Reading glasses work fine when the screen is very close to your face such as a laptop screen. However if it's a separate monitor that's ~30 inches away, reading glasses are slightly blurry which can lead to eyestrain and headaches.
https://www.warbyparker.com/learn/wp-content/uploads/2023/04...
Look into it if you suspect it's a contributor to headaches: https://www.google.com/search?q=computer+glasses+%22intermed...
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 materials tend to have poorer dispersion, but especially in the mid-range 1.6ish, there are wide variations in quality at the same index. Glass tends to be best, if your prescription is light enough that you can handle the weight. Polycarbonate and acrylic are awful. MR-8 is in the middle, and what I've settled on for recent computer glasses.
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's a polymer, not glass, but its Abbe number is 43, which is perfectly adequate.
Crown glass, with its Abbe number of 59, is superior, but the eyeball can discern differences only up to 45-50, so most of Crown glass's improvement over Trivex is imperceptible.
This is partly why it's not offered in glasses (again, in the US, at least according to my optometrist). It is also twice as heavy, shatters (polymers like Trivex don't), and scratches more easily.
- high (58) Abbe number
- thick (1.5 index)
- cheapest
Actually buying CR-39 lens might require solving a dark pattern maze of online or offline options, since the cost is so low.
I'd used the same material for my outdoor/sports/driving frames but it's higher density caused them to slide down my nose during activity so the next pair I opted for Trivex.
--
¹–CR-39 requires full frame spectacles, as drilling holes is verboten.
²–Shamir Autograph III, awesome & highly recommended.
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 overlap, we can get a sharp focus on yellow. And, the visual system makes the full spectrum work by deriving the red vs. green concepts from the difference between the two cone responses. Blue focus is accepted as a necessary sacrifice.
Now I always go for the thickest lenses (which are also usually the cheapest) for this reason. My prescription is -3.75, and there isn't any noticeable difference with thinner lenses.
The lens material you've now chosen actually has the best optical properties out of all the plastic lens materials. Its only downside is that the refractive index is only 1.5 which does mean they will be a little bit thicker than the high index ones.
You could also try a material called Trivex which also has low chromatic aberration while being a little thinner than the material you are using which is called CR-39
Thing is, I ignored it for about 10 years and my brain simply ignored whatever signal was coming from that eye. I'd look at things and see no blurring unless I closed my right eye. However, at a certain crossover distance my brain "switches over" because my left eye has amazing close vision and my right eye doesn't. I can actually feel it when this happens, like a physical sensation. No headaches, but it is "odd".
Anyway, I decided to get glasses, and it turns out I need two different prescriptions. One is close up (not longsightedness, it is still a myopia lens). The other is for 1m-∞
What kills me is going into the office where I am switching between glasses. Different rooms with different Zoom screens. At home is much nicer where I just have one big monitor to watch.
I take my glasses off to read my phone most of the time. Technically my primary glasses are progressives but it is nicer to take them off.
Same. I wear progressive lenses and I feel like they do fine as far as being able to read the text on my phone or for reading a book. But I tend to take off my glasses anyway to do these things. I'm not entirely sure why this is since I seem to be able to read the text fine with the glasses. My hypothesis is that I like being closer to the text so that it fills up more of my visual field which helps me mentally focus on the text better.
That almost seems to reduce eyestrain as well, at least for me, as they're still good enough to see everything (I can't read text across the room but I can halfway across the room), just not without some light blur on things, and I seem to have trained my brain to stop trying to focus on things, just let it stay in the blur (at least while I have my intermediate glasses on), and that seems to relax my eyes more.
But the intermediate glasses are super clear for when I'm on the computer, which is a good chunk of the day and where I really need to see nice and sharp, as I'm manipulating things with pixel precision at times (game ui, web ui, board game graphic design).
Currently wearing, to look at arms-length monitor screen, add +1.0. Will move out to the porch to read and switch to add +1.5. Will come back to cook and switch to my basic prescription.
I must put on and take off 300 pairs of glasses a day. But I don't care. I can't do anything else.
I'm nearsighted and don't need glasses to see my computer screen clearly at all. But nevertheless I started getting headaches from eye strain.
Went to the optometrist, got a pair of glasses just to reduce eye strain at screen distance. Zero difference in sharpness, but I can work all day long with zero eye fatigue.
It's not for avoiding outright headaches (I don't get vision headaches) but it's clearly more comfortable. It's quite possible that what's pleasant is in part the change of pace - but it is also better adapted for sharpness.
12 inches?
that's way too close
Imagine them lying down or propped up on their elbows with the book on the floor. Then that distance seems about right.
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 crisply, clearly, and easily in a way that I haven't seen it in a decade.
When I swap back and forth between my regular lenses and my occupational lenses, the difference is stark. With my regular lenses there's a part of the screen that's about a half dollar coin in size that's clear and in focus. The rest of the screen is every so slightly blurry. I have to move my head to constantly adjust the focal point, or move my eyes and struggle to focus.
When I switch to my occupational lenses, the entire screen is clear. I don't have to move my head. I don't have to fight to focus. Where I look, it's crisp.
No wonder I was struggling! I was fighting to focus all day long. I suffer from almost no eye fatigue now. If my eyes are tired, it's usually because I'm tired and it's been a long day.
The downside is I now have to juggle two pairs of glasses instead of one, but that's oh so totally been worth it. I'm not going back.
