I’m guessing; I haven’t paid all the bills yet.
I sit here this morning wearing bifocals, about which I have sharply mixed feelings. I am greatly relieved to be able comfortably to read the low-contrast type in Pattern Recognition (for example). No, tremendously relieved. I’m a reader by vocation, and my alienation from various forms of type has been a Major Nuisance for too long. I don’t, however, like the way that bifocals introduce blurriness into my field of vision when I glance outside the designated, designed-in loci for viewing. Glasses are supposed to remove blurriness from my vision, and I object to seeing blurs through the lenses. That’s why I get a new pair, after all.
And I’m not sure about these new frames.
At the same time, I’ve come to the end of my occupational therapy for my thumb. My therapists have said, in essence, “We’ve done our part; there’s no point in coming back.” We’e increased the flexibility in my thumb (good thing) and decreased the pain (good thing), but the swelling hasn’t gone down (odd thing). They’re referring me back to my PCP, for her to decide what to do about the mystery swelling.
Lessons learned (and this is important, listen to the old geezer, kiddies):
Sounds like you have progressive lenses.
The idea of having all focal distances handled by the same lens sounds cool, but the fact that the area for any specific distance is very small makes them sound unwieldy.
I think it's easier to deal with tlined bifocals. Less unexpected blur.
Wow! My computer just switched to 640x480 from it's usual 1024x768. (Driver bug.) Talk about easy to read - a few lines at a time!
Posted by: Wes at June 14, 2004 11:55 AMDid you consider the lenses that make a continuous change? I love mine, tried after a few years with tri-focals. They reportedly make some dizzy, but it's usually very temporary. NTA
Posted by: NTA at June 15, 2004 05:42 AMHello there,
I was just browsing and wondered whether you might like to read my essay at
www.hubrisbiscuits.blogspot.com
All comments are very welcome, as it is a work in progress. Thanks for your time.
Mom and Wes,
Yes, these are the progrssive/graduated lenses. I'm still trying to decide what I think of them, but I really do appreciate being able to see type better. I just suspect that the template for “who looks where at what” doesn’t mecessarily match my eye motions ideally. I’ll probably adapt, ubt I’m hanging onto my old pair. I can always plop some reading lenses over the regular lenses if need be.
On the other hand, I may just adapt comfortably to this pair, and Margaret assures me that they look fine. And who else do I have to please?
Posted by: AKMA at June 15, 2004 12:15 PMThere are stick-on bifocal lenses that you could put on your old glasses. Think "window clings".
Check with the optician. There are different "templates" for the progressives.
Whatever you do, don't get polycarbonate lenses, unless you need high impact resistance. The chromatic abberation is awful.
[Sorry, that's probably more detail than you need/want. As you can probably tell, I'm kind of fussy about my lenses.]
Posted by: Wes at June 15, 2004 11:02 PMHmmm. I hyperextend and/or sublux my thumbs constantly. Normally it doesn't cause me any problems, but it hurt for about a week after I did it while picking up my (heavy) laptop case to put it in the trunk. *pop*
Perhaps I should pay more attention to what I'm doing with my thumbs.
Posted by: Elizabeth at June 19, 2004 03:58 PM