Post to This Thread
30calcat 30 Jun 2017, 06:43
Jack 29 Jun 2017, 11:39
Your glasses look really fantastic. The photography shows them off to the extreme. They really interest me. Your eyes must look very small behind those powerful lenses.
What are the lenses made of to make them look so thick?
30calcat 28 Jun 2017, 18:12
Jack 28 Jun 2017, 17:01
30calcat 28 Jun 2017, 16:11
Jack 28 Jun 2017, 16:00
What is you full prescription?
30calcat 28 Jun 2017, 15:21
Most people would not consider your glasses thick. I wear these much thicker glasses in a semi-rimless frame every day:
I am comfortable wearing them and they have never attracted negative attention. The very occasional questions I get are probably from a fellow OO.
Mel 28 Jun 2017, 13:59
Thanks for the input, Paul. You bring up an interesting point, though I can't say that I fully agree: as an OO, I've always preferred semi-rimless to rimless, especially in a high-prescription, as a semi-rimless somehow "defines" the thickness of the lens more, whereas a rimless kind of melts into the face, regardless of the prescription.
In any case, since I have a life outside of my fetish, my goal was to figure out whether my glasses (here is an updated photo: https://postimg.org/image/u11mjsr53/) look ridiculously thick. I'm in college and my prescription is still rising steadily, so I anticipate something like a -1 increase to a -7.75 at my next exam. I'm trying to figure out at which point I'll have to bite the bullet and go for full-rimmed.
Paul 26 Jun 2017, 19:21
I think rimless and semi-rimless should NOT be grouped together for your question. With rimless, a little thickness looks good because thin rimless glasses just disappear on a person's face...the thickness, in effect, serves as the "frame" and I think it's a positive effect (even from a non-optic-obsessive perspective) up to a reasonable thickness (like 1/4" or 7mm maybe).
I feel completely differently about semi-rimless, which are typically a very "dainty" or lightweight frame that is easily overpowered by lenses more than a few mm thick (in my opinion).
My $0.02 only. And I agree with others that most people don't notice lenses regardless. For example, I went from wearing -3 glasses to -8 full time and no one ever said a thing or seemed to notice at all.
HighMyopic 26 Jun 2017, 18:33
What do you think is the rx of these lenses? They look like myodisc lenses.
NNVisitor 24 Apr 2017, 09:17
I just checked the image you posted. I think the glasses were well chosen and do not look very thick. Mine are several D higher and I have astigmatism as well. I don't know what index has been used on my glasses other than that they're high index glass lenses. I know that there is a 1.9 index zeiss glass lens available which is the thinnest that I know of. This type is very expensive and I'm sure mine are not that lens type.
Rayray 23 Apr 2017, 00:52
Hi Mel, for your prescription and the index of lens you have (1.67) your lenses are about normal - I have a prescription of about -8.5 so my glasses are very similar. If you don't want the thickness to be noticeable a thick plastic frame is the best option - rimless or semi-rimless will just draw attention to your lenses. A lot of people are very unaware of glasses lenses however and still won't think your glasses are thick.
Maxim 20 Apr 2017, 16:15
To Anonymous No. 1, No. 2, No.3 ..... No. 99
I must admit, you are right. Stealing is forbidden, that starts in the Holy Bible and continues in our legislative systems.
Not a good idea.
Believe it or not, during our school years, we collected old glasses for experiments in the physics lessons, optics. Then we learned about the camera, the human eye, the telescope and the binoculars, and camera lenses, not to forget the microscope, and much more.
Mel 20 Apr 2017, 15:15
Thanks for the advice. It seems that I did pick a frame that is way too large, and that's why the lenses are so thick.
Could you give me an example of a semi-rimless frame that would minimize thickness? And what ET do you think would be acceptable in a rimless/semi-rimless?
?!?!?!?!?!?!!! 20 Apr 2017, 14:05
maxim What Are You Talking About? Stealing is Stealing is Stealing. With Your Logic, I Ask Is it Better to Steal from A Person or a Bank? Some Logic You Have There, Little One. The Other Anon Poster Is Absolutely Correct.
High Myopic 20 Apr 2017, 10:38
I cannot even see peoples heads let alone their faces. I am totally blind as a bat.
LiP 20 Apr 2017, 05:51
Did you miss my post 14 April? Thanks.
Still trying to work out ,how are you able to wear +48 glasses without using contacts (GOC)?
Can you see properly, if yes , how, Please?
HighMyopic 19 Apr 2017, 20:39
I have not got them in the mail yet. They should come next Monday.
30calcat 19 Apr 2017, 20:18
Yes they look as thick as my 17mm thick lenses. I am surprised the lab edged the lens with so much of the thickness on the back side. Do the nose pads even make contact or does the inside edge dig into your nose? Or do you wear them further down your nose - they look like reading glasses?
HighMyopic 19 Apr 2017, 18:07
You think this 15+ base in prism glasses pair has half inch thick lenses?