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 risks of complications, generally worse vision outcomes, longer recovery, etc. The lens implantation process is even undoable and as safe as cataract surgery which has been done since the 1970s.
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 nature of the complications for the latter is also more along the lines of "an eye infection for a month" instead of something permanent.
I definitely suggest researching it (and not mentally lumping it in with Lasik, because they are quite different). Cheesy, but my only regret is not having done it years sooner.
Ever since my elderly friend had cataract surgery (5 years ago) she finds bright light painful, so she spends less time outdoors.
try bandaids on your fingers, it takes 21 days to form a habit. buy a few big boxes, 30 bandaids a day is cheaper than a beer
I get my glasses in ANSI rated safety glasses so wearing glasses all the time doubles as protection from all the things that could get in my eyes. This is useful if you have hobbies where that is a worry, though for most people you are fine without.
What are the rest of the words? Or the auto'correct'-corrections?
You would still wear* and after 45 everyone does* perhaps?
I still dream of being able to see first thing when I wake up.
Using it outside of its intended distance will cause eye strain since your eyes won't be able to focus properly.
My provider calls them "computer glasses". It does not have blue light filtering as I do work with implementing web designs and color accuracy does matter to me.
I totally recommend computer glasses for anyone who works all day looking at a computer screen.
They would be a separate prescription / lens type (as in not progressive I think) compared to daily use glasses. I do have to swap to my daily use when not using my computer glasses outside of sitting and looking at a monitor.
Using my daily use for computer monitor reading doesn't feel "right" compared to my computer glasses. There is a clear difference between them.
Mine are more useful that I anticipated when I'm not using them for work. I would advise against anybody driving with the wrong pair of glasses, but I can see significantly better with my occupational lenses than without. I would not trust them at night, but during the day I can see well enough I am not concerned about my driving. I don't intend to drive with them, but there has been the occasion here or there when I had to run somewhere quickly and forgot to swap my glasses.
It also helps that mine are progressives, so the very very top part of the lens is my "regular" prescription. I can use that to focus on something at a distance if necessary.
>They would be a separate prescription / lens type (as in not progressive I think) compared to daily use glasses. I do have to swap to my daily use when not using my computer glasses outside of sitting and looking at a monitor.
Like I mentioned above, mine are both occupational and progressive. I'd like to try non-progressive occupational lenses to see if I like them better, but I'm not convinced it would be worth the money.
I've only done it a handful of times, though. And also I wouldn't do so at night.
I don't find that at all, personally. I wear my computer glasses almost all the time in the house and just let myself not try to focus on things. If anything it seems to be better than my normal distance lenses for eye strain, for me, because my eyes do try to focus with my normal lenses since it's supposed to be perfectly clear, where I know there's a good reason they're not in focus when I'm not wearing them.
My distance glasses have progressive lenses, which may be part of that, as there's different strength depending on where you're looking at in the glasses. I've been tempted to remove progressive lenses from my next pair, as I tend to take them off to read anyway, and then I'd get a flat prescription like I have on my computer lenses.
I have two glasses that have lenses with a similar prescription. The older one has some basic lenses and anything outside the center gets gradually less clear towards the edges. The newer one has aspherical lenses and even the areas near the edges are quite clear. It wasn't expensive either. The best lens I have used was probably a zeiss one but I'm guessing the full featured zeiss is probably quite expensive.
This can be mitigated with custom magnetic clip lenses, e.g. Chemistrie. Tiny magnets are implanted into your current frame. Clip lens changes the focal length of your existing glasses by a fixed offset. Computer or reading clip can be changed in seconds. They also have polarized clips for instant sunglasses on your existing frame, which are better than Transitions/photochromic because they work while driving and are instant on/off.
By asking to talk to only those who have problems, you could be self selecting for a population who may not help you actually solve your problem, even if they mean well.
This is just my experience of course. When I did my initial research, I asked a question on Blind about progressive lenses. Lots of people said they have progressive lenses and they have zero problems.
If I was forced to guess, I would say that some (or maybe even all) of these folks who start talking about the computer glasses……it makes me wonder if they simply under-bought their lenses. Yes glasses are expensive. Getting a better lens will cost more. Yes yes, the Luxotica this and that. I don’t care about any of that crap. All I care about is getting the best lens possible and so should you!
Do what I mean!
Not all, because I'm one of them and I think progressive lenses are dumb and won't buy them, but I will buy top of the line distance correction and get it checked to make sure it's correct and then get top of the line computer glasses and make sure that they're correct too. I will get transition lenses though. Those are pretty great (except in a car I guess).
I don't need glasses that sacrifice fov for distance and also for my computer when I can just keep the right glasses with my computer.
Maybe my astigmatism correction is causing problems, though it's a small correction. Do you have any astigmatism in your prescription?
What's great with this lenses for computer use is that anything from screen to close up is clear so they're great for hobby work, etc.
OP for now just wants to talk to people, I assume to understand their issues, what they tried, what makes it better and what makes it worse for them. Talking to people volunteering for a call is not dangerous.
For all we know, OP will not see any pattern that fits their hypothesis and leaves it at that.
Anyway, I've been fighting progressives for about 5 years now. I have 2 pairs that I got a couple years apart but could never bring myself to wear them. Like some others have said, I much prefer having a pair of medium distance computer lenses. They end up being the glasses I wear when I'm at home even when I'm not in front of the computer. I now have to lift them up to see up close, but that's a reasonable compromise to wearing progressives.
