Ask Slashdot: What's Out There For Poor Vision? 197
hackwrench writes: I like to read on my computer, but when I resize text to be comfortably big, web pages and browsers handle it badly, and some applications don't offer an option to enlarge. Some applications even are bigger than the screen, which Windows doesn't handle well. Lastly, applications consist of bright backgrounds which feels like staring into a headlight. Windows' built in options like magnifier are awkward. What tools are there for Windows to increase text size, make things fit inside the screen, and substitute colors that windows use?
Use a larger monitor. (Score:1)
Re:Use a larger monitor. (Score:5, Informative)
Also, if you can, turn the brightness down. Monitor manufacturers love setting the backlight to 'suntan'; because it makes the colors look more vibrant, the ghastly reflective screen look actually usable, and allows them to print a more impressive contrast ratio on the box without technically lying. If you have enough control over your computing environment, you ideally want a matte display, with the backlight low enough that the apparent brightness of white areas on the screen is about the same as the whitespace in a book under comfortable reading conditions. You will need a decent screen to actually do this(the cheap seats turn the brightness up because it's the only way to keep darker colors from just becoming indistinguishable; but better panels are up to it). You also want to avoid having to deal with glare from other light sources on the screen, since that will force you to punch the brightness back up.
Re: (Score:2)
Other way around. Manufacturers make horrible glossy screens to increase apparent contrast and allow them to push the brightness to suntan since more brighterer = more betterer.
Re: (Score:2)
In the 'large monitor' vein, you can either go for one that just has enormous pixels(there are some 1366x768 and 1920x1080 panels that smear those pixels over a pretty enormous area) or, if other constraints demand it(in a laptop, say) shoot for something with a resolution that is an integer multiple of the one you actually want to use. Non-integer scaling can be done more or less tastefully; but simply doesn't have a 'correct' solution. Integer-multiple scaling is both easier and produces better results.
I agree with this for the large monitors as whether it's a 32" or a 64", it's still usually supports the standard 1366x768/1024x768 or something similar that most websites expect.
For laptops, one option on linux would be a desktop that is larger than the physical screen size. You could set the physical screen resolution to 640x480 but then set the desktop size to 1024x768 or some other normal resolution. You would have to scroll side to side to see that whole screen but you would have a built in zoom no m
Re: (Score:2)
Sites that "expect" a particular screen size and can't adapt to other sizes are inherently broken and shouldn't be used.
Re: (Score:3)
and possibly way more importantly - ensