# Optical Forums > Progressive Lens Discussion Forum >  Free-Form Phanatics...Help?

## Fezz

OK,ok...I'll admit it-I am not drinking the Free-Form Kool Aid! I have voiced my opinion on these forums enough for most to know my feelings. I have a patient in who I have tried several Free-Form, and Individual type lenses over the last few years with no *WOW* factor.

Rx as follows: Current

OD -3.00=-1.00 x 115
OS -3.00=-1.00 x 070
Add +2.50

2004-I fit him with Zeiss Individual. 1.60 w/ Carat
Previous, he had worn Varilux Comfort, Zeiss Top, and Panamic. His main complaint has always been the width of clear areas in intermediate and near. The Individual did not impress him. In other words, no noticeable difference. This guy is very bright, owns companies here and in Germany and can speak and under stand optics well. Frame=Elasta #7027 54-20

2007-I fit him with a "Free-Form" from a well known lab. 1.67 Labs AR
He was very un-impressed. He felt that the areas were the same or smaller. The AR coating failed (several times). Frame=Elasta#7027 54-20(same as 2004)

Today-This is where you free-form Gurus come in.
We are going with same frame style. He wants wider areas. He also wants to be assured that the AR will hold up better, or that we will stand behind it if it doesn't.

1.) My first thought was Shamir Autograph in 1.60. My concern here is the AR availability and warranty.
2.) Second, I thought about the Hoya ID Lifestyle in Trivex. Great AR and great warranty. But, I have had quite a few people try and not like, and it is not a true free-form so I don't think the goal of wider areas will be met. The regular ID is out because of cost versus other options.


So....what would you Free-Form Phanatics suggest? Why?

I think Craig will suggest Unique. I actually kicked that around, but am unsure of the AR warranties and durability.

Thanks!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## Jubilee

I have had no issue with the Unique.. however ....

I LOVE MY AUTOGRAPH! 


AR on 1.60 is no issue, Zeiss carat is the usual .. however I believe you can get the Crizal family of coatings on it as well (or at least I have in the past)


You mentioned lifestyle ID.. why not the Hoyalux ID.. (the true free form version)

Both the Autograph and the ID have produced that WOW factor in my patients.

----------


## chip anderson

Everyone who was knowledgable (OMD's and the like) that I have tried freeform lenses on has been unimpressed with everything but the price!

----------


## Jacqui

Try the Autograph

----------


## RT

> Second, I thought about the Hoya ID Lifestyle in Trivex. Great AR and great warranty. But, I have had quite a few people try and not like, and it is not a true free-form


Actually, ID Lifestyle *is* true Free-Form.  "Free-Form" defines the method by which the back surface is created.  I can assure you that the ID Lifestyle is created using Free-Form techniques on really expensive equipment.  And unlike using Free-Form to merely make conventional toric surfaces, the back surface of the ID Lifestyle is truly the type of surface that one associates with Free-Form techniques.

Maybe what you're trying to say is that ID Lifestyle is not a true "individualized" progressive.  That would be a true statement.  Some of the optical elements in ID Lifestyle are molded in and thus not able to be individualized.  But some of the optical elements are created via true Free-Form techniques, and are thus individualizable.

However, I'm not sure I understand your linkage between either "Free-Form" or "individualized" and "wider areas".  "Wider areas" would be a function of the design of the lens, not a function of how it is produced ("Free-Form") or how the key descriptive parameters are specified ("individualized").  I could very easily use Free-Form to create the world's narrowest progressive.  Similarly, I could individualize that same narrow progressive to exactly your inset, frame size, pantoscopic tilt, etc.  

If "true Free-Form" is your goal, then may I suggest you reconsider the Hoyalux ID (from my employer).  On the ID, *both* the front and back surfaces are created via Free-Form.  That makes it double Free-Form!  Why settle for those measly "single Free-Form" lenses?

And to be just slightly combative, one common factor in this patient's previous lack of "WOW" has been, um, the guy fitting the lens.  Even Free-Form production of a highly individualized ultra-wide design may not be enough to overcome fitting issues.  

OK, sorry.  That may have been a little more than slightly combative.  But you get the point.  It IS possible that the design is not the culprit here.

----------


## Fezz

> Actually, ID Lifestyle *is* true Free-Form.  "Free-Form" defines the method by which the back surface is created.  I can assure you that the ID Lifestyle is created using Free-Form techniques on really expensive equipment.  And unlike using Free-Form to merely make conventional toric surfaces, the back surface of the ID Lifestyle is truly the type of surface that one associates with Free-Form techniques.
> *
> 1.)Maybe what you're trying to say is that ID Lifestyle is not a true "individualized" progressive.  That would be a true statement.  Some of the optical elements in ID Lifestyle are molded in and thus not able to be individualized.  But some of the optical elements are created via true Free-Form techniques, and are thus individualizable.
> * 
> *2.) However, I'm not sure I understand your linkage between either "Free-Form" or "individualized" and "wider areas".  "Wider areas" would be a function of the design of the lens, not a function of how it is produced ("Free-Form") or how the key descriptive parameters are specified ("individualized").  I could very easily use Free-Form to create the world's narrowest progressive.  Similarly, I could individualize that same narrow progressive to exactly your inset, frame size, pantoscopic tilt, etc.  
> * 
> *3.) If "true Free-Form" is your goal, then may I suggest you reconsider the Hoyalux ID (from my employer).  On the ID, both the front and back surfaces are created via Free-Form.  That makes it double Free-Form!  Why settle for those measly "single Free-Form" lenses?
> * 
> *4.) And to be just slightly combative, one common factor in this patient's previous lack of "WOW" has been, um, the guy fitting the lens.  Even Free-Form production of a highly individualized ultra-wide design may not be enough to overcome fitting issues.  
> ...