I really want to find an optometrist who uses some alternative to the old phoropter system. My prescription is currently a bit "off" and I swear it's because the phoropter system is fundamentally flawed. My eyes adjust and adapt during the test, causing me to misreport the optimal setting. There just isn't enough time in a typical appointment to detect eyestrain or other issues with a particular prescription.
Presbyopia hit me about 10 years ago. Some people I know use all-day contacts for distance vision then wear glasses on top for computer use and reading. I'm considering it.
$10K MSRP for the optician's profiling equipment, https://navaophthalmic.com/product/i-profiler-plus/
I don't sit at a screen much these days, but for a while when I did, I had a computer prescription pair that I swapped on every day when I sat down at my desk, and swapped off when I went to leave. The distance vision with it was good enough to walk around the office or down the road to lunch, but not good enough to drive to and from the office.
After moving and getting a new optometrist, I got a different main prescription, and was told to try wearing them at the computer instead of swapping. Lo and behold, they worked without causing headaches, which is why I ended up with a computer pair previously.
For all of the time I've been in glasses, I've read books without them.
I'm probably not interesting to talk to, because I'm no longer in front of a computer when I can avoid it and I'm in my 40's so I'm staring down (pun intended) some vision changes in the near future anyway.
Minus 2 or 3 in both eyes with a cylindrical correction as well.
I'm skeptical that that can work. I suppose you can administer a basic eye test and get a close-enough prescription, but this is really important and I want to get it exactly right.
I kinda wish I could give it a try, just to see what they can manage to do without all of the tools that an optometrist would apply. But I've got some concerns (which is why I made the appointment) and I'd rather have somebody look closely.
What you also need though is someone to look into your eye and machines still don't do everything an optometrist does there. (though there are other machines that do things your optometrist cannot)
Furthermore an assessment by an optometrist should also check for glaucoma and macular issues.
Further reading: https://eyewiki.org/Dry_Eye_Syndrome
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Perfluorohexyloctane
It's really eerie how moist it makes your eyes feel after even a few uses. I have definite reservations about instilling megadoses of PFAS directly into my eyes but there's no doubt that it is amazingly effective.
This seems like something that could have a technical solution beyond just putting liquid in your eyes. I am wary as liquids are sometimes contaminated with bacteria or other substances. Perhaps screens or headbands that trigger blink reactions.
Does the problem persist with contact lenses? Soft contact lenses can do a better job of correcting vision for someone with keratosis, as they conform to the wonky surface of the cornea.
Edit: Just realised you're probably doing market research rather than asking for yourself. Either way, people with keratosis, who don't fit into the box, might be something to consider.
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 eyesight, but I haven't investigated further.
Maybe try e-ink? There are e-ink monitors on the market if that works, if the problem's the light. You can also try software like Redshift[1] for regular monitors.
If it's your neck, at least put some books under your monitor stand, if you're not able to get better monitor mounts. Or lower your chair. You should be looking straight ahead for your monitor, so your neck muscles shouldn't have to do much work.
Definitely not a good plan, especially Ibuprofen. My mother took Ibuprofen for years to manage her arthritis and that absolutely wrecked her kidneys. Not to mention Ibuprofen can also cause internal bleeding. It's a quick short term fix but not a good long term solution.
As opposed to what? It's all metabolised by something, choose what you wreck. Take paracetamol routinely instead and you'll wreck your liver instead.
It’s much harder to address the root issue (speaking as someone who’s taken their fair share of pain meds themselves), but it’s infinitely better in the long term.
My monitor is at the appropriate height (eyes are roughly even with top of the screen) and distance (about arms-length), so I'm looking straight ahead.
The rest I'll consider though, thanks.
I didn't start doing that (sitting on stools) till I had been meditating for a long time, so it wasn't that different than sitting on the floor in half lotus position, which I had extensive practice doing.
I've been doing it for >10 years now; I will confess that when I have a meeting in a meeting room with proper chairs, I do really enjoy the chair back. It's all about using your body in a variety of ways.
This could be the problem, especially if you are close to 40 years old. You may be starting to develop presbyopia, which is typical. In the early stages you can still read and focus on closeup things fine, so you may not realize it is starting, but in the background your eyes are, in fact, straining a lot and causing headaches.
I think my water intake is fine, but I don't have a specific measurement.
My last appointment was a couple of years ago, and I don't believe they raised any issues about it then.
I'll see about an appointment.
Make sure your posture is correct when sitting in front of a screen before attempting anything else.
I wear hard contact lenses most of the time, but I do have glasses. My glasses prescription is around +21/+23 (I would fit right in hanging out with Milhouse Van Houten or Professor Hubert J. Farnsworth), but I only wear them in emergencies because I get headaches and dizziness after 10/15 minutes of wearing them. I mostly keep 'em for the novelty of showing people just how thick my glasses are. 8)
My eyes do get tired after long screen days, resulting in blurry vision and watery eyes. I also get headaches on a somewhat frequent basis.
If that's useful at all, I'd be happy to chat more.
It adds a lot to the cost of the glasses, though. Easily $75 to just get half of the thickness.
Go to an eye doctor, they can diagnose. It's likely just something as simple as an astigmatism and some glasses should help you with that.
https://www.conshohockeneye.com/why-am-i-seeing-double-visio...
> Astigmatism is one of the most common causes of monocular double vision, and can be easily corrected by glasses or contact lenses.
I'm unable to get CXL for at least a year due to demand.
