But, but...what about fitting and alignment? Only an OD can do
that...and only the original OD who filled the prescription, even if
you moved and he's across the country! The doctors so love their
customers that they want us to come in one time for a fitting, and
then use our extended service policy to keep coming back for
realignments.
I think it makes busy work for them.
OK, enough sarcasm. In all seriousness, there have been excellent
rimless frames produced for over 100 years. I have a few antique
examples that are still structurally sound, and which could be used
today...if you could find a lab willing to make the lenses properly.
I even have a pair of rimless pince nez...talk about minimal!
Properly designed rimless glasses *are* structurally sound. They're
minimal by nature...but they are structurally sound.
Wholeheartedly agree, though, about the inherent problems associated
with making the lens a structural element.
-- Chuck Knight
On Sun, Sep 20, 2009 at 4:26 PM, Chalo <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Paul wrote:
>>
>> I bought that exact [rimless] frame from Zenni, and replaced the vinyl nose
>> pads
>> with silicone to get an extremely light and comfortable pair for
>> computer use. (The pads didn't make that much difference, but silicone
>> is nicer and there's no chemical hazard.) They worked fine for quite a
>> few months, but then they broke in the middle.
>
> I think opticals, both online and local, are all taking some blame for
> the intrinsic crappiness of rimless and half-rim frames. Such frames
> are all needlessly fragile, all structurally unsound, and all way
> better at making people have to replace glasses frequently than they
> are at correcting vision.
>
> The optical retailers are only to blame for offering this junk to
> begin with-- but it's not their fault that such insubstantial frames
> are junky. It's just the nature of an incomplete frame to be weak and
> troublesome.
>
> Would an astronomer make a telescope by drilling holes in lenses and
> connecting the holes together with wire? Would he use fishing line as
> a structural element of his instruments? No, he would not, because
> that would be dumb.
>
> Glasses _frames_ are supposed to be just that. The lenses are optical
> elements and should not be required to function as frames. Confusing
> the two functions is one of the factors that gave us pervasive use of
> polycarbonate-- which is plenty strong and tough, but a terrible
> optical material that should never be used as a lens when visual
> quality is important.
>
> Anyway, folks can save themselves the trouble of rickety and
> unreliable glasses by just using full-rim designs made from proven
> metals or plastics. Then they should use lens materials for their
> optical qualities and not their mechanical qualities.
>
> Chalo
>
> >
>
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Check us out at the oft-updated http://glassyeyes.blogspot.com!
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"GlassyEyes" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/glassyeyes?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