Rt, Thanks for your input. This is exactly what I am looking for. Let me break your post down!

1.) Thanks for clarifying what I was trying to say. You got the point! Sadly, I think the lens companies have clouded the realities to the point of mass confusion. This is better left for another thread!
2.) My point here is that the lens companies have projected an aura around these lenses. They have implied that the lenses that are free-form, individualized, super-sized, and fantasized are somehow better than conventional progressives. Maybe you could clarify how they are better. If they do not provide wider areas, what do they provide? Maybe they provide better optics....how? Enlighten me, please.
3.) Your point about "double Free-Form" is great. Thats exactly what I would expect from a company man spouting off about the companies product that costs "double" what other lenses do. Does it offer "double" the width of areas? Does it provide "double" benefits somehow? Does it provide "double" the pleasure as well? How is it better? Enlighten me.
4.) No worries. I not only have a thick head as you have alluded to, but I have thick skin as well! I think you are right, the design is not the problem. I think the problem lies much deeper. I think a lot has to do with over hyped claims by lens manufacturers. I think some has to do with dispenser ignorance in believing the hype. I also think some may have to do with an educated dispenser, a educated patient, discussing current lens options and deciding to gamble on new technology. I must admit, I am not a great dispenser. I have a lot to learn. That is why I am here. Enlighten me.

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## k12311997

Fezz,

I wish I could offer something constructive but I'm a free form virgin.  2 things strike me 

1. patient won't change frames over 4 years probably far to anal retentive to be WOWED by anything.

2. GASP the man, the myth , the legend dealing in Safilo!?!?

Good Luck :cheers:

----------


## Fezz

> Fezz,
> 
> I wish I could offer something constructive but I'm a free form virgin.  2 things strike me 
> 
> 1. patient won't change frames over 4 years probably far to anal retentive to be WOWED by anything.
> 
> 2. GASP the man, the myth , the legend dealing in Safilo!?!?
> 
> Good Luck :cheers:


:bbg:

A Free-Form Virgin, huh. Come on, everybody is doing it! Oh...it feels so good. Come on..try it. We won't tell!

1.) Very anal retentive! But, exactly the patient who I think would most benefit from supposed free-form, or individualized progressive lenses. Right? Also, having the exact same frame makes for a very good side by side comparison. When you compare apples to apples, it becomes very clear what differences exist! If any!!! Again, a very intelligent, sophisticated and educated consumer makes for a very good litmus test!!!

2.) Safilo is my go-to brand.  *L*O*V*E* them!

;):cheers::D:cheers:;)

----------


## jeanne2020

give 'em hell, fezz!

----------


## Fezz

> Actually, ID Lifestyle *is* true Free-Form.  "Free-Form" defines the method by which the back surface is created.  I can assure you that the ID Lifestyle is created using Free-Form techniques on really expensive equipment.  And unlike using Free-Form to merely make conventional toric surfaces, the back surface of the ID Lifestyle is truly the type of surface that one associates with Free-Form techniques.



This is very interesting.

Are Essilor 360 series of lenses "free-form"
Are Indo lenses "free-form"?
Are Seiko lenses "free-form"
Are Shamir lenses "free-form"?
Would a Younger Image be considered "free-form" if the same equipment that was used to produce a Hoya Lifestyle ID, was then used to produce an Image?
Would a Hoya Wide be considered "free-form" if the lens was produced on the same equipment as the Lifestyle ID?

Maybe you could educate me, and hopefully others. What exactly is "free-form techniques"?

----------


## Lee H

I received an Autograph II about three weeks ago and absolutely love them. I have worn Panamic, Concise, Ellipse, and the Summit CD Lifestyle, and I can honestly ay this is the best pair I've owned. The vision is so crisp and there is such a smooth transition from distance to near. I do not have any issues with reading or intermediate width as both are plenty wide and clear. I have the Kodak Clear on them and it seems good so far. Cleans well however not as slick and easy to clean as my Avance' or SHV. I was told the Crizal isn't available on the Autograph.

Good luck!

----------


## RT

> 2.) My point here is that the lens companies have projected an aura around these lenses. They have implied that the lenses that are free-form, individualized, super-sized, and fantasized are somehow better than conventional progressives. Maybe you could clarify how they are better. If they do not provide wider areas, what do they provide? Maybe they provide better optics....how?


