mm vertical jump would be difficult to detect.

- quote -

> Well. I have 4 pairs of glasses. One has horizontal displacement
> of 5mm, one by 3mm, one by 2mm, one also by 2mm.

We don't know whether you mean displacement of the optical centers, or
phoria. If you mean phoria, you have to tell us how far away you're
measuring that 5mm or 3mm.

- quote -

> Vertical is
> off by 1mm.

Do you mean 0.25 prism diopters? That's a 1 mm jump at 16" from your eye..

- quote -

> Now I want glasses that is dead center vertically
> and horizontally. Its ok if I have very slight phoria but at least I
> want my glasses to be accurate so the phoria won't be from
> many sources.

> Say. Have you encountered eyeglasses frames that have collimination
> screws that hold the lens? This means the lens are not stuck to the
> frame body but by the collimination screws entirely holding them
> (floating the lens just like in SCTs telescope)?

http://www.nealjguns.com/ss_store/ShootingGlasses.html or maybe
http://www.optivision2020.com/trial-lens-sets.html

This is the ultimate in frame design and centering.

I think you should find an experienced optician and ask him to make you a
good pair of glasses and relax and let him do his job.

- quote -

> is zero then prestiss rule = power x zero = zero. In this case,
> how do you solve for the vertical prism diopter of the -7 and -8
> when there is no displacement in distance but by power??

In most cases you don't read through the optical centers.

If you read 10 mm below OC in each eye and the glasses are made "perfect",
your -7 eye will experience 7 pd base down and your -8 eye will experience 8
pd base down when reading 10 mm below OC.

The difference is 1 pd. You probably have managed pretty well. If you want
to do better, have the optician put the OCs _low_ in the frame, or whereever
you happen to be looking when you read.

Then you might experience vertical diplopia when looking up, but in down
gaze the glasses should be very comfortable.

- quote -

> One can tolerate 2 prism diopters of vertical displacement? I thought
> you said 1.5 prism diopters vertical displacement can already cause
> headache.

It's silly to think everyone is the same. 1.5 vs 2 but what does it matter?
Bottom line: do you have vertical phoria when you read?

- quote -

> I know we have fusion reserves. But why stretch the reserves when
> one can get a pair of glasses with dead center optical centers?

Reason number one: you don't read through the optical centers.

- quote -

> and then send it to me after paying then I'll treasure your spectacle
> forever

Sorry, I'm not in that business.

-MT

#30 03-21-2009, 05:21 AM

On Mar 20, 9:22*pm, Charles <fort...[at]mac.com> wrote:
- quote -

> In article
> <dabel-C4D6D8.17484420032...[at]c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au> , Dan
> Abel <da...[at]sonic.net> wrote:
> > OK, you've got me curious. *Other than the fact that they seem to be the
> > same person, is there some clue, or set of clues, that you used to
> > determine that they *were* in fact the same person?
> In addition to that they seem to be the same person, their IP address
> is from the same block and traces back to the same internet provider in
> the Philippines, pldt.net. Right there would be enough for me but both
> using the same software according their headers including Media Center
> PC 5.0 version of Vista. There can't be that many coincidences.
> --
> Charles

With all that, and they both wear RGP lenses to boot?
Ding! Ding! Ding! Ding! I think we have us a winner!!

Should we change the name to Horusia, or Porus??

-=# Firewalker #=-

#29 03-21-2009, 01:22 AM

In article
<dabel-C4D6D8.17484420032009[at]c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au> , Dan
Abel <dabel[at]sonic.net> wrote:

- quote -

> OK, you've got me curious. Other than the fact that they seem to be the
> same person, is there some clue, or set of clues, that you used to
> determine that they *were* in fact the same person?

In addition to that they seem to be the same person, their IP address
is from the same block and traces back to the same internet provider in
the Philippines, pldt.net. Right there would be enough for me but both
using the same software according their headers including Media Center
PC 5.0 version of Vista. There can't be that many coincidences.

