Add group to favorites
Back to post list
Send new message to group Search:
Post Subject:
Spherical equivalent refraction?
Spherical equivalent refraction?
What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
-12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
ophthalmologist and optometrist?
Thanks!
What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
-12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
ophthalmologist and optometrist?
Thanks!
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
In article
<04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a384@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> Thanks!
This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
not used the same convention to describe a prescription. If Zernike
functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike
functions to take over soon.
Bill
In article
<04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a384@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> Thanks!
This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
not used the same convention to describe a prescription. If Zernike
functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike
functions to take over soon.
Bill
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
On Apr 30, 10:37 pm, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> In article
> <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a...@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
>
> douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> > Thanks!
>
> This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> not used the same convention to describe a prescription. If Zernike
> functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
> spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
> lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike
> functions to take over soon.
>
> Bill
Um, okayyyy...you didn't really answer my question. And what are
Zernike functions? How would my prescription be written using them?
On Apr 30, 10:37 pm, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
> In article
> <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a...@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
>
> douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> > Thanks!
>
> This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> not used the same convention to describe a prescription. If Zernike
> functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
> spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
> lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike
> functions to take over soon.
>
> Bill
Um, okayyyy...you didn't really answer my question. And what are
Zernike functions? How would my prescription be written using them?
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
Dear Doug,
Subject: Calculation of "Spherical Equivalent" power
You take your listed "Spherical" and add 1/2 the
astigmatic number. (Ignore the degrees.)
Thus, for example, your right eye:
-11.25 + ( -2.5 / 2 )
-11.25 + ( - 1.25 )
Spherical equivalent = 12.5 diopters, right eye.
Enjoy,
Or
What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
On May 1, 1:39 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> On Apr 30, 10:37 pm, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a...@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
>
> > douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> > > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my=
> > > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> > > Thanks!
>
> > This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> > The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> > power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> > unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> > not used the same convention to describe a prescription. If Zernike
> > functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
> > spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
> > lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike=
> > functions to take over soon.
>
> > Bill
>
> Um, okayyyy...you didn't really answer my question. And what are
> Zernike functions? How would my prescription be written using them?- Hide =
quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Dear Doug,
Subject: Calculation of "Spherical Equivalent" power
You take your listed "Spherical" and add 1/2 the
astigmatic number. (Ignore the degrees.)
Thus, for example, your right eye:
-11.25 + ( -2.5 / 2 )
-11.25 + ( - 1.25 )
Spherical equivalent = 12.5 diopters, right eye.
Enjoy,
Or
What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
On May 1, 1:39 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> On Apr 30, 10:37 pm, Salmon Egg <Salmon...@sbcglobal . net > wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a...@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
>
> > douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> > > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my=
> > > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> > > Thanks!
>
> > This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> > The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> > power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> > unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> > not used the same convention to describe a prescription. If Zernike
> > functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
> > spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
> > lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike=
> > functions to take over soon.
>
> > Bill
>
> Um, okayyyy...you didn't really answer my question. And what are
> Zernike functions? How would my prescription be written using them?- Hide =
quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
In article
<4821bc34-08e1-4c0e-85bf-dedd15d4ee70@r9g2000prd.googlegroups . com >,
douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
> Um, okayyyy...you didn't really answer my question. And what are
> Zernike functions? How would my prescription be written using them?
Zernike functions are one form of what are called orthogonal functions.
You have to know some mathematics beyond the typical mathematics
studied by nontechnical students. Zernike functions are being applied
in wavefront correction in refractive surgery.
Any smooth wavefront distortion introduced by the eye's structure can be
represented as a sum of such functions. This includes all kinds of
aberrations that cannot be corrected by spherical and cylindricl lenses.
There is one and only one way the individual Zernike functions can
describe the wavefront distortion of a given eye (except for measurement
error).
Bill
In article
<4821bc34-08e1-4c0e-85bf-dedd15d4ee70@r9g2000prd.googlegroups . com >,
douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
> Um, okayyyy...you didn't really answer my question. And what are
> Zernike functions? How would my prescription be written using them?
Zernike functions are one form of what are called orthogonal functions.
You have to know some mathematics beyond the typical mathematics
studied by nontechnical students. Zernike functions are being applied
in wavefront correction in refractive surgery.
Any smooth wavefront distortion introduced by the eye's structure can be
represented as a sum of such functions. This includes all kinds of
aberrations that cannot be corrected by spherical and cylindricl lenses.
There is one and only one way the individual Zernike functions can
describe the wavefront distortion of a given eye (except for measurement
error).