Then your answer is obvious.  Find the oldest progressive design from before the era when those godless Marketeers took over, and use that.




> 3.  Your point about "double Free-Form" is great. Thats exactly what I would expect from a company man spouting off about the companies [sic] product that costs "double" what other lenses do. Does it offer "double" the width of areas? Does it provide "double" benefits somehow? Does it provide "double" the pleasure as well?


If you honestly thought that my post was an attempt to sell a particular product, then I need to rethink my writing style.  You were the one who wrote off a particular products because you believed it wasn't "true Free-Form".  I tried to humorously extrapolate that.  I admit my failure.

But you bring up points worthy of discussion.  Are newer designs (and their really, really sexy means of production) superior from a cost/benefit standpoint _for every patient?_  Undoubtedly not, or we would have discontinued the old designs.  Is a newer design right _for this patient_?  I don't know.  I'm not on the sales side of things, so I won't even pretend to tell you how to choose progressive designs.  But I can confirm for you which products are or are not made through "true Free-Form".

And I will note that even though you have managed to disappoint your patient the last 2 times he purchased from you, he came back again.  So somehow, these over-hyped new designs shamelessly hyped by those godless Marketeers have not negatively impacted your ability to retain customers(or you're the only show in town).

----------


## Fezz

Rt,

So....

...............can you please educate me as to how "free-form" lenses are better?

I think that is a simple question. You have tried to belittle me. You have been sarcastic. You have tried to pitch your companies products. But, you have yet to tell me why these lenses are better.

Excuse me if this seems "combative".

----------


## IndianaOD

> Everyone who was knowledgable (OMD's and the like) that I have tried freeform lenses on has been unimpressed with everything but the price!


:bbg: Sorry I got a laugh out of your statement that OMDs are knowledgeable  on optics!  :cheers:

----------


## MarcE

I got a few wows from the Definity. I have heard of people that have lots of wows from the Autograph. However, it is being discoed and replaced by the Autograph II. Hoya ID is my opticians favorite. Definity is my favorite.

If he wants wide intermediate, a computer lens is the choice for him.

I know what you mean by this being a good patient because he is used to better than 20/20 vision (I'm guessing), smart, very nit-picky, and aware of his optics. The problem my be that his vision is better than 20/20. There just isn't alot of improvement to be had.

You have ignored all lenses from the Empire? There is a good reason why they bought the Definity from J&J when they have a hundred good designs on the shelf.

My suggestion would be Definity (long corridor) in Trivex, w/Avance.  With an explanation that this is as good as it gets.  Mr Rententive, "A no-line multifocal is a lens designed to do everything.  Because of this, it has certain compromises.  The best choice for a wide reading and intermediate area is a separate specific indoor or computer lens."

----------


## RT

> Are Essilor 360 series of lenses "free-form"


I believe that Essilor uses a different term to describe non-toric back surfaces.




> Are Indo lenses "free-form"?


Unknown--I confess ignorance of the Indo brand in the US.  But one could, of course, put a "free-form" back surface on an Indo lens, or one from any manufacturer.  Whether the resulting lens could correct your patient's vision optimally is another question.




> Are Seiko lenses "free-form"


Some Seiko progressive lenses are produced conventionally using toric back curves.  Some are produced using spherical front curves and complex rear curves.  And some Seiko lenses are not progressives.  The 2nd group would be considered "free-form".




> Are Shamir lenses "free-form"?


I believe that Shamir was the company that actually introduced the term "Free-Form" to the optical industry.  Some Shamir progressive lenses are produced conventionally using toric back curves.  Some are produced using spherical front curves and complex rear curves.  The 2nd group would be considered "free-form".




> Would a Younger Image be considered "free-form" if the same equipment that was used to produce a Hoya Lifestyle ID, was then used to produce an Image?


Since "free-form" describes the method of production, and is not descriptive of the design at all, the answer in my mind is bizarrely "Yes".  You could put a non-toric surface on the rear surface of a Image progressive using "free-form" equipment.  Again, whether or not the resulting lens would correct your patient's vision optimally is a different question.




> Would a Hoya Wide be considered "free-form" if the lens was produced on the same equipment as the Lifestyle ID?


See previous answer.

The semantic argument here is that you have to separate the means of production from the design.  And yes, the terms have been both obscured and misinterpreted.  

It's sort of like the HDTV that I have that actually only shows a High Def picture if I have it connected to a High Def source.  I could have gotten a cheaper non-hyped TV with similar performance in certain environments (i.e. a non-HD source).  If my eyesight is no good because I bought the wrong lenses, does any HDTV make a difference over what I can see on conventional TV?  Can I conclude that because in some environments or for some people HDTV shows no benefit over conventional TV, that HDTV is over-hyped?

There is an optical lab (independently owned) that offers a "free-form" round seg.  It's not a particularly new or exciting design, yet you can pick up a trade magazine and see it "hyped" (oh, the humanity).  It gets attention because the method of production allows the design to be used in cases where molded round segs aren't available (like photochromics).  So...design = simple.  Means of production = interesting.