What sucks the most about the diagnosis is that the opthalmologist explained that there's essentially no treatment, it's progression can only be slowed, and I'll never be able to get LASIK or SMILE.
Also, currently a broke college student, so don't really have the money to visit a good ophthalmologist :)
(This is not medical advice)
For this case, dark text on a light background is much better than light on dark. Dark on light, the light halation blends more or less evenly over the dark letter stems, resulting is slightly lower overall contrast but sharp lines. Light on dark, it's Las Vegas in the rain.
Quoting a previous comment of mine (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42796950#42797424)
> A big thing not often spoken about with eye strain is dry eye caused by the lack of blinking due to focusing on screens too close to our face. This is an evolutionary phenomenon--close dangers cause extreme focus without blinking. Extreme focus on close items reduces our blinks. Our eye lids have glands in them that release oils on your eye with each blink. These oils help prevent the watery part of your tears from evaporating. When it evaporates your eyes dry out causing discomfort and potentially pain.
> If you don't blink enough, the oil doesnt get on your eyes and eventually, in extreme cases, the glands can even die. A lack of oil in tears can cause extreme eye fatigue and even pain.
> This is why dry eyes is on the rise. Remember to blink!
> I actually built a little web app to count my blinks. See https://dryeyestuff.com/. Not perfect, just a prototype. 100% free.
Would love to chat about your experience in any case. I'm at jbornhorst [at] gmail.com if interested.
Presbyopia: https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/presbyopia/sy...
Presbyopia usually becomes noticeable in your early to mid-40s and continues to worsen until around age 65.
You should ask a qualified or licensed optometrist or optician or whatever it's called wherever you live.
AIUI:
- you don't adjust CYL
- The amount you add is roughly 0.75, plus an extra 0.05 for each year above 40yo.
For example, at age 50:
Add = 0.75 + 0.05 × (50 − 40) = 0.75 + 0.5 = 1.25
So let's say that this person's regular glasses are -3.25 in each eye. Their computer glasses would be -2.00 in each eye.
Don't trust random strangers on the internet!
The downside of this is that I now find it very difficult to read computer screens and my phone while wearing my distance lenses. The practice of holding things further away to be able to read them always was, I suppose, inevitable.
If I accidentally wear the progressives at my desk, I usually notice within half an hour that I'm not comfortable.
With the computer glasses, everything is clear (including my laptop screen, which is below my monitor).
The diagnosis: keratoconus (thinning and ultimately misshapen cornea). The prescription: highly-corrected rigid scleral contact lenses. The result: radical. I would describe my uncorrected vision as 480p, glasses as 1080p, and scleral contacts as 4k.
The scleral prescription makes my medium and far vision great while further limiting my ability to focus closely. I experimented with "monovision" to have one near-focused eye and one far-focused eye with my brain sorting out the difference, but I could tell that it resulted in lower resolution. I optimize by sticking with the medium-far prescription and wearing 1.5x reading glasses for anything within a few feet. It works great.
If you're in a similar boat, I can't recommend it enough to get checked for keratoconus. To get that you'll want to find a place that can do a corneal tomographic scan with a device like a Pentacam. Oh, and try to not rub your eyes and tell your kids the same because it's believed to be a major cause. I used to do it for fun as a kid to make colors while I was bored.
Take a look at the test @globnomulous I hope that this helps people.
They're expensive, there was a learning curve for getting them on correctly, and it took several followup appointments to get the correct fit from the manufacturer, but I can wear the lenses almost all day and they give me clear, sharp, 20/20 vision.
Also, when I'm wearing them I need reading glasses to read up close--my uncorrected vision actually compensates for my slight age related nearsightedness. But my vision is so much better I don't mind at all!
The back story is that I had lifelong astigmatism and 2 eyes with different powers (one more farsighted than the other one) which led to some mild amblyopia (lazy eye) that I've had since childhood. My vision wasn't "that bad" so I got by without using my glasses for a long time. But when I tried using my several year old prescription glasses I found that presbyopia (that age related inability to focus on anything up close) made the glasses almost useless for reading.
Even though I'm a dev who looks at screens all day, I didn't think I minded, but I noticed in recent years that my appetite for reading books had disappeared was partly due to noticeable eye strain, but also due to generalized eye fatigue that I wasn't really acknowledging. I also had to sit up front in meeting rooms to follow along with anything projected on the screen, which was annoying.
A colleague mentioned the book Fixing My Gaze (https://www.google.com/books/edition/Fixing_My_Gaze/Ul16tPVk...) and I bought it. It's partly a personal narrative by a neuroscientist who was stereoblind and taught herself to develop stereo vision in middle age (she was profiled by Oliver Sacks at one point). But it's also a history of research optometry, which focuses on refractive vision correction and visual processing (as distinct from eye diseases) and which I barely even knew was a thing. Which led me to NECO and my big quality of life improvement!
I always got 20/20 on my vision tests, but kept complaining to different optometrists, and finally found one smart enough to recognize my situation, and now I wear -0.5 lenses. It brought my life out of a very dark place.
I first got "dimestore readers" specifically for computer use, to reduce eyestrain. When I put them on at the beginning of the day I'd notice some weirdness (phantom artifacts and double vision) but my brain would cancel it out and all was good. After about a decade though, I wasn't noticing those artifacts at the beginning of the day, but while driving home I'd see double. That led to getting prescription glasses, and learning lot about astigmatism.