NNVisitor 19 Apr 2017, 15:18
Correct. I have been very careful to not get large frames. Also I have high index lenses in them. Costs more for them but worth it. Compared to 1.50 index lenses which I had years ago before I was told about the thinner high index lenses. Smaller frames with high index lenses have resulted in lenses as much as 50% thinner.
Maxim 19 Apr 2017, 14:48
I compare these photographs to the pictures of lenses with 8 prism diopters, that I remember.
I would say, yes, 15 prism diopters or more.
HighMyopic 19 Apr 2017, 14:38
You think there is at least 15 base in prism in these glasses?
The lenses look like super thick wedges with rounded fronts.
The back of the very thick wedges
Maxim 19 Apr 2017, 14:27
To his Eminence, the Right Hon Mr Anonymous:
.... and Greenpeace or the Red Cross, or UNICEF or the Churches?
They are collecting penny per penny, cent per cent, from poor people in the street, and their Directors, or Bishops, or whatever tehy are called, are living in big houses, tehy are art collectors, and they are chauffeur driven in fine limousines.
Which problem is worse?
19 Apr 2017, 13:37
@MAXIM = your sense of logic seems impaired. imagine it was cars for charity. what if you picked up 8 cars with a tow truck, and kept 3 cars for yourself. how is that ethical. i think you no the answer. it is larceny.
antonio 19 Apr 2017, 12:44
smaller glasses would help them
not to get that thick
best regards, antonio
Mel 19 Apr 2017, 12:15
Interesting, Jared. My glasses are only around -7, fairly high index (1.67), and yet the edges still look like ice cubes (link if you're interested: https://postimg.org/image/krknqm44z/)
What am I doing wrong?
Jared 19 Apr 2017, 11:14
You ever on ES chat? Would be happy to exchange info with you there.
JP 18 Apr 2017, 13:38
I'd enjoy playing around with lenses to work this out, but would like the confidence of a lensometer assessment of the prescription, particularly as I'm interested in a pair of (minus) lenses with cylinder and add.
Luke 15 Apr 2017, 16:20
Jared and Patrick B
Can you please share any pictures of the amazing glasses.
Patrick B 15 Apr 2017, 12:41
I agree with Jared. Most dispensing opticians don't have the expertise when dealing with high-minus prescriptions and aren't aware of the available options. My prescription is -26, and I have lenses which are approximately 4 mm thick in 1.8 high-index lenses. They are, of course, blended myodiscs set in negative carriers. Cosmetically they look pretty good and most people aren't aware of the strength of the lenses unlike my other pairs of glasses which have conventional full-frame lenses. My last pair are in a small 47mm frame and are 9mm thick at the beveled edges. They look so much stronger than the myodiscs especially since they are heavily biconcave. I've been counseled against rimless/semi-rimless frames because they don't provide as much support for glass lenses and are thus more fragile. Still, I might just try them for my next pair.
Today I saw a guy who probably had -12s in a frame that was perhaps 50/52mm in width. I'd guess he had the 1.74 high-index lenses. The combination of the frame and the lenses meant that they were relatively thin and the frame covered the edges perfectly. That said, there was on getting away from the fact that his lenses were quite strong when viewed dead on. He also had that classic high-myopic body language meaning that he always turned his head whenever he wanted to view something off to the side.
Jared 15 Apr 2017, 09:37
Arbitrary means let's not deal with this and suggest a non semi-rimless frame. My brother's best friend is an optician and he sees this daily. When customer is advised that a -6 or more will be somewhat thick lens and wants semirimless then told a high index lens, at additional cost would cut down on the thickness. He said most of the time they opt for a different frame. My brother's Rx is -25 and he wears semi rimless which are 4mm thick.
So a viable option is available for hi myopes who want semi-rimless without thick lenses. Just ask!!!
30calcat 15 Apr 2017, 04:27
You can also use a lens clock to approximate the lens power yourself
Maxim 15 Apr 2017, 00:43
What to say to the optician?
Tell him/her, you would donate glasses via a collecting organisation. But attention - many opticians are part of such projects - you must keep them!
You could also collect and donate glasses - see Google: "donate glasses".
If you collect e.g. 20 glasses from family and friends, donate 15 and keep 5, it would ne morally alright ????
Maxim 15 Apr 2017, 00:23
We did the measurement of lenses in school, in physics / optics.
Did you get plus (magnifying) or minus (minifying) lenses.
For plus lenses it is quite easy, even with astigmatism.
Again it is easier, when you are used to the metric system, than to the inch / foot etc system.
Measurement of a plus lens (e.g. readers):
Go in front of a white wall with day daylight (ideally a sun beam):
A plus reader of + 1.00 makes a focus spot in 1 meter distance.
A plus reader of + 2.00 makes a focus spot on the white wall in 1 meter divided by two = half a meter = 0,50 meters or 50 cm.