----------


## MarcE

> There is an optical lab (independently owned) that offers a "free-form" round seg. It's not a particularly new or exciting design, yet you can pick up a trade magazine and see it "hyped" (oh, the humanity). It gets attention because the method of production allows the design to be used in cases where molded round segs aren't available (like photochromics). So...design = simple. Means of production = interesting.


 
Also available:  round segs in 1.67. 1.60 polarized, 1.70, Resolution Transitions, Canary yellow polar. . .  Essentially anything that a SV SF blank is available.  And the lab doesn't hype an increased optical experience, or thinner lens. only increased accuracy.

----------


## Fezz

> The best choice for a wide reading and intermediate area is a separate specific indoor or computer lens."


Thanks for the info MarcE!

Mr. A. Retentive has many pairs of glasses. I have him in several wide trifocals. I also have him in several NVO, Computer-Only, and DVO SV setups. Again, this Dude is bright. He fully understands limitations, visual demands, etc. He uses the correct pair of eyewear for the task at hand. 

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## bob_f_aboc

Fezz,

Have you thought about going old-school with this guy? Maybe back to VIP or XL instead of all the new-fangled stuff. If he has been in the Individual, Comfort, Panamic, and GT, maybe he just needs to go back to basics. I had a pt several years ago that had tried the newest and greatest lenses and hated them. I put him in a VIP and he loved them.

I know I will get slammed for this, but sometimes technology isn't always the best answer.

Otherwise, I'm with RT, if you want a freeform with good AR go with the HOYA ID with Super HiVision. I have fit this quite a bit and had good results. I have learned to set the seg about 1mm lower than normal for best results with my patients.

My 2 cents.

----------


## Craig

> OK,ok...I'll admit it-I am not drinking the Free-Form Kool Aid! I have voiced my opinion on these forums enough for most to know my feelings. I have a patient in who I have tried several Free-Form, and Individual type lenses over the last few years with no *WOW* factor.
> 
> Rx as follows: Current
> 
> OD -3.00=-1.00 x 115
> OS -3.00=-1.00 x 070
> Add +2.50
> 
> 
> ...


The warranty is something excessive and ensures it as long as the RX is current! They actually have a 100% return policy at this point on the Unique as long as your returns are not excessive. This certainly makes it easy to do business and eliminates some creative returns. 
We do 100% non glare coatings and we have almost zero defects; it makes no difference if we use Hoya, Kodak, Crizal, Zeiss or Pech's in-house EZ-C coating. The main issue is the lens material and the scratch coating adhesion.

I have had less than 1% returns for non glare in the past 3 years. The only issue prior to that was on transitions 1.6 lenses. 

As far as the Unique's new non glare coating it does have an anti-static property and a coating to ensure no slippage in finishing. The best part is they ship in an average of 2 days and the thickness on plus and minus lenses is very consistent. That is the key! Ordering a pair of lenses and having it show up consistently in 3 days as ordered. We are up to 75% Trivex and can't wait for the polarized to be released. THe weight difference over the nose is very impressive to patients and as far as the WOW factor: This combination of optics and lens material is as good as it gets. 

We cannot create miracles for some people, but we can give it our best shot. But if you use any new design in free form the results are all pretty good. We just got a pair of the new Sola HDV for my lab person and it is fine; but not much different than the Autograph or Uniques that he also has.

Best of Luck!
Craig

----------


## TLG

Fezz,
You are the last person I need to direct to my site ordinarily as you graciously recommend it in post after post. However, you may want to check out my Digitally Surfaced lens page where I list each lens and describe how each lens surface (front/back) is created; digital surfacing, digital mold, std techniques etc.

I spent a ton of time researching as I am as confused as you (many more are also, we simply admit it). But I think I have it right for each lens listed. Check it out again at -> www.thelensguru.com/digitalChart.php and see if it lends any clarity to your questions.

----------


## Jubilee

The way I seperate things in my mind..."Free-Form" is digitally processed. No molding, just a straight to manufactured front. Creation, Definity, etc.

"individualized" is a segment of the "Free-form" lenses that compensates for the individual elements and position of wear. May not be necessary for Mr and Mrs Joe Schmo.. but for those who have less common Rxs or high visual demands.. the $$ can be worth it.

I explain it similar to AR. "normal" is looking out a window. You can see most detail, and the function is good. However when you step outside and look at the same scene, things are *that* much brighter, crisper, and clear. Not much.. and for many the window scene is fine.. however there are a good number of people who like the extra definition and contrast.

----------


## chip anderson

Got an E. Mail today from Optical Dynamics who claims to be making free form contact lenses.  Can't see them working unless they have a plastic that exactly the same index and the cornea or tears.

Chip

----------


## RT

> The way I seperate things in my mind..."Free-Form" is digitally processed. No molding, just a straight to manufactured front. Creation, Definity, etc.


Huh?  Creation uses conventional toric surfaces on the back surface.  The front surface is molded at the factory.  Therefore, Creation is absolutely, positively, not "Free-Form".