--
Charles

#28 03-21-2009, 12:48 AM

In article <200320091921245333%fort514[at]mac.com> ,
Charles <fort514[at]mac.com> wrote:

- quote -

> In article
> <dabel-A7D7ED.12085820032009[at]c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au> , Dan
> Abel <dabel[at]sonic.net> wrote:
> > I looked at their headers, and they are quite similar. Of course, a lot
> > of people use GoogleGroups, and their headers should look similar. They
> > both use exactly the same software (including version number and
> > extensions). Again, a lot of people use MS Windows with the same
> > version.
> It is the same person. Pia is Horus.

OK, you've got me curious. Other than the fact that they seem to be the
same person, is there some clue, or set of clues, that you used to
determine that they *were* in fact the same person?

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
dabel[at]sonic.net

#27 03-20-2009, 11:21 PM

In article
<dabel-A7D7ED.12085820032009[at]c-61-68-245-199.per.connect.net.au> , Dan
Abel <dabel[at]sonic.net> wrote:

- quote -

> I looked at their headers, and they are quite similar. Of course, a lot
> of people use GoogleGroups, and their headers should look similar. They
> both use exactly the same software (including version number and
> extensions). Again, a lot of people use MS Windows with the same
> version.

It is the same person. Pia is Horus.

--
Charles

#26 03-20-2009, 11:12 PM

On Mar 21, 12:24*am, "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
- quote -

> "Horus" <horus...[at]hotmail.com> wrote
> > I wonder how one can differentiate between glasses that are wrong
> > and the eyes having phoria (?) *Any particular tests?
> If the question is burning you, you could measure phoria twice, once with
> glasses and once with contacts.

Yes done it with RGP contacts. Phoria with contact lens is almost
nonexistent so the phoria with the glasses is caused by decentering.
The reason I still need glasses even if I have contacts is because
I can't use contacts 15 hours a day because of dry eyes.

- quote -

> > Well. I live in Indonesia. All optical shops can't promise accuracy so
> > the vertical displacement is on average around 1-2mm. Since my
> > power is high at -8.0. I can't tolerate even 1mm. I want zero vertical
> > displacement which no one in the country can deliver.
> When did you tell us you had vertical phoria while reading? If you have no
> vertical phoria or diplopia when reading, the measurements. do. not. matter.

By putting covering each eye alternately with one hand, I can
see about 2mm vertical jump when using the glasses. No
vertical jump in contact lens or just 0.05mm.

- quote -

> It sounds to me like you've had several pair that were made just fine and
> now you're looking to solve a problem you don't have.

Well. I have 4 pairs of glasses. One has horizontal displacement
of 5mm, one by 3mm, one by 2mm, one also by 2mm. Vertical is
off by 1mm. Now I want glasses that is dead center vertically
and horizontally. Its ok if I have very slight phoria but at least I
want my glasses to be accurate so the phoria won't be from
many sources.

Say. Have you encountered eyeglasses frames that have collimination
screws that hold the lens? This means the lens are not stuck to the
frame body but by the collimination screws entirely holding them
(floating the lens just like in SCTs telescope)? This would
enable manual adjustment with help of a lensometer for complete
centering. I'm looking for this kind of frame that may be available
someplace in the planet. Then I'll buy it and then have local optician
get a lens for it. This is the ultimate in frame design and centering.

- quote -

> The US may have more regulation, but the standard for making eyeglasses is
> an ANSI document, adopted internationally. Micrometer accuracy is seldom
> necessary.
> What IS necessary is the experience and skill to make a comfortable pair of
> glasses.
> If you understand Prentiss' rule, you might understand how lenses of
> different powers (eg -700 and -800) ALWAYS create vertical phoria in up or
> down gaze.