Until recently, I always tested better than normal at infinity without glasses. At infinity, most of my correction is astigmatism. Corrected, I'm still 20/10. But here's the "weird trick": I've learned that it's something that my eyes / brain are doing combined with the astigmatism. I can still conjure "hot spots" with near perfect clarity even without glasses, but it strains my eyes (I don't get full FOV clarity without glasses anymore).
I can't stand progressive lenses, although I have a pair for super close-in work. All my task glasses are "single pane of glass", my "infinity" glasses are bifocals. These days my eyes are more comfortable wearing the infinity glasses than not. The truly noticeable difference with glasses was night driving: no more stars! Huge reduction in eyestrain and improved basic ability to see when challenged by oncoming headlights; I've combined that with some aggressive rose tint in a pair specifically for night driving (very 70's mod frames. woot!).
I'll never get Lasik because I've been told repeatedly that if I did so they wouldn't be able to correct me to 20/10 any longer.
High display brightness tends to hurt more with glasses than without.
Some days i can see clearly through my prescription lenses while on others i dont. I also have gone for eye power checkups on different days and indeed my prescription is different.
On my last visit i also got my axial length checked. Will do the same on my next visit and see wtf is going on in there
Ive got all sort of test btw Fundus examination Corneal thickness Corneal shape Topography
So far no one knows whats happening
Post-concussion syndrome (and screens)
After getting a concussion, I had to change my screens in a big way. Many people have heard of sensitivity to PWM and low frequency PWM in particular. The alternative is DC dimming, and it helps tremendously. Additionally, higher refresh rates seem to help. At least 120 Hz but preferably 144, 165 or higher. My phone has some complicated PWM / DC dimming settings[0] - possibly 120 / 360 Hz[1]. My laptop is 165 Hz and does not appear to use PWM[2]. My desktop screens are 144 Hz and have DC dimming.
I'm going through the hassle of getting a physician to sign off on an ADA request to get my current employer to allow me to use better screens at work, as they provided a laptop with a horrible 60 Hz screen, and two crappy 60 Hz monitors. Fortunately I'm only in the office twice a week.
Glasses
Last year, I got brand new glasses with the prescription determined by the optometrist. However, it took three tries of adjusting things like pupil measurements and the "base curve" or index of the glasses before I started to get used to them. Up until then, I felt very tired and brain foggy while wearing them. With the third revision and a week of adjustment, I finally started to settle in. It takes a really good eye doctor to figure out these kinds of issues, and be willing to swap out lenses for you.
[0] https://www.eyephonereview.com/post/oneplus-12-its-complicat...
[1] https://www.notebookcheck.net/OnePlus-12-5G-Smartphone-Revie... (120 Hz PWM)
[2] https://www.notebookcheck.net/Acer-Nitro-16-AN16-41-review-A...
Phone manufacturers know that OLED screens cause eye strain, and they've tried to mitigate it, but it's still sort of an unsolved problem that phone manufacturers haven't prioritized. For the most part, they tend to prioritize making the problem worse over time.
A quick intro to the topic: https://flickeralliance.org/pages/about-flicker
Personally, I am grateful to have an LCD laptop (the MacBook M2 Air's screen is a godsend), and I hope more people would recognize OLED PWM as the source of their eyes strain and complain about it, so that manufacturers change their priorities.
But I insisted and made (very weak) glasses with blue-light filter included, and these days I use it when I need to read stuff on the screen (I get zero strain or blurry vision when I play games, in same setup, oddly enough). It helps a lot but they're not perfect, sometimes I still get blurry vision after a while.
Later on I experimented with lightning condition, and realized that my eyestrain often correlated with bad lightning (cafe, when remote work) and stress/bad sleep. Better lightning also help, but not perfectly. It's also odd because since childhood I've been sensitive to light. Walking outdoors in the summer, I can't keep my eyes fully open.
I ended up self-serving at eyebuydirect.com. For the price of the highway robbery at the local optician I got 6 pairs of reasonable quality frames with regular lenses stepping along a range I guessed I need for computer work. And I couldn't be happier, even though I ignored the astigmatism bit. It's possible there is a bit of that engineer DIY itch that got scratched in the process as well :-)
Some of their frames are clones of expensive, popular frames from boutique designers. Perhaps that's why they are retired after a while.
Progressive lenses also influence visual perception after years of use, unlike old-school bifocals with a clear shift in focus.
They told me "you have 20/20 vision, your vision is completely fine, you don't need glasses!" But, I responded, my vision is definitely blurry. They politely told me to stop wasting their time.
Dissatisfied, I went to another optometrist, and paid closer attention to the whole process. After some discussion with the doctor, we arrived at the conclusion - I've had essentially 20/7 vision my entire life, and now in certain circumstances my vision has degraded to 20/20!
They gave me a prescription and now I am perfectly happy having laser-sharp vision again when I want it.
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 testing for myself.
Maybe this is your sweet spot?
1. Base curve. Some people are bothered by lenses with a high base curve. Talk to an optician.
2. Flicker. Lights that flicker can cause headaches and other issues. This includes many LEDs, especially ones from more than a couple years ago, as well as old CRT monitors. “Driverless” LEDs are a major offender. Some modern “low persistence” displays could also be problematic. (I have no idea why anyone wants a low persistence monitor. I understand why low persistence is useful for VR, but monitors aren’t VR.) There’s a standard called IEEE 1789 that the industry mostly ignores.