----------


## Jubilee

The marketing and the hoopla I went through to get my "Certified free-form specialist" designation from them was all about how instead of traditional molding on the Creation, they use a digital process.. resulting in crisper optics and truer design. Where as the Autograph is Individualized for the wearer.. 

Creation is listed as a free form lens, along with the newer versions of Piccolo and Office.. (losing the molds...)

----------


## rdcoach5

Fezz, I have 3 identical Rx's in 3 identical frames because I wanted to take out the variables My Kodak Unique and Sola HDV are both great for dist with the HDV better for intermediate and both equal for near. But my GT2 pair blows away both free-forms for int and near. There is no comparison for me at work and I really can't stand wearing the Unique at work if I have my GT2 pair with me. I have been wearing the HDV at work primarily bec they are transitions and I want to be able to show my pts how light they are inside or be able to walk out and show that they instantly turn dark. That being said, I consider the Definity to have an edge on any other progressive that we normally use. Every Zeiss ID we used was a Wow but very expensive. Just switched a hyperope from Seiko Super Proceed 2 to the Free-form version and got a " don't see any difference" response.

----------


## RT

> instead of traditional molding on the Creation, they use a digital process


That still means that the front surface is create via a mold.  So the _mold_ is created via Free-Form manufacturing techniques.  The _lenses_, on the other hand, are conventionally produced using a molded front and toric back surfaces.

----------


## snotbagel

firstly, free form progressives all use one basic design advantage over front molded lenses..the add curve is on the bqck, closer to the eye, and by its nature causes less distortion. How any particular company implements that is an issue.

I've tried some wow factor lenses, and I can say that only Definity comes close to free form performance. 

Vx 360 is very good, pentax prestige about the same, and indo lifemade expert in there too.

Whats the main difference to you?
VX costs ****, Pentax ****, and Indo starts at **** for the same technology. 

Really, I compared the field of view , (distance on all three is like an SV lens) and comfort sitting in front of my LCD screen (to test intermediate) and found them equal..

Definity is not too shabby either...

PS, Digital Eye Labs does wonders with the Shamir autograph attitude for wrap frames...taking advantage of free form to decenter the fitting points so that you can fit just about anyone into those huge sunglass frames without worrying about the cutout chart!

----------


## snotbagel

ps, I really like the GT2 also, but the Indo comes in at about the same price uncoated.

----------


## Fezz

Hey Snotbagel,

Watch the wholesale pricing! This is a public forum!

 Optiboard is a public discussion forum. We are composed of eyecare professionals and the consuming public. _In this regard, it is inappropriate to publish wholesale prices,_ or other propriatary information which might compromise the relationship between professionals and consumers. If you have questions of this nature, or information to provide, please use the Private Message system to ask the question or to diseminate the information. Posts containing pricing information deemed inappropriate, will be removed.

----------


## Refractingoptician.com

..

----------


## Uncle Fester

> With a name like "SnotBagel" on a public forum ,  how would you assume a level of Professionalism ?


*HEY!*

Fezz---How about the ultra-vue 28. Man what a lens for channel widths.:cheers: (Let us not discuss unwanted "astigmatism" on either side of the corridor.);)



Oh wait. They did discontinue that one. :cry:

----------


## snotbagel

get a life...

here's a post about prices!!!!

digital surfacing is going to turn the old tradition molded lens guys on their ears!
A blank from VX or sola, etc, costs XXX dollars, but digital labs use a semifinished SV blank that costs only x dollars!
In the extreme, they also use a hunk of plastic and surface both sides digitally. 

It costs a chunk o change to buy the digital lab, but not so much more than starting from scratch, and if you consider that most rx's are sv or progressive, then you have 80% of the market covered with only a couple of grand of stock ,as opposed to many g's for molded progressives!

By the way, someone wanted a freeform optimized for computer and near, should try pentax perfas Premier (fit 2mm lower than you usually would).
it also has a terrific AR, and priced reasonably $$ not $$$.

Is price an issue?  you bet, when we are no longer tied to VX, SOLa, etc, and can get better service AND product! Freeforms are my regular fit now, at the same price I was charging for GT2 and Physio!

----------


## hcjilson

> With a name like "SnotBagel" on a public forum ,  how would you assume a level of Professionalism ?


I don't really think its fair to judge someone because of their nomme de plume, although why someone would choose a name that's a turn off is beyond me. It would be a good idea to cut some slack for the newer member and get on with the subject at hand.Lets just assume the expertise is up to the level of his posts and go on from there.tx hj

----------


## snotbagel

Yah,I see that, by the standards of the posters here. However, I've been licensed since 1979 in NY, and actually started dispensing in '77. you can check, if you want.

http://www.nysed.gov/coms/op001/opsc...&plicno=004449


This board is great..old F-s like me can share , and hopefully learn too.
The screen name is from my youth, you know how mean some kids are, so I just took it and made it my own..besides, I NEVER conflict with other screen names!!!
Scott

----------


## beagleman

:hammer:Fezz, what are you trying to do?  If you haven't WOWed your patient by now, why keep hitting your head against the wall?  Sounds like the son trying to please his father in some futile Digital Quest.

