Im toying with the idea of getting these as a reglaze
for intermediate (computer) and reading. Any gotchas?

Cheers, Jim

On 24/04/2023 17:47, Jim White wrote:
>
> Im toying with the idea of getting these as a reglaze
> for intermediate (computer) and reading. Any gotchas?
>
How old are you?

In article <u26ehi$e95c$1@dont-email.me>,
rsandr@yahoo.com says...
>
> On 24/04/2023 17:47, Jim White wrote:
> >
> > Im toying with the idea of getting these as a reglaze
> > for intermediate (computer) and reading. Any gotchas?
> >
> How old are you?

Seventy three!

I don't even know what they are in any case.
Brian

--

--:
This newsgroup posting comes to you directly from...
The Sofa of Brian Gaff...
briang1@blueyonder.co.uk
Blind user, so no pictures please
Note this Signature is meaningless.!
"Jim White" <news@jimwhite.co.uk> wrote in message
news:MPG.3eb1141f776db11e9896a9@news.eternal-september.org...
> In article <u26ehi$e95c$1@dont-email.me>,
> rsandr@yahoo.com says...
>>
>> On 24/04/2023 17:47, Jim White wrote:
>> >
>> > Im toying with the idea of getting these as a reglaze
>> > for intermediate (computer) and reading. Any gotchas?
>> >
>> How old are you?
>
> Seventy three!

Brian Gaff wrote:

> I don't even know what they are in any case.

I hadn't heard of them, they sound like a variation on varifocals, but
with shorter range, e.g. between reading and TV distance, or between
smartphone and talking to people round a pub table, rather than the full
range between needlework and star gazing?

Could be useful, but I can see you might end up with a pair for 1m,
another for 2m, another for 3m, having a computer pair and a driving
pair in enough hassle already

On 25/04/2023 09:21, Andy Burns wrote:
> Brian Gaff wrote:
>
>> I don't even know what they are in any case.
>
> I hadn't heard of them, they sound like a variation on varifocals, but
> with shorter range, e.g. between reading and TV distance, or between
> smartphone and talking to people round a pub table, rather than the full
> range between needlework and star gazing?
>
> Could be useful, but I can see you might end up with a pair for 1m,
> another for 2m, another for 3m, having a computer pair and a driving
> pair in enough hassle already

You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.

You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
reach a certain age.

Andy Burns wrote:

> Brian Gaff wrote:
>
>> I don't even know what they are in any case.
>
> I hadn't heard of them, they sound like a variation on varifocals, but
> with shorter range, e.g. between reading and TV distance, or between
> smartphone and talking to people round a pub table, rather than the full
> range between needlework and star gazing?
>
> Could be useful, but I can see you might end up with a pair for 1m,
> another for 2m, another for 3m, having a computer pair and a driving
> pair in enough hassle already

For many years I had varifocals and a pair of what were called, even more
confusingly, "interview" lenses on a string around my neck. (Yes, they
called me "six-eyes." :-) ) The latter covered quite short range to
computer screen distance plus a bit. They were perfect for working in the
pharmacy at the computer and on the dispensing bench, but were no use for
general use. The varifocals for general use were useless on the computer as
the filed of view at that range was not wide enough. This worked fine for a
long time.

When my vision changed slightly for the better, I discovered that I could
get varifocals that covered the whole range and had a wide enough field of
view to cover computer use at screen range. The snag? They were the top of
the range Varilux lenses and cost a mint (in the £400 to £500 region.)
However, it was so much more convenient that in the end I went down that
route.

The answer, therefore to your comment about multiple pairs is that in
almost all cases two pairs will cover it - but one will suffice if you can
spare the cash.

--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England

If God created mankind, how come Adam and Eve have belly-buttons?

RDS wrote:

> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.

I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
pub with pupils wide open.

> You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
> reach a certain age.

Yes, my distance pair are good for driving (though noticeable that
they're sharpest on bright sunny days due to the opposite effect on
pupils) but sometimes in social settings I find people are "too close"
and I end up a bit cross-eyed.

Bob Henson wrote:

> The answer, therefore to your comment about multiple pairs is that in
> almost all cases two pairs will cover it - but one will suffice if you can
> spare the cash.

I tried varifocals once (not the super expensive version) and wasn't
over the moon with them, that was when I got the "intermediate" pair for
computer use and distance pair for everything else, but since covid and
now working from home most of the time, the intermediate pair have
become the "norm" even though they're not ideal away from a desk, and
the distance pair are more or less just for driving and subsequent use
away from home.

I've been thinking for months I ought to re-visit the optiquacks ...

On Tuesday, April 25, 2023 at 9:55:44 AM UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> RDS wrote:
>
> > You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
> > and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.
> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
> pub with pupils wide open.
> > You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
> > reach a certain age.
> Yes, my distance pair are good for driving (though noticeable that
> they're sharpest on bright sunny days due to the opposite effect on
> pupils) but sometimes in social settings I find people are "too close"
> and I end up a bit cross-eyed.

