Small lenses can give progressives a problem. Progressives are also very sensitive to pupil position. Varilux tells their people to put a dot on one lense in front of your pupil and measure the interpupil distance on their machine for the other. Hardly ever works. Most people do not have the facial symetry of a cover model. Both pupils must be marked on the lense and the person doing the marking must be at your exact height. When you look straight ahead you must see the dot directly in front of your pupil on both eyes. Then, and only then, the lab will reliably get the position right. In the old days technicians were fairly reliable. No so today. The thoughtful customer's logic and instinct surpases the average apathetic employee every time. We had an optician once who asked how would he know about a frame I inquired about if the salesman didn't bring it in to him. He does NOT have that job anymore. His replacement knows enough to get off his chair go to the trade shows. Although most current styles seem to be the jellybean lenses, larger ones are out there. Suggest you google for a mail order outfit I think in Tx called Hidalgo. My spelling may be wrong. They have traditional sizes, nice basic catalog, very explanatory. I know they have the large traditional B&L that Gen MacArthur wore as well as the USAF issue style. There is also a good fellow in AZ named Lehman who has been very patient and effective with my sports glasses. Good luck.
----- Original Message ----- From: "sol" <[email protected]> To: <[email protected]> Sent: Wednesday, October 25, 2006 6:05 PM Subject: Re: CS>Eyeglass lens types > Interesting information. I had a pair of varilux that I really liked, > no problems. But my last prescription, I have never been comfortable > with. Always have wondered if it is because frames now are so small and > shallow. The last Rx frames were much smaller than the ones I had > previously, but they were the best I could find. In the ensuing 2 or 3 > years, eyeglass frames/lenses have gotten even smaller and even shallower. > Could it be that the shallower smaller frames made my last varilux > lenses so bad? I am considering going back to regular trifocals, but > don't see how those can be made in the teeny lenses/frames of today. > I've looked around recently, and don't see a solution, except to wait > for who knows how many years (with extremely poor vision) until large > frames come back into sytle. It is driving me nuts not to be able to see > properly. But I have never heard of the frames you mention below, and > doubt if they are available anywhere near where I live, in the middle of > nowhere, U.S.A. > sol > > > James McCourt, Ph.D. wrote: > > >Most progressives are problems. > >Varilux is better these days but still blurred compared to Zeiss. > >Zeiss is far better for only slightly more money. > >I find the best solution is Zeiss on a frame that has a nosepiece that moves > >the lenses higher for reading and close work. Such frames started in > >Austrailia a few years ago but are now in the US. > > > > > > > -- > The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver. > > Instructions for unsubscribing are posted at: http://silverlist.org > > To post, address your message to: [email protected] > > Address Off-Topic messages to: [email protected] > > The Silver List and Off Topic List archives are currently down... > > List maintainer: Mike Devour <[email protected]> > >
