Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

news.ycombinator.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 334 posts

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#321

Post by bmurphy1976 »

KurSix wrote: post #234
bmurphy1976 wrote: post #8

Yes, I'm very nearsighted. I've worn progressive lenses for years but they continue to drive me crazy. I can see fine with them, but my eyes easily get fatigued and I have to take long breaks to get them to calm down. Over the summer I added a pair of progressive occupational lenses (not reading glasses). They are focused arms length in front of me. This has been a complete game changer. I can now see my monitor cris…

Do you find yourself swapping glasses a lot throughout the day, or do you mostly stick with the occupational ones when working?

I wear my occupational lenses 100% while working at my computer/laptop or doing some up close and small fiddly work (i.e. soldering a circuit board). I wear my regular glasses otherwise, but find myself frequently taking them off to focus on things close to me (i.e. if I want to read something really quick or use my phone for more than a quick glance).

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#322

Post by Suppafly »

jasode wrote: post #71

The solution for me to eliminate headaches when working at computer screens was getting an extra set of intermediate distance glasses specifically for computer work. The "computer screen distance" of 3 ft is in between book-reading distance of 1 feet and driving distance 20'+ feet. I also avoid progressive lenses or high-index lenses for computer work. I commented about how arrived at this solution previously: https:…

>The solution for me to eliminate headaches when working at computer screens was getting an extra set of intermediate distance glasses specifically for computer work.

My wife is getting bifocals for basically this same reason.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#323

Post by Suppafly »

globnomulous wrote: post #179
kps wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also avoid […] high-index lenses for computer work. Yes! You're the first to mention this. It's not refractive index itself that's the problem, it's dispersion (roughly, the degree to which refractive index varies across the visual spectrum, described by ‘Abbe number’). We've all seen pictures of a prism splitting a beam of white light into a rainbow — for visual purposes, the less split the better. Higher-index…

Hear, hear! Here's a good way to test your glass's refraction index. On your desktop find a small red icon with something white in the center. Stare directly at it. Now turn your head until the icon is at the edge of your vision. If your lenses are cheap polycarbonate, the white part of the icon will appear to move towards the edge of the icon or even out of it. Most non-cheapo glasses today in the US use Trivex. It'…

I don't know which type of glass my glasses have, but I know I had to pay a ton for it, because the cheaper sort can't handle my prescription without being really thick and/or heavy. But as someone that actually wears my glasses all the time and not just randomly, it's worth the extra expense.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#324

Post by Suppafly »

corysama wrote: post #201
kps wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I also avoid […] high-index lenses for computer work. Yes! You're the first to mention this. It's not refractive index itself that's the problem, it's dispersion (roughly, the degree to which refractive index varies across the visual spectrum, described by ‘Abbe number’). We've all seen pictures of a prism splitting a beam of white light into a rainbow — for visual purposes, the less split the better. Higher-index…

A fun fact I learned recently, after years of casually skimming color science, is that our eyes cannot focus the entire visual spectrum at once. That’s why our cone response to the spectrum looks like https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cone_cell#/media/File%3ACone... instead of having cleanly segregated red vs. green responses. If it was segregated, we could only focus on red or green but not both. By having a heavy ove…

>instead of having cleanly segregated red vs. green responses.

I suppose that's why r/g colorblindness is so common.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#326

Post by Suppafly »

bmurphy1976 wrote: post #58
dinfinity wrote: post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unsure if this will work for your case, but I am _very_ happy with my implanted contact lenses. They sit behind my iris and optically function as normal contact lenses. No hassle, just a straight up body upgrade. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intraocular_lens I was very surprised that this is not a more common thing to hear about amongst people with bad eyesight. Laser correction sucks in comparison, with more ri…

Honestly, I'm absolutely terrified of doing anything that might damage my eyesight. I know the common procedures (i.e. Lasik) have come a long way in the last two decades and are very low risk, but they are not zero risk. I won't even wear contact lenses, I long ago fully committed to glasses. That type of procedure doesn't fit my risk tolerance.