Bill
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
Salmon Egg schreef:
> In article
> <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a384@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
> douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
>
>> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
>> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
>> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
>> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
>> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
>> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
>> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
>> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> not used the same convention to describe a prescription.
There are no problems in prescribing in minus or plus cylinder.
When prescribed with the plus cylinder the example above should be
S-13.75=C+2.50 axis 88
When prescribed with a minus cylinder it should be
S-11.25=C-2.50 axis 178
Both prescriptions are the same and every eyecare specialist in this
world can read and understand both.
The spherical equivalent is the same in both prescriptions
S-13.75 plus 1.25 (1/2 of the plus cylinder +2.50) results in 12.50
diopters.
S-11.25 plus -1.25 (1/2 of the minus cylinder -2.50) results also in
12.50 diopters.
Jan Oudesluys (normally Dutch spoken)
Salmon Egg schreef:
> In article
> <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a384@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
> douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
>
>> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
>> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
>> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
>> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
>> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
>> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
>> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
>> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> not used the same convention to describe a prescription.
There are no problems in prescribing in minus or plus cylinder.
When prescribed with the plus cylinder the example above should be
S-13.75=C+2.50 axis 88
When prescribed with a minus cylinder it should be
S-11.25=C-2.50 axis 178
Both prescriptions are the same and every eyecare specialist in this
world can read and understand both.
The spherical equivalent is the same in both prescriptions
S-13.75 plus 1.25 (1/2 of the plus cylinder +2.50) results in 12.50
diopters.
S-11.25 plus -1.25 (1/2 of the minus cylinder -2.50) results also in
12.50 diopters.
Jan Oudesluys (normally Dutch spoken)
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
Salmon Egg schreef:
> In article
> <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a384@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
> douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
>
>> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
>> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
>> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
>> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
>> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
>> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
>> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
>> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> not used the same convention to describe a prescription.
There is a convention and there are no problems at all.
You may prescribe in minus or plus cylinders.
When prescribed with the plus cylinder the example above should be
S-13.75=C+2.50 axis 88
When prescribed with a minus cylinder it should be
S-11.25=C-2.50 axis 178
Both prescriptions are the same and every eyecare specialist in this
world can read and understand both.
The spherical equivalent is the same in both prescriptions
S-13.75 plus 1.25 (1/2 of the plus cylinder +2.50) results in -12.50
diopters.
S-11.25 plus -1.25 (1/2 of the minus cylinder -2.50) results also in
-12.50 diopters.
Jan Oudesluys (normally Dutch spoken)
If Zernike
> functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
> spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
> lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike
> functions to take over soon.
>
> Bill
Salmon Egg schreef:
> In article
> <04f3541d-999a-4270-8cff-adff9820a384@n1g2000prb.googlegroups . com >,
> douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
>
>> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
>> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
>> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
>> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
>> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
>> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
>> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
>> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>>
>> Thanks!
>
> This is one subject I get up on a soap box about.
>
> The way prescriptions are given in terms of adding together spherical
> power and cylindrical power. Unfortunately, this combination is not
> unique and IIRC, optometrists and ophthalmologists have traditionally
> not used the same convention to describe a prescription.
There is a convention and there are no problems at all.
You may prescribe in minus or plus cylinders.
When prescribed with the plus cylinder the example above should be
S-13.75=C+2.50 axis 88
When prescribed with a minus cylinder it should be
S-11.25=C-2.50 axis 178
Both prescriptions are the same and every eyecare specialist in this
world can read and understand both.
The spherical equivalent is the same in both prescriptions
S-13.75 plus 1.25 (1/2 of the plus cylinder +2.50) results in -12.50
diopters.
S-11.25 plus -1.25 (1/2 of the minus cylinder -2.50) results also in
-12.50 diopters.
Jan Oudesluys (normally Dutch spoken)
If Zernike
> functions were used instead, there would be a unique combination of one
> spherical and two astigmatism functions. However, because cylindrical
> lenses are easier to understand and manufacture, I do not expect Zernike
> functions to take over soon.
>
> Bill
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
What's the use in all these complex formulas, I don't know. Just makes
things harder and longer for the laymen to work out what the pros are
chattering about. Can't we all just use a standardized refraction
measurement thingy? I mean, it would make things so much easier. Like,
just plain old 'minus 3' and 'axis 174' etc. Things us mere mortals
can actually identify with and have a clue what they imply...
What's the use in all these complex formulas, I don't know. Just makes
things harder and longer for the laymen to work out what the pros are
chattering about. Can't we all just use a standardized refraction
measurement thingy? I mean, it would make things so much easier. Like,
just plain old 'minus 3' and 'axis 174' etc. Things us mere mortals
can actually identify with and have a clue what they imply...