A plus reader of + 2.50 makes a focus spot in 1 / 2.5 meters = 0,40 meters = 40 cm;
Plus reader +3.00 1/3 = 0,33333 = 33 cm;
Astigmatism lens, e.g. a +2.00 sph / + 2.00 cyl equal to + 4.00 sph / - 2.00 cyl makes two lines:
one line in 1/2 = 0,5 meters = 50 cm and
one line in 1/4 = 0,25 meters = 25 cm.
If you're interested, buy one or two cheap readers (here sometimes at 1,00 Euro = 1,== $, and try these experiments.
Minus lenses can be calibrated with a magnifying glass. Thoe magnifying glasses are very often at 10 diopters = + 10 - that means, their focus point is at 1/10 meters = 0,1 meters = 10 cm.
If with the magnifying glass + the unknown minus lens to be tested the result e.g. is a line or a focus point in 0,2 meters = 20 centimeters, then the result is 1/0.20 = 5 (= five diopters), the unknown minus lens has "weakened" effect of the +10 lens (magnifying glass) to +5.00. That means, the unknown minus lens has a power of -5.00 (minus 5 / nearsightedness).
The complete general formula is=
D = 1/f + 1 1/l -- in words:
The power in diopters (D) is the result of
1 meter divided by the measured focus distance in metrs or centimeters,
1 meter divided by the distance of the light source (e.g. sun) from the lens
You can do the same measurement in a dark room with a small lamp, with the same results.
JP 14 Apr 2017, 23:50
I have recently purchased a pair of used glasses and am really pleased with their style, fit and how well I can see with themy. I would like to know their exact prescription. I wonder whether any of you have experience of obtaining a prescription from a pair of glasses? What would you say to the optician?
Trent 14 Apr 2017, 10:53
Of course -6 is arbitrary. I'm just judging from my own response from Opticians. Edge thickness is a function of the eye size of the frame and the lens material being used. You can put lenses as thick as ice cubes in any frame, its really up to the end user.
Mel 14 Apr 2017, 10:29
Well, "cutoff" is obviously arbitrary" - but I guess I'm asking at what edge thickness they become very prominent.
Jared 14 Apr 2017, 08:39
I wear semi-rimless -30s.
Trent 14 Apr 2017, 08:03
Usually -6 diopters is the cut-off for semi-rimless frames.
LiP 14 Apr 2017, 07:23
Still trying to work out ,how are you able to wear +48 glasses without using contacts (GOC)?
Can you see properly, if yes , how, Please?
antonio 14 Apr 2017, 03:51
this should depend on the index of refraction
rimless glasses are made in:
Normal glas or cheap plastics might have n=1,5
which leads to thick glasses for the same strength of
letīs say -5 diopters.
n=1,57 or even higher index (until abut n=1,83 or so in mineral glasses) cost more and more, but lead to reduced thickness of the lens
hope that helps, best regards, antonio
by the way how strong is your prescription ?
and do you want thin lenses in rimless glasses ?
Mel 14 Apr 2017, 03:23
Out of curiosity, what is your threshold at which glasses become noticeably thick in a rimless/semi-rimless frame?
HighMyopic 11 Mar 2017, 18:55
Is there anywhere online I can get glasses stronger than +48 diopters? VisionEnhancers.UK goes up to +48 diopters but no higher. Pat told me that his glasses are +56 diopters. I now need to get glasses for me that are +56 diopters or more!! My glasses collection now must have glasses that are +56 diopters since I thought I have worn the strongest plus glasses ever at +48 diopters. But I was wrong.
30calcat 10 Mar 2017, 15:27
SPQ, I think if you asked a random sampling of people around you if they thought your glasses are thick they would probably acknowledge it, though a 1.6 index does a pretty good job of compressing it to a common looking lens.
SPQ 10 Mar 2017, 11:49
Interesting. Would you say 6.5 or so in a semi-rimless is enough to reach coke bottle status/make the glasses look truly thick?
30calcat 07 Mar 2017, 19:18
SPQ, based on lens calculators, you will probably get another 1mm of thickness, but some other unknowns may vary your results, such as aspheric lens curves. In theory, going from 1.67 to 1.6 will cause your lenses to look about 12% stronger in the same power, so your -7.25 will look like a -8 in 1.67 all else being equal.
SPQ 07 Mar 2017, 17:35
Thanks for the feedback, calcat. Yes, I do plan on using these frames, I like them a lot and I think they expose the thickness really well.
If I have a -.75 increase or so, that will bring my prescription up to -7.25 or -7.50 (I also have -.75 of astigmatism).
I'm thinking of doing 1.60 index -- if my current glasses are 5.5 mm or so thick on the edges in 1.67, what do you think the new thickness will be? Ideally I'd like to hit the sweet spot of 8 mm but not go over 10.
30calcat 07 Mar 2017, 05:24
SPQ, I think a lower index will look great. I have worn lenses much thicker than that without anyone taking enough notice to say anything. Are you going to get the thicker lenses filled in these frames?