Tip: Zenni.com lets you order pairs with custom corrections in 0.25 diopter increments for under $100 each, so you can try a few and find what feels best for several hours of screen time.
I’m severely myopic (-11), though that is corrected completely by contacts. Presbyopia, alas, hits us all.
I’m currently lining up interviews to learn more about your experiences. If you’ve commented here but haven’t connected yet, feel free to email me at: jbornhorst [at] gmail [dot] com.
I’m especially interested if you’ve experienced persistent discomfort even after updating your prescription professionally (headaches, eye strain, subtle blur, etc.). Pure research, no selling. Your insights will help shape a better solution.
I’ll do my best to reply promptly to everyone. Thanks again, and please keep the stories coming!
[1] It's been maybe a decade since I researched this - at the time I concluded that the hourglass FOV shape was a result of progressive lens designers not having enough surfaces to play with and was unavoidable if they wanted decent near and far areas, which tends to work well when your presbyopia isn't too bad yet. Maybe since then someone has introduced a different compromise in that space (maybe narrower close window trading for wider middle distance region?) but I'm not aware of it.
These days I still use screens a lot but I don't recall the last instance of this happening, and I think my reading glasses have largely solved this problem for me.
Your optometry office can also test your glasses to make sure that they're actually the right prescription. Lensemakers sometimes (often?) do the fabrication slightly wrong.
I've seen my doctor about it and given my existing tinnitus/pulsatile tinnitus, she diagnosed me with BPPV which sounded reasonable to me. But the epley maneuvers don't do much of anything to help, and given these bouts of dizziness/vertigo are brought on/made worse by screen usage, I'm wondering if it's related to my eyes instead of my ears.
As I get older and nearing 40 now, I'm realizing the wisdom in all these things I've been told throughout the years but never had to heed before: Take _frequent_ breaks from monitors. Strive to take daily brisk walks (keeps my bp in check). Drink enough plain water (keeps some of my frequent headaches at bay). And so forth.
> As I get older and nearing 40 now, I'm realizing the wisdom in all these things I've been told throughout the years but never had to heed before: Take _frequent_ breaks from monitors. Strive to take daily brisk walks (keeps my bp in check). Drink enough plain water (keeps some of my frequent headaches at bay). And so forth.
I'm almost 37 myself, and it might be time to accept that I'm not as young as I think I am anymore. I've convinced myself for years that I have plenty of time to worry about sleeping better, eating better, and exercising more when I'm older. But now I am older!
I originally got my prescription with an Eye-Q device, and had a professional "correct" it.
I cannot read pill bottles and the like without a magnifying glass, and haven't been able to for a little over 2 years, right before the poking and scratching - which is why i originally thought i needed glasses.
my biggest issue with the way prescriptions are decided is the "this one, or this one" and they both look equally crappy, and they say "which looks less crappy" and i just pick randomly, because they're both awful. and then it continues, where it's just blurry from there on out. I don't understand the mechanism to give me glasses that will correct my vision when the device they use to test makes everything look blurry! At least i understand how the Eye-Q device works...
I had an eye opening (ha) experience once I got pretty deep into 200/300/600 yard high power rifle. I was trying to debug an issue with my 600 yard shots clustering in three places - one cluster right in the middle, another cluster directly left, and a third cluster somewhere else
You set up these camera thingies (https://scattusa.com/) and it shows you an exact trace of what's going on with your aiming, while not using any ammo (recoil hides a lot so you do most practice without ammo).
The left cluster ended up being super obvious: trigger control and problems relaxing, making me physically jump shots over there - you could see lines from the Scatt go right after shot breaks.
The other cluster though was strange as hell. It was just not in the right spot. But it was a singular spot, I had two remaining clusters. There was no movement between middle and other cluster like there was with the left. It just looked like some percentage of the time I aimed at the wrong spot (not that far off, but enough to drop points).
Then one day when lying on the ground for an hour with the Scatt, I started seeing double. I'd blink and it would go away, but by relaxing a lot I could make it go back. The double vision was right where the cluster was.
Then I looked up more info on astigmatism (had >2 diopter astigmatism?), and it turns out it's literally just light refracting into 2+ places instead of 1. And of course the real bullseye people know about this (since in high power honestly we're kinda pretending at it), and they have specialized sights for correcting the axis and magnitude of astigmatism:
https://gehmann.com/en/579-Cylindrical-lens-system-0-2-Spher...
And sure enough, that's like the same thing the optometrist is doing. Except in the context of bullseye you can physically see the 2 bullseyes floating around an axis and then coming together.
I get why they do it the way they do it, because your brain corrects the astigmatism and doesn't let you see double normally, but if you can train your eye/brain to kinda dissociate and see double, you can get a pretty exact correction for astigmatism.
Then I got LASIK and my 600 yard scores went from high 170s/ low 180s to like 195+. Lol.
Eventually, i was able to count 8 distinct "copies" in my left eye. It made trying to determine what was in front of me at night nearly impossible, and i stopped driving until after the medication they gave me worked.
The Eye-Q device has a red and a green "bar" and those rotate with each "test", you push buttons on the device until you see a yellow bar appear distinct from the red and green bars, then you hit "ok", it rotates, spreads the bars apart, and you start again.