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
On May 1, 12:34 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that
will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as
SER.
Judy
>
> Thanks!
On May 1, 12:34 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> ophthalmologist and optometrist?
SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that
will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as
SER.
Judy
>
> Thanks!
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
> On May 1, 12:34 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
>
> > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
>
> Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that
> will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as
> SER.
>
> Judy
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thanks!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
> On May 1, 12:34 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
>
> > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
>
> SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
>
> Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that
> will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as
> SER.
>
> Judy
>
>
>
>
>
> > Thanks!- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
In article
<9b6e2170-1e92-40b8-9379-6f07acb42bd5@l17g2000pri.googlegroups . com >,
douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
> On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
> > On May 1, 12:34 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> >
> > > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> > > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
> >
> > SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> > can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> > for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
> >
> > Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> > licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that
> > will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as
> > SER.
> >
> > Judy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
It would be nice if you could take each of the world's professions and
boil them down into one thing, but then they wouldn't be much of a
profession, would they?
I can see a few uses for SER, but it's definitely not a main focus.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
dabel@sonic . net
In article
<9b6e2170-1e92-40b8-9379-6f07acb42bd5@l17g2000pri.googlegroups . com >,
douglas <Protoman2050@gmail . com > wrote:
> On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
> > On May 1, 12:34 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> >
> > > What's "spherical equivalent refraction"? My --right eye--
> > > prescription is -11.25 -2.50x178 --I believe this means that my lens
> > > has a power of -11.25D at 178 degrees, and -13.75D at 88 degrees--,
> > > and I heard of this term "spherical equivalent refraction", which
> > > apparently is calculated by adding the spherical power, and
> > > cylinderical power divided by 2, so this means I've got an SER of
> > > -12.50D. What's the purpose of calculating the SER, how can it help my
> > > ophthalmologist and optometrist?
> >
> > SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> > can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> > for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
> >
> > Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> > licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that
> > will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as
> > SER.
> >
> > Judy
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > > Thanks!- Hide quoted text -
> >
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
It would be nice if you could take each of the world's professions and
boil them down into one thing, but then they wouldn't be much of a
profession, would they?
I can see a few uses for SER, but it's definitely not a main focus.
--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA
dabel@sonic . net
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
On May 2, 1:47 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
>
> >
> > SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> > can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> > for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
>
> > Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> > licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that=
> > will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as=
> > SER.
>
>
> Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
For police officers, pilots, ship captains etc, the licensing agency
sometimes has a concern about how well the person will see if glasses
are lost or damaged during work. So they specify the maximum amount
of refractive error.
Judy
On May 2, 1:47 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
> On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
>
> >
> > SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> > can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> > for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
>
> > Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> > licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error that=
> > will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified as=
> > SER.
>
>
> Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
For police officers, pilots, ship captains etc, the licensing agency
sometimes has a concern about how well the person will see if glasses
are lost or damaged during work. So they specify the maximum amount
of refractive error.
Judy
Re: Spherical equivalent refraction?
On May 5, 2:03 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
> On May 2, 1:47 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
>
> > On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
>
> > > SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> > > can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> > > for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
>
> > > Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> > > licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error th=
at
> > > will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified =
as
> > > SER.
>
> > Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
>
> For police officers, pilots, ship captains etc, the licensing agency
> sometimes has a concern about how well the person will see if glasses
> are lost or damaged during work. So they specify the maximum amount
> of refractive error.
>
> Judy
Oh yeah, I forgot.
On May 5, 2:03 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
> On May 2, 1:47 am, douglas <Protoman2...@gmail . com > wrote:
>
> > On May 1, 8:55 pm, Dr Judy <mpac...@rogers . com > wrote:
>
> > > SER doesn't have much purpose. For lower amounts of astigmatism it
> > > can be used to determine soft lens power and spherical glasses power
> > > for those who can't tolerate cylinder correction.
>
> > > Some agencies that care about total refraction (police, pilot
> > > licensing etc), may specify a maximum amount of refractive error th=
at
> > > will be allowed for their purposes. That amount is often specified =
as
> > > SER.
>
> > Shouldn't they just care about your best corrected acuity?
>
> For police officers, pilots, ship captains etc, the licensing agency
> sometimes has a concern about how well the person will see if glasses
> are lost or damaged during work. So they specify the maximum amount
> of refractive error.
>
> Judy
Oh yeah, I forgot.
Next: Love Baby Name Free
Previous: Laparoscopic Biliary Injuries (Part Two), prevention and presentation.