Patients who are "sharpeners" notice very small changes in their vision...anything from the RX to the lens design.  Your patient sounds like a "non-sharpener", and a rather insensitive one at that!  He simply cannot notice any differences.  You trying to get a reaction out of somebody who isn't noticing anything! 

At the major optometry school I work at, manufacturers give us a steady diet of lens coupons.  I happen to be a sharpener.  One of my collegues is just the opposite.  She can wear anything and doesn't notice any difference.  I notice a huge difference between older designs and the newer free form designs.  I figure, why not recommend the latest designs to everybody so that I am encompassing all patient types from sharpeners to non-sharpeners.  The important thing is, you don't need to go into much detail about the technology with the patient.  They don't need all of our opti-babble.  I just try to get my patient into what I think is the best product given their needs and RX.

----------


## Fezz

Thanks for the reply BeagleMan!

I see your point!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## MarcE

Scott,
Are you using the Definity or the Indo Lifemade?  From my experience, Definity is much more expensive that GT2.  I can't sell them for the same price.  Are you saying that the Indo Lifemade is a WOW lens at a price similiar to the GT2??
Thanks for your input.:)

----------


## snotbagel

Right now, GT2 is cheaper  by a very few than lifemade, and both compare favorably in optics to definity. Lifemade has two iterations: inicia and expert, referring to soft vs hard design. the expert has a vx360 field of view, if sharpness is your wow factor. However, comfort can be a wow factor, and the inicia as well as definity and Pentax perfas prime have that in spades.

I wear both, and am not too particular about it. I DO have a 92 inch projection HD theater, and can say DEFINITIVLY that VX360 , Indo Expert, and Pentax Prestige all have a perfect distance field of view. i give the comfort and computer edge to Indo, however..

PS, please pay attention to all the basics of aspheric fitting, such as panto, faceform, and vertex. These make a huge difference too. 
Shamir autograph, to name one, can adjust the lens design to compensate for odd fitting frames, if you measure and supply these to the lab. these are kludges, however, and there's no substitute for the basics.

The example here is the "keyhole" effect. The closer you are to the keyhole, the wider your field of view through it. This is also why back surface curves work better than front..

----------


## Refractingoptician.com

,,

----------


## snotbagel

sneeze on yours if you don't on mine..

----------


## Fezz

Mr. Retentive picked up his new pair yesterday. I ended up using the Hoya ID LIfestyle in Trivex.

No WOW.

But, he did seem to appreciate the clarity and he was able to find the zones quickly. He wasn't turning cartwheels, high-fiving me, and screaming praises, but he seemed pleased.

A success.......I guess!

:D:cheers::D

----------


## bob_f_aboc

> Mr. Retentive picked up his new pair yesterday. I ended up using the Hoya ID LIfestyle in Trivex.
> 
> No WOW.
> 
> But, he did seem to appreciate the clarity and he was able to find the zones quickly. He wasn't turning cartwheels, high-fiving me, and screaming praises, but he seemed pleased.
> 
> A success.......I guess!
> 
> :D:cheers::D


 Some days anything less than an @$$ chewing by a patient is a success!

----------


## DocInChina

There is so much written here about particular designs, much of what is written is information gleaned from a black box. Much of what has been posted deals with contour maps rather than optical clarity and optimization. Having a lens with wide reading areas or wide intermediate areas but with few data points and few optimized points cannot give the clarity of a lens with many data points that have been optimized across many fields of gaze.

Free Form designs can actually be made in an infinite of combinations and not just the designs being promoted by manufacturers. Designs can be optimized based upon prescription as well as visual requirement for each patient. The higher the visual requirement or visual need, the free form designs can be designed to fit that need. Designs can have Front Surface Progressive with aspheric or spheric back surface or Back Surface Progressive with aspheric or spheric front surfaces. The designs can be optimized across a wide range of data points. The more data points being optimized and the more aspheric curves being generated, the better the optics, the more time is required to produce, the higher the cost will be for the end product. 

Manufacturers weigh the costs to produce and the time needed to produce against the selling price. Anything else that is used to describe free form designs is just fluff and marketing.

----------


## eyeguy99

I am in belief that we are being brainwashed in that these new progressives are the cats meow.  The only 2 designs that patients have really noticed a difference in my office is the NIKON SEE_MAX and ESSILOR PHYSIO 360.  I've had better luck with an older long corridor than some of these new designs.  I believe that many have issues with the flatter base curves of today also.  Cheers

----------


## Robert Martellaro

> Mr. Retentive picked up his new pair yesterday. I ended up using the Hoya ID LIfestyle in Trivex.
> 
> No WOW.
> 
> But, he did seem to appreciate the clarity and he was able to find the zones quickly. He wasn't turning cartwheels, high-fiving me, and screaming praises, but he seemed pleased.
> 
> A success.......I guess!
> 
> :D:cheers::D


The clarity was primarily due to the higher Abbe material. Good/smooth zone aquisition is PAL design. He probably would not see any difference between this lens and the standard Summit CD in Trivex. 

