Forum Home
PC World Chat
Thread ID: 125019	2012-06-02 01:59:00	Prescription Glasses	pctek (84)	PC World Chat

Post ID	Timestamp	Content	User
1279140	2012-06-04 11:43:00	the wife has been told that she should be wearing UV400 lenses due to damage already done by sun exposure. Does the UV400 filter also "darken the picture" or does it work on a different optical principle ?? The UV400 is an ultra violet blocking tint. It has only a very faint yellow to it, and is very close to being clear, so it doesn't darken the image to any degree that is noticable.	Paul.Cov (425)
1279141	2012-06-04 11:54:00	I had a free eye test from Specsavers a couple of months ago (my first ever). I'm still waiting to be contacted offering a huge discount... I forgot to ask them for the prescription. Do I have a right to it given that 'they' paid for the test? That is a very interesting question. Normally you have every right to the prescription. In the UK it is compulsory to give people their prescription at the conclusion of the exam. Then again, the govt funds eye exams in the UK. There's no such requirement around this end of the globe, so it's typically only given out when requested. Certainly if you paid for an exam you'd have every right to the info. If the exam was 'free', then there may be an arguement that the results don't belong to you, but there would be room for some interesting arguements, and the NZ Association of Optometrists would love to know how that went... should Specsavers prove difficult with you. There are people in the industry, and within Specsavers who are very unhappy about the free exam promo, and specsavers have used lawyers to shut down every one of them... which is a very sad sign when those in the industry aren't even allowed to debate the issue or to express their own opinion. There's also Specsavers contracts that stiffle their workers, former workers, franchisees from stating their opinion of the organisation. Specsavers will hand pick the comments that get released to the public and to the industry. The rest gets swept under the carpet. That on its own says heaps about the company.	Paul.Cov (425)
1279142	2012-06-04 12:02:00	What about those, I think it's refractive lenses? My mum got recommended them for night driving. Probably meant anti-reflective lenses. It's a coating on the lenses to reduce reflected glare from the surface of the lenses. It does nothing to reduce the glare (intensity or scatter) from the incident light. For anyone who drives without glasses, adding glasses just purely for the antireflective tint will do nothing to help. It's a very good feature for those that already use glasses to drive (day or night). It's a nonsense for those that don't need glasses to drive.	Paul.Cov (425)
1279143	2012-06-04 12:43:00	I find that if I close my left eye (with the cataract) I get a clearer image. The bad eye puts a fuzzy filter over the total vision. My Polaroids are have a prescription lens on the left and plain Polaroid on the right.	mzee (3324)
1279144	2012-06-04 22:19:00	My problem with Specsavers is that the staff were very nice and I don't like to knock them The Specsavers website is not very trustworthy. Using the interactive graphics I tried on a 49mm pair of specs and then a 54mm pair. I couldn't see any difference so did the same thing in two instances of IE and alt-tabbed between them. As I suspected, absolutely no change The website is also very slow, 1990s dial-up speed At the exam, my distance vision was reported OK even though I have trouble reading the LCD displays on my audio equipment from the sofa (3 - 4m). I asked for a white on black test but they couldn't do it. Back home, I notice that one eye is significantly worse than the other (when trying to read the audio settings). This wasn't reported either. The test was rather rushed for an old guy. I would have liked to spend more time choosing "which image is clearer" rather than being forced to guess If they offer a good "special", I might accept on condition they re-do the test. Otherwise I'm inclined to go somewhere new. I've learned a few things (from Pressf1!) and will be a bit more forceful	BBCmicro (15761)
1279145	2012-06-04 22:59:00	OK ... Final question now that there has been a little light shed on Specsavers .... Has anyone got an opinion on which "specialist" has the best service overall service, both in accuracy of examination, customer service, price, etc.	SP8's (9836)
1279146	2012-06-04 23:19:00	I would have liked to spend more time choosing "which image is clearer" rather than being forced to guessl A common feeling. If it's any help, the point we are aiming for with the test is the point where judging these differences becomes difficult. When you start to struggle to pick an answer, then your hessitation is answer enough - that it's pretty darn close to where it needs to be. I often find myself telling folks that very thing to reassure them that their difficulty or hessitation is answer enough. No one single response is likely to be critical to the result. THe whole thing is about swinging the power back and forth of the target mark, steadily narrowing down the degree to which we go from one side to the other of the final prescription. Any duff responses tend to get purged during the repetition in the process in most cases. As for your trouble with the display, it's likely related to the colour of the LEDs used in the display. Red light refracts (bends / focuses) to a lesser degree than green light. An eye that is over minused (underplused, or left a little bit 'longsighted') sees green LED displays more clearly than red LED displays. The reverse applies too. An eye that is overminused or a tad on the 'shortsighted' side of neutral sees a red LED display more clearly. Your eyes can be fine for distance focus (based on white light, the whole spectrum) and still have issues with the LEDs part way across the room. A lens that corrects you for a coloured LED at 3m distance will not be clear for the wider spectrum over a longer distance, so we almost never aim to specifically improve perception of coloured LEDs, and even with new specs a single coloured LED display is not guaranteed to be clear... the specs are for a wider range of distances, and a wider spectrum of colour.	Paul.Cov (425)
1279147	2012-06-05 00:16:00	.."duff responses tend to get purged during the repetition in the process in most cases" That's helpful I've just measured the viewing situation that's causing me problems: Distance to clock (green figures, but similar results for nearby white figures): 2.7m Figure size on the clock: 13mm high, 7mm wide Left eye extra image: Down 1.5mm, Right 0.5mm, Strength (in audio terms!) -3dB (ie, strong) A strong image almost on top of the original. I can't read figures with a 7mm height Right eye extra image: Down 3mm, Right 6mm, Strength -15dB (ie, weak) A weak image almost completely displaced. I can just read figures with a 6mm height Subjectively the Left eye is significantly worse than the Right eye. If I had to rely on my Left eye, there would be annoyance reading the ticker on Fox (hack, hack... choke) It puzzles me that this situation - which causes a genuine problem in everyday life - was not tested for. (and probably never is?? given that it requires white on black)	BBCmicro (15761)
1279148	2012-06-05 00:28:00	I just spent $700 for consult and new lens only, kept my frames as I like them, so I am also interested in the results of the online buy	DeSade (984)
1279149	2012-06-05 00:33:00	I was thinking of suggesting we post pictures of our various spectacles, especially to illustrate the asymmetric thickness thingy. However the problems of (a) photographing glass and (b) focussing when I'm not wearing the glasses has made me reconsider.	Tony (4941)
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9