What's interesting is i never failed to get that yellow bar with the eye-q - i'd have expected that to be synonymous with getting a clear image from the optometrist tool - which copilot tells me is called a phoropter. To be silly, i will pronounce that "fuh-rope-ter" and see if anyone notices.
edit; i just checked, right eye i can see 4 lights on my NAS blinking, left eye i see at least 8 without glasses, only 4 with. These aren't very bright, so i'll have to remember to test outside at night with a planet or a distant street light. a single copy of a light source isn't as bad as 4 or 8 or a giant swish!
2: I know the doubling you're talking about when looking through sights. There's something about the way parallax works that i don't think it's "tricked" me in the past. I wonder now if i could group, at all?!
I wouldn't call it "the" solution: it's part of a complete breakfast.
Some time ago I prioritised sleep, inner calm, strict 9-5 work etc. Both blood pressure got better and eyestrain / headaches went away soon after.
Also most eye correction technology like glasses don't fix the higher order aberrations, that can cause halos and other artifacts. Only wavefront scleral contact lenses do that, but they seem scary so I haven't tried them.
[1]: https://blog.damnever.com/en/2024/reminding-myself-to-take-a...
When I turned 40 and started have issues with presbyopia, I asked my opthalmologist (who also writes my eyeglass prescription) during my biennial checkup why he has been prescribing powers based on how well I can read the tiniest letters on the board when I spend most of my life reading stuff that is two feet away.
He reluctantly suggested that I could use glasses with 1D shaved off the powers in the prescription. I had already done this before I asked him about it. And it has been a big help as the strain disappeared.
Things get blurry at a distance with the new glasses, but it is not as if I am driving at night on the roads or anything.
I only ever get blurry vision after very long days in front of the computer without doing anything else (think 12-14 hours). I doubt this is glasses related, since I remember having this issue while studying late as a child, and at the time I had perfect vision (which lasted until my late twenties when my ophthalmologist suggested glasses would be a good idea).
With simple prescription lenses for the astigmatism my eyes are much better at looking at the same place, but at the end a long day I have a ton of trouble getting them to agree on where to look and often end up just closing my right eye.
20 minutes of (intense) discomfort. 30 minutes later I was seeing the world in high definition (with sand-in-my eyes, yes. But high definition). I took eyedrops 3 times per day for months. Totally worth it. 20 years later I remain glasses-free.
Granted, I was a mild case: Some myopia (3 and 4 if my memory serves) and .5 astigmatism on each eye. And not everyone is eligible; some people's corneas are too thin to be "sculpted".
Only drawback is that when driving at night the lights from incoming cars and traffic lights have "extra halos" around them. Very minor inconvenience for me and definetly worth it.
Went to ophthalmologists and doctors and they keep claiming that everything is alright. Still not able to figure out what is wrong.
1. Your eyesight is not exactly "fixed". It can vary during the day depending on stress, tiredness, dryness, etc..
2. A prescription glass can help and does help but it doesn't magically fix your eye sight. If your eyes are strained from lengthy screen usage, the glasses are not going to do anything about that.
3. There is a possibility that your doctor prescribed you un-correct glasses. It took me a while to find my "correct" range.
I eventually got sick of the coke bottles and got Lasik. I can see better than I ever thought possible, but the recovery was brutal. It was more than two years before I could go a day without Systane Ultra.
The prescription is about the same as my old glasses, 12 years apart, perhaps they are dialed in just a little bit too much.
The other thing is that these glasses have blueguard filter, which I have been attributing the eye strain to. I've been looking for a way to remove the blue guard, but I can't and I don't want to spend A$400 on a new pair. :(
(Not a subject matter expert, but my wife was an optician for 15+ years, so I've picked up a lot via osmosis)
I test by looking around randomly a bit, keeping my screen in my peripheral vision. If it “pops” brightly in my peripheral vision, I know it’s too bright.
Or I adjust the other way; if I’m planning use a screen for a while in a dark room, I’ll turn on some lights to bring up the ambient level a bit.
I personally can't last 1 minute on a white screen, and bringing brightness too low isn't without its issues.
I'm gonna look into the lens material as suggested by some of the comments. That sounds promising.
I also have caterscts that have made screen time progressively less fun for long periods of time. It's time that I took care of them.
- Don't make my stigmatism stronger, keep it the same
- Don't change my eye center/focal point, keep it the center of the lens
I'd be interested and negative and positive experiences!
The slide rule looking eye training is also kind of rough. A string with two or three beads on it. All fun things that could make me puke from doing too much.
Nearsighted, left eye worse.
For common lens materials, polycarbonate has a low Abbe number, and Trivex is a widely available alternative with a higher Abbe number. You can find tables online for common lens materials.
It has always never lasted more than one day but it fucks up my day
In all cases, all the doctor did was stick me in the machine, read off the numbers, give me some glasses. They work 10% of the time. I don't mean one in 10 doctors gave me good glasses. I mean on Tuesday pair #3 works. On Wednesday pair #7 worked at 10am but then stopped working pair #11 worked at 5pm. More often than not, no pairs work.
I feel like I need some kind of adjustable lenses (I'm imagining something steampunk with multiple lenses or a dial so I can dial in what works AT THIS MOMENT) but AFAICT no such thing exists
Does any one else have this issue?
Note: I have no pain
Anecdotes
(1) A doctor in SF put me in the machines, measured my eyes, made me some glasses. I come back a week later and using them is worse than not using them. I tell them they don't work. They get upset and reprimand me. Finally they give in. Make a new appointment. A week later doctor sees me, makes a new prescription, orders glasses, a week later the same, using them is worse then not.