I have varifocals but found them not great for reading in bed so at my opticians advice I got a pair of reading glasses. They do the job

In message <kapj8bFn6siU1@mid.individual.net>, Andy Burns
<usenet@andyburns.uk> writes
>Bob Henson wrote:
>
>> The answer, therefore to your comment about multiple pairs is that in
>> almost all cases two pairs will cover it - but one will suffice if you can
>> spare the cash.
>
>I tried varifocals once (not the super expensive version) and wasn't
>over the moon with them, that was when I got the "intermediate" pair
>for computer use and distance pair for everything else, but since covid
>and now working from home most of the time, the intermediate pair have
>become the "norm" even though they're not ideal away from a desk, and
>the distance pair are more or less just for driving and subsequent use
>away from home.
>
>I've been thinking for months I ought to re-visit the optiquacks ...

Specsavers have given up on me:-)

Last two checks failed to produce any income as my eyes seem to have
stabilised. Ok on a daylight number plate test *officer* but slight
astigmatism makes glasses essential for night driving and I wear
bi-focals to read the dashboard instruments.

Reading glasses on a string snag readily with my activities:-(
>

--
Tim Lamb

On 25/04/2023 09:55, Andy Burns wrote:
> RDS wrote:
>
>> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
>> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.
>
> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
> pub with pupils wide open.
>
>> You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
>> reach a certain age.
>
> Yes, my distance pair are good for driving (though noticeable that
> they're sharpest on bright sunny days due to the opposite effect on
> pupils) but sometimes in social settings I find people are "too close"
> and I end up a bit cross-eyed.
>

I have to use varifocals for driving since they moved dashboards closer
to drivers. Even in the car I've had for 10 years :(

--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

Andy Burns wrote:

> Bob Henson wrote:
>
>> The answer, therefore to your comment about multiple pairs is that in
>> almost all cases two pairs will cover it - but one will suffice if you can
>> spare the cash.
>
> I tried varifocals once (not the super expensive version) and wasn't
> over the moon with them, that was when I got the "intermediate" pair for
> computer use and distance pair for everything else, but since covid and
> now working from home most of the time, the intermediate pair have
> become the "norm" even though they're not ideal away from a desk, and
> the distance pair are more or less just for driving and subsequent use
> away from home.
>

One of the advantages of mine is that I can now see distance and the
dashboard clearly when I'm driving.

> I've been thinking for months I ought to re-visit the optiquacks ...

Regular visits are a good idea anyway. As they are free for old geezers
like me, there's no reason for me not to go at least once a year. I would
also recommend Retinal Imaging every couple of years, albeit you have to
pay for that (about £30). My results have always been fine, but I know a
couple of folk who have been saved a whole lot of trouble by early
diagnosis of problems. There may be additional benefits with opticians who
have the machinery - they are generally more up to date and offer a better
service in general. That, of course, is not necessarily the case - but in
my experience it has been very much the case.

--
Bob
Tetbury, Gloucestershire, England

Quantum mechanics: The dreams stuff is made of.

Bob Henson wrote:

> One of the advantages of mine is that I can now see distance and the
> dashboard clearly when I'm driving.

My single vision distance lenses cover from the dashboard to the horizon
pretty ell (for now).

On 25 Apr 2023 at 09:46:18 BST, RDS wrote:

> On 25/04/2023 09:21, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Brian Gaff wrote:
>>
>>> I don't even know what they are in any case.
>>
>> I hadn't heard of them, they sound like a variation on varifocals, but
>> with shorter range, e.g. between reading and TV distance, or between
>> smartphone and talking to people round a pub table, rather than the full
>> range between needlework and star gazing?
>>
>> Could be useful, but I can see you might end up with a pair for 1m,
>> another for 2m, another for 3m, having a computer pair and a driving
>> pair in enough hassle already
>
> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.
>

I've a pair of 'computer specs' (as defined by the optician) that work for
everthing except very close up (when I take the specs off) and distance
(distance specs, 3m+). Many times I've set off driving wearing them . . .

Also good for DIY - big 'Michael Caine' style. Well, better than nothing.

--
Cheers, Rob, Sheffield UK

On 25/04/2023 09:46, RDS wrote:
> On 25/04/2023 09:21, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Brian Gaff wrote:
>>
>>> I don't even know what they are in any case.
>>
>> I hadn't heard of them, they sound like a variation on varifocals, but
>> with shorter range, e.g. between reading and TV distance, or between
>> smartphone and talking to people round a pub table, rather than the
>> full range between needlework and star gazing?
>>
>> Could be useful, but I can see you might end up with a pair for 1m,
>> another for 2m, another for 3m, having a computer pair and a driving
>> pair in enough hassle already
>
> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.
>
> You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
> reach a certain age.
>

I do, but with my very strong prescription, I only have to move the
glasses slightly up or down my nose to go from distance to reading.

--
Colin Bignell

RJH wrote:

> I've a pair of 'computer specs' (as defined by the optician)

I think mine started them as +1, but they adjusted them to +1.5 (or was
it +1.25 can't remember) when I said they weren't quite right, I
literally have my monitor at arms length.

> that work for everthing except very close up (when I take the specs
> off)

All my life I've taken my glasses off for close work.

> and distance
> (distance specs, 3m+). Many times I've set off driving wearing them . . .