I wear almost the same Rx as your client- let me know if there are additional issues and I'll loan you my shoes.

I remember the 7027 (Team or Elasta?). Tough as nails (stainless with a monoblock spring hinge?) if I remember correctly.

----------


## sumit082

I am an optometrist from  India and into practice since 3 years and have been dispensing PAL'S mostly shamir & of essilor family and never had any problem with physio or panamic , but recently hoya came into market and they launched there hoyalux id lifestyle and zeiss launched there carat -hd both say these lenses are freeform and much better then physio 360 .Now i am in big dilemma wether i should switch my patients to these products or continue with varilux family is there any benefit of dispensing freeform lenses? :Confused:

----------


## DocInChina

Welcome to Optiboard!

I suggest you do a forum search regarding free form lenses. There is already a lot of information that has been covered previously. If you still have questions I know everyone will do their best to answer you. Once you read through the previous posts you will have a better idea on how to choose your candidate patients for free form designs.

Eric

----------


## sumit082

> Welcome to Optiboard!
> 
> I suggest you do a forum search regarding free form lenses. There is already a lot of information that has been covered previously. If you still have questions I know everyone will do their best to answer you. Once you read through the previous posts you will have a better idea on how to choose your candidate patients for free form designs.
> 
> Eric


thanks eric

----------


## beagleman

> I am an optometrist from India .... Now i am in big dilemma wether i should switch my patients to these products or continue with varilux family is there any benefit of dispensing freeform lenses?


I'm a teaching optician at one of our major optometry schools.  There are varying schools of thought amongst our staff of opticians regarding your dilemma.  Some feel that if Varilux is working, keep the patient in it.  I am of the school that if there is a better lens on the market, our patients deserve the best.  I have switched dozens of Varilux Comfort wearers to the Kodak Unique and they all love it right from the dispense.  I'm sure similar results with the Hoya digital lens.  If you drove a 1995 Toyota Camry to the dealer to buy a new car, would you expect to buy another 1995 Camry?  Wouldn't your prefer a 2009 car with all its improvements?  The Physio 360, as far as I can tell, is a renamed Panamic, still front side molded technology, and digital surfacing back side.  None of our staff like it, so we don't dispense it.  I tried it, it looks clear, but I get a headache.  Patients who tried it have similar comments.

----------


## HarryChiling

You know how easy it would be to compare a companies FF offering to their traditional front side progressive blank with a table of values showing which powers would benefit the most from the FF in their line of products.  I think drk even mentioned that one manufacturer had a color coded chart in thier literature, too bad we can't quantify the difference beyond red, yellow, green, and blue.  Make no mistake the manufacturers are pretty much correct inthe fact that most would not understand how to utilize these figures so they use what we learned in elementary school LCD or Least Common Denominator.  That means all of us get to be treated like the dumbest of us.

----------


## Chris Ryser

> Originally Posted by *hcjilson*  
> _I don't really think its fair to judge someone because of their nomme de plume, although why someone would choose a name that's a turn off is beyond me._


 



> *Yeah ok , but , I used to enjoy a 12 grain bagel with strawberry cream cheese at Tim Hortons in the morning ..... I don't anymore .*


 





> *i won 't.............  sneeze on yours if you don't on mine..*


No comment needed...............................:bbg::bbg::bbg::bbg:

----------


## Cherry Optical

> I think Craig will suggest Unique. I actually kicked that around, but am unsure of the AR warranties and durability.


We have had nothing but great results and quick turn times on Kodak CleAR and Kodak Clean and CleAR from Signet Armorlite's Signetek laboratory in CA.  They do a lot of lab to lab work.  

Great quality product.

-Adam

----------


## Fezz

> We have had nothing but great results and quick turn times on Kodak CleAR and Kodak Clean and CleAR from Signet Armorlite's Signetek laboratory in CA.  They do a lot of lab to lab work.  
> 
> Great quality product.
> 
> -Adam


Thanks for the input Adam!

:cheers::cheers::cheers:

----------


## sumit082

> I'm a teaching optician at one of our major optometry schools. There are varying schools of thought amongst our staff of opticians regarding your dilemma. Some feel that if Varilux is working, keep the patient in it. I am of the school that if there is a better lens on the market, our patients deserve the best. I have switched dozens of Varilux Comfort wearers to the Kodak Unique and they all love it right from the dispense. I'm sure similar results with the Hoya digital lens. If you drove a 1995 Toyota Camry to the dealer to buy a new car, would you expect to buy another 1995 Camry? Wouldn't your prefer a 2009 car with all its improvements? The Physio 360, as far as I can tell, is a renamed Panamic, still front side molded technology, and digital surfacing back side. None of our staff like it, so we don't dispense it. I tried it, it looks clear, but I get a headache. Patients who tried it have similar comments.


thanks beagleman ...i have tried hoya's summit pro switched few patients reluctantly but it worked ,summit pro had no WOW factor but created no trouble either now i am keen on dispensing  hoya's ID and kodak's unique is also available so i would love to try that too.