Again they get angry an berate me. They give my some BS about I should take them home and let your eyes get used to them. I respond, if that's the case then the doctor could not make a prescription with his machine because I'd need to take the machine home to "let my eyes get used them" before he'd know if it was working.
Anyway, they finally let me make another appointment. the doctor measures and claims he knows what must have happened (didn't tell me) and orders another pair. A week later I check. These ones are marginally better than than not wearing anything AT THAT MOMENT. It take them home, every time I try to use them they're worse than not using them. (oh, and they apparently charged the eye insurance $999)
(2) My previous SF doctor I had a similar experience in that their glasses didn't work. They didn't berate me. They re-ordered once. I was shy and didn't complain the second time even though they were no good and I never used them.
(3) I've bought lots of glasses at Jins (Japan) - They have fully automated machines for measurement. I've got 2 pairs from them that help the most often, though not always.
(4) Last time I bought glasses I was at ZOff in Japan (because the wait for Jins was too long). The "doctor" their claimed my eyes were fairly good - meaning the images are clear, it's only the double vision that's the issue (letters look like there's a ghost 15% as bright/dark) about 4cm down from the actual letters)
Look at the number 0, like the zero on a speed sign that says “60 km/h”, what do you see? Likely two sharp ovals, with a pigment between them, making the shape of a zero. If you have trouble seeing it, it’s likely because your eyesight is poor and it’s blurry.
Well, I see sharp ovals. I just don’t see only two sharp ovals. I see dozens of fragments of those two ovals, both on the interior as well as the exterior. Those fragments are razor-clear and razor-sharp with a good prescription, but the smaller the zero is, the closer these fragments intrude on each other, and the harder it is to make out that zero as a zero.
Plus, when something like a speed sign gets small enough (enough distance, in terms of speed signs), I even get a distortion of the overall number - a zero starts looking like an egg balanced on its pointy end. It is fatter at the top than it is at the bottom.
This gets immeasurably worse with more complicated glyphs, like a 6 or an R. All those extra sharp-clear edges make them look like other things, like an 8 or a B.
Now, these “fragments” are kind of like looking through an insect eye at the same time as looking through a human eye. I see a part of the glyph that is clear and sharp, which then fades out around a roughly-circular distance from the place of maximum sharpness like it’s a mirage. And these cluster together such that they overlap, and also hover over the “master image” that my eye sees. So I am seeing the same part of that edge multiple times.
For example, if I look at the letter T, I can see the top corner of the left arm multiple times, both as a part of the full image of the T as well as multiple fragment overlays. If I choose a T that has the right contrast, the right thickness, great clarity and the right sizing, I can easily count how many replications of any one point are visible. Even for a precise point like the top left corner of a sans-serif uppercase T, it can be anywhere from 3-5 replicated corners. Teeny-tiny replicated fragments, and clustered tightly around that area, but multiple copies that can dramatically confuse the image and make the letter look like something else.
And this problem is in both eyes, pretty much equally. I take the glasses off, and so long as the text is close enough (I’m nearsighted), it happens without glasses equally severely.
Also xylitol and salt sinus flushes help, even with those floaters.
The check appointment was with the practice's other O.D. I said the prescription would've been great for sniper shooting, but I just needed something to read the computer monitor. "You want an intermediate-range prescription." It was better, but still too strong. I used the curvature measurement to order my own prescription from one of the online contact stores. Three years later I upped my prescription by a quarter diopter.
Contact pro-tip: I use my contacts for 1.5 to 2x the rated time. Daily contacts can't be used for more than a day. 2 week contacts are good for at least 3 weeks. I've found my monthly contacts are good for at least 6 weeks. I've started using the hydrogen peroxide contact solutions: https://clearcaresolution.myalcon.com/
> even though your prescription is "correct"?
Most people have a range of prescriptions that they find acceptable. Some people's visual mechanism only 'likes' a specific prescription that might not correct them to 20/20. Developmental Optometry is a sub-specialty of optometry that considers more than acuity. This is a overview: https://www.theottoolbox.com/behavioral-optometrist-developm...
My contacts correct to 20/40 or 20/50, which are good enough for most tasks.
So maybe more selling, less research?
1. My perscription was out of date by two years and I let it go too long. My eyes struggled to compensate. Got it fixed.
2. For a while I had two different computer setups at different lengths, that contributed to it, they were different by almost two feet. Made changes to make them about the same distance.
3. My night computer I used in a dark room with no backlight. Added a single directed light facing the wall behind the monitor which gives it a soft but focused glow around the computer.
4. I'm PWM sensitive (see associated subreddit). I reduced brightness drastically on my phone and it helped alot with eye exhaustion since my brand is a well known bad source of PWM eye exhaustion and headaches.
After all these changes and a healing time of about a month, I'm back to being able to see individual pixels in text on my screens. My eyes feel like they have de-aged about 10-15 years and eye exhaustion almost never happens now, maybe once in a month and a half, after a few bad nights.
Other stuff that helped, improving sleep and restfulness and getting out and doing exercise more often. Also not using glasses when not needed.
Hope this helps!
Go outside, have incandescent lights.
I am nearsighted (-7.5 with astigmatism in left, -6.0 in right).
Recently been experiencing slight spasms and fatigue in the left eye. Always been very sensitive to light changes. Dry eye isn't frequent (yet), but I assume will get more so with age.
Night-time driving is awful even with full correction, it seems like I get afterflashes for a fraction of a second after seeing every single oncoming vehicle.