Easy to do

On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 09:55:44 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> RDS wrote:

> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
> pub with pupils wide open.

You are the only person I have encountered who accepts that the pupil and iris of the human eye affect depth of field.

Bill

On 25/04/2023 09:46, RDS wrote:
> On 25/04/2023 09:21, Andy Burns wrote:
>> Brian Gaff wrote:
>>
>>> I don't even know what they are in any case.
>>
>> I hadn't heard of them, they sound like a variation on varifocals, but
>> with shorter range, e.g. between reading and TV distance, or between
>> smartphone and talking to people round a pub table, rather than the
>> full range between needlework and star gazing?
>>
>> Could be useful, but I can see you might end up with a pair for 1m,
>> another for 2m, another for 3m, having a computer pair and a driving
>> pair in enough hassle already
>
> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a desk.
>
> You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
> reach a certain age.
>
Indeed. I have three. Two are bifocals set to infinity at the top, and
car dashboard/computer screen at the bottom.

The second set is infinity at the top, book reading at the bottom
The third are monofocals set to around 6" for things like threading
needles or inserting small grub screws etc etc.

--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On 25/04/2023 10:40, Robin wrote:
> On 25/04/2023 09:55, Andy Burns wrote:
>> RDS wrote:
>>
>>> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
>>> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a
>>> desk.
>>
>> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
>> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a
>> dingy pub with pupils wide open.
>>
>>> You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
>>> reach a certain age.
>>
>> Yes, my distance pair are good for driving (though noticeable that
>> they're sharpest on bright sunny days due to the opposite effect on
>> pupils) but sometimes in social settings I find people are "too close"
>> and I end up a bit cross-eyed.
>>
>
> I have to use varifocals for driving since they moved dashboards closer
> to drivers.  Even in the car I've had for 10 years :(
>
>

It took me quite a long time to learn to drive with varifocals as they
distort my perception of what I see when driving through a narrow gap.

I eventually learnt in the USA where the roads are wider and I got fed
up with having to change glasses to look at a map.

--
Michael Chare

On 25/04/2023 12:35, wrights...@f2s.com wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 09:55:44 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
>> RDS wrote:
>
>> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
>> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
>> pub with pupils wide open.
>
> You are the only person I have encountered who accepts that the pupil and iris of the human eye affect depth of field.
>

You only had to ask :)

I suspect some may deny it because our eyes/brains often settle for
out-of-focus images without telling us.
--
Robin
reply-to address is (intended to be) valid

wrights...@f2s.com <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
> On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 09:55:44 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
>> RDS wrote:
>
>> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
>> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
>> pub with pupils wide open.
>
> You are the only person I have encountered who accepts that the pupil and
> iris of the human eye affect depth of field.

Eh? No different from a conventional camera. I think you need to hang out
with better informed people. ;-)

Tim

--
Please don't feed the trolls

On Tue, 25 Apr 2023 10:40:24 +0100, Robin wrote:

> On 25/04/2023 09:55, Andy Burns wrote:
>> RDS wrote:
>>
>>> You'd tend to end up with a pair that work for let's say between 30cm
>>> and 1m so not great for walking around in but good for sitting at a
>>> desk.
>>
>> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
>> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a
>> dingy pub with pupils wide open.
>>
>>> You can never have 1 pair of specs that works for everything once you
>>> reach a certain age.
>>
>> Yes, my distance pair are good for driving (though noticeable that
>> they're sharpest on bright sunny days due to the opposite effect on
>> pupils) but sometimes in social settings I find people are "too close"
>> and I end up a bit cross-eyed.
>>
>>
> I have to use varifocals for driving since they moved dashboards closer
> to drivers. Even in the car I've had for 10 years :(

I use bifocals. Arranged so that the demarcation point is just above teh
dashboard.

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

On 25/04/2023 09:08, Brian Gaff wrote:

> I don't even know what they are in any case.

Occupational lenses are a type of multifocal lens that can be used for a
person’s occupation or lifestyle. They are designed for close to
intermediate tasks such as reading, writing and screen-work. These
lenses can be either ‘office’ or ‘computer’ varifocal lenses which
differ in their focal capacities. Some occupational lenses come with
anti-glare coating or blue-shield coating (ideal for computer use and to
help with migraines and severe headaches at work).

--
Bing AI

Tim+ <tim.downie@gmail.com> wrote:
> wrights...@f2s.com <wrightsaerials@f2s.com> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, 25 April 2023 at 09:55:44 UTC+1, Andy Burns wrote:
> >> RDS wrote:
> >
> >> I have a single vision pair that's designed for screen use at arms
> >> length, usually ok for checking messages on phone too, unless in a dingy
> >> pub with pupils wide open.
> >
> > You are the only person I have encountered who accepts that the pupil and
> > iris of the human eye affect depth of field.
>
> Eh? No different from a conventional camera. I think you need to hang out
> with better informed people. ;-)
>
Exactly my thought.

It is obvious when you realise you can read small print in bright
sunlight whereas you don't have a hope in dimmer light. It's simply
because the iris has stopped down and the increased depth of field
means that closer things are in focus.

--
Chris Green
·