----------


## AMBERPOG

This is a genuine free-form back-surfaced progressive. The price point is VERY reasonable, starts at <whole price removed>. And is available in CR-39, Hi-index up to 1.74, Transitions, Polarized & Drivewear.

If you want more information you can email or message me.

----------


## Steve Machol

As per the forums rules, please do not post wholesale prices. Thank you.

----------


## Craig

> This is a genuine free-form back-surfaced progressive. The price point is VERY reasonable, starts at <whole price removed>. And is available in CR-39, Hi-index up to 1.74, Transitions, Polarized & Drivewear.
> 
> If you want more information you can email or message me.


Sounds good to me.  What equipment are you using to surface the lenses and what center thickness are you getting on a minus lens?  

I will try some of the 1.74; no one else has a free form version in the US.

Craig

----------


## jjbons

Craig,

The HOYAlux iD is available in HOYA's 1.70 material.  This is generally ground to a 1.0 CT.  

JB

----------


## Fezz

I have dispensed a few Shamir Autograph II's and Seiko Succeeds in the last few weeks!

I am finally getting the "WOW" factor!

The most "WOW" is from the Autograph II!

"Wow....these lens engravings are annoying!"
"Wow....why did they make those marks so big?"
"Wow......I never noticed those marks on my old progressives!"
"Wow..........why are these lenses scratched..oh wait...it looks like the Egyptians marked these up..oh wow!


UGH!!!!!

;):cheers: :cry: :cheers::shiner:

----------


## Johns

> I have dispensed a few Shamir Autograph II's and Seiko Succeeds in the last few weeks!
> 
> I am finally getting the "WOW" factor!
> 
> The most "WOW" is from the Autograph II!
> 
> "Wow....these lens engravings are annoying!"
> "Wow....why did they make those marks so big?"
> "Wow......I never noticed those marks on my old progressives!"
> ...


Brother Fezz....

You seem to not be approaching this in the spirit of progress.  You have chosen the correct lens, but you have chose the wrong type of customers!

Most of our customers that drive Jaguars don't care that they are outperformed by Toyota Camry (even the '95 model) in terms of reliability, mileage, trunk space, and headroom.  After all, they can afford to drive a Jaguar, and they tend to ignore the some of the discomforts.

You need to change your approach, as well as your attitude towards these remarkable products.  And if you really are looking for the "WOW!" factor at dispensing.  Instead of using traditional reading cards, try using a brochure from the "Tanned Isle Nudist Resort".  Works like a charm!
:cheers:
Good luck...

Brother Johns

----------


## TLG

> I have dispensed a few Shamir Autograph II's and Seiko Succeeds in the last few weeks!
> 
> I am finally getting the "WOW" factor!
> 
> The most "WOW" is from the Autograph II!
> 
> "Wow....these lens engravings are annoying!"
> "Wow....why did they make those marks so big?"
> "Wow......I never noticed those marks on my old progressives!"
> ...


Hilarious...
but seriously, are they _that_ noticable?

----------


## Fezz

> Hilarious...
> but seriously, are they _that_ noticable?


 
OOOOOHHHHH YEEEEEAAAAAHHH!!!

They make the Younger Image markings look like......nothing!

I am talking BILLBOARDS!!!


UGH!!!

:shiner::cheers: :cry: :cheers::D

----------


## Lee H

These markings can be *much* more noticeable than any markings I have _ever_ seen. With that being said, I know for a fact, the labs that actually surface the Autograph 2's, can adjust the engraving device to make the markings less noticiable (same as other PALs). 
I have a pair of Autograph 2 lenses and I can hardly find the markings.

 :Cool: 


ps. I absolutely love my lenses!

----------


## Fezz

Thanks for supporting my observations Lee!

I am rather gun-shy to sell these lenses! Honestly, I have a pair that I checked in today.....that I feared calling the patient!!! I am DEAD serious....these markings are like _BILLBOARDS_!!!!!!

My thoughts..........

Holy smokes....if these markings are so noticeable.....why do I sweat, worry, get a sour belly over,  hairline scratches, pits, flaws, etc.,  that I sometimes bounce at final inspection!!!!

----------


## Chris Ortiz

Thanks Fezz for bringing it on the free form topics. Still a very confusing arena out there. I realize this is an older post, but the same challenges exist for us as dispensers. We end up going backwards if a pt is unhappy and demands their old design and to be refunded the difference. That happened in our practice many times with the Shamir lenses. We have had great success with the Unique and Seiko free forms so far. Good topic still for today as the market is flooded with different ways to spin this technology.

----------


## Randle Tibbs, ABOM

Does anyone remember the Varilux Plus ( I believe that is the lens I'm thinking about, but at my age, who knows )? Talk about billboards, you could see the engravings across the room. Essilor said it took 80D's of accomodation for the patient to see, which may have been correct. They just didn't factor in the patients family and friends who could see them.

Randle

----------