>I won't even wear contact lenses, I long ago fully committed to glasses. That type of procedure doesn't fit my risk tolerance.

I feel similarly, but as the thickness of my glasses increases as I age, I'm starting to consider Lasik or similar. If I already had cataracts, implanted lenses as part of the cataract removal would be a non-brainer.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#327

Post by Suppafly »

hollerith wrote: post #99
dinfinity wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand the hesitation, but that's the thing about this: It's even simpler than cataract surgery (where they actually _replace_ your own lenses instead of just flopping one in front of it), which is very very common, and very very safe. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_cataract_surgery IIRC the chance of complications for Lasik is about 10x that of the one for intraocular lens implantation. The natu…

>cataract surgery, which is very very common, and very very safe. Ever since my elderly friend had cataract surgery (5 years ago) she finds bright light painful, so she spends less time outdoors.

> so she spends less time outdoors

Instead of just wearing shades? That's silly.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#328

Post by globnomulous »

Suppafly wrote: post #323
globnomulous wrote: post #179

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hear, hear! Here's a good way to test your glass's refraction index. On your desktop find a small red icon with something white in the center. Stare directly at it. Now turn your head until the icon is at the edge of your vision. If your lenses are cheap polycarbonate, the white part of the icon will appear to move towards the edge of the icon or even out of it. Most non-cheapo glasses today in the US use Trivex. It'…

I don't know which type of glass my glasses have, but I know I had to pay a ton for it, because the cheaper sort can't handle my prescription without being really thick and/or heavy. But as someone that actually wears my glasses all the time and not just randomly, it's worth the extra expense.

Interesting, is the lens ultra high-index? How's refraction? As far as I'm aware, high-index, as the index becomes higher, generally will have a progressively worse Abbe number.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#329

Post by hadlock »

Night_Thastus wrote: post #5

I'm nearsighted with no astigmatism, so I have a simple -2/-2 prescription (if I remember correctly). I sit at a screen 8-16 hours a day. I get strong headaches every single day, for which I keep a supply of ibuprofen at work and home. 400mg a day is generally plenty. I do not wear my glasses while at the screen, as it's close enough that I don't have any issues. I suspect my headaches are neck muscle related, not ey…

If you're getting headaches every day and it's related to computer use, it might be worthwhile to talk to a professional about your workstation ergonomics, screen/font size etc. That is not normal. At all. I don't know anyone else complaining about having headaches daily. I put my monitor on an adjustable arm and it made a tremendous difference, just being able to move the monitor up/down half an inch throughout the day. Also as I've gotten older I've gone from 20 to 22 to 27" displays which helps.

Re: Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

#330

Post by simoncion »

YZF wrote: post #199
simoncion wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How the hell did you convince your optometrist to correct your vision to 20/7? The past two docs I've been two have ignored me when I've said "I can make out the letters, but they're blurry and fuzzy. Can we go stronger?" with "Well, that's corrected to 20/20 vision.". I'm very, very strongly considering finding a used eye-testing-headgear thingie like they have in their offices, learning how to use it, and doing the…

That's odd. Most optometrists I've seen over my life (and specifically here in Canada, BC) will keep trying to adjust and ask you if it's sharper or not before they settle on the numbers. They'll go higher or lower power and/or astigmatism in different increments. They're also generally pretty cool with things like testing with a laptop monitor and getting the sharpest computer prescription. Maybe this is your sweet…

> Maybe this is your sweet spot?

I doubt it. I played around a bit with the hand-lenses and was able to get a much more clear picture by increasing the lens strength more than the doctor was willing to.

If the doctor was making any sort of tradeoff, they were not informing me of it. They kept asserting that I was "corrected to 20/20" when I protested that the letters on the chart were still quite fuzzy. If they'd have informed me of a "close range vs. long range" lens tradeoff, I would have happily informed them of my willingness to have multiple pairs of glasses.

Post reply on HN