Prentiss rule = power x vertical displacement

If displacement is 1.5mm.. then prentiss for the left for example
is -7.0 x 0.15 = 1.05 prism diopter. However if the -7 and -8
is dead center at the optical center. And vertical displacement
is zero then prestiss rule = power x zero = zero. In this case,
how do you solve for the vertical prism diopter of the -7 and -8
when there is no displacement in distance but by power??

- quote -

> Theoretically the vertical phoria should be zero at the optical centers of
> the glasses.
> Once you understand that, check and see if you read through the optical
> centers of your glasses.
> No?
> You're reading through the lens at a LOWER position?
> Then you are CREATING induced prism and you've had vertical imbalance all
> along.
> You can tolerate a couple of prism diopters of vertical displacement without
> problem.

One can tolerate 2 prism diopters of vertical displacement? I thought
you said 1.5 prism diopters vertical displacement can already cause
headache.

I know we have fusion reserves. But why stretch the reserves when
one can get a pair of glasses with dead center optical centers?

- quote -

> > *However
> > you hint that in the US. Eyeglasses are accurately made so I
> > wonder where I can order one in the US. Since I haven't
> > set foot in your country. I can't just walk in to one. Hence
> US dollars aren't very strong right now and you might find you could make5
> or 10 pairs of glasses there for the cost of one pair here. Look for an
> experienced optician and ask for a comfortable pair of glasses.
> -MT

I won't mind even if I have to pay ten times as long as I get it.
Haven't you sent any glasses outside the country? I could give you
the power (no astigmatism), PD (left from nose bridge center,
right from nose bridge center), then you can choose the frame of
whatever kind that is small, round, close to eyes and then fabricate
it with MilSpec quality (zero displacement vertically and
horizontally)
and then send it to me after paying then I'll treasure your spectacle
forever

Horus

#25 03-20-2009, 07:59 PM

On Fri, 20 Mar 2009 08:14:47 -0700 (PDT), Neil Brooks <neil0502[at]yahoo.comwrote in
<news:8311feeb-ad0a-4e1c-a0bc-7ee49ba14d80[at]k19g2000prh.googlegroups.com> :

- quote -

> On Mar 20, 9:09Â*am, "Mike Tyner" <mty...[at]mindspring.com> wrote:
> > "Neil Brooks" <neil0...[at]yahoo.com> wrote
> > > > Would that surprise anybody, btw?
> > > Nah....
> > > Who are you?

> > > -MT
> Imelda's long-lost stepson.
> You know: the guy who -- in an effort to break from the stain of my
> family's tradition -- occasionally comes to s.m.v., and declares that
> shoes ARE the cause of all myopia.

Aw, hell ... and all along we thought it was caused by indigestion and tight
underpants!

--
- Nicolaas

Similar Threads
Thread	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Does this mean over / under corrected?? terry@pcxusa.com: Hi again, I posted my lasek progress on this forum with the last update some weeks ago. The scoop is this: I had custom lasek (VISX star 4) on...	Lasik Eye Surgery	4	12-19-2005 04:16 PM
Doctors ? Lasik corrected to 20/15 bbnn: Is there a disadvantage to being corrected to 20/15 or 20/10 with Lasik? Will reading suffer because of it. I know a doc who says that he can...	Vision	6	04-20-2005 11:03 AM
Presbyopia with Laser-corrected Eyes Sid Joyner: Hi All - I was born with near-sightedness and got glasses when I was 7. Finally, in 1999 at age 42, I had lasik eye corrective surgery. It was...	Lasik Eye Surgery	14	06-14-2004 12:47 PM
Presbyopia with Laser-corrected Eyes Sid Joyner: Hi All - I was born with near-sightedness and got glasses when I was 7. Finally, in 1999 at age 42, I had lasik eye corrective surgery. It was...	Vision	14	06-14-2004 12:47 PM
Presbyopia with Laser-corrected Eyes Sid Joyner: Hi All - I was born with near-sightedness and got glasses when I was 7. Finally, in 1999 at age 42, I had lasik eye corrective surgery. It was...	Main Category	14	06-14-2004 12:47 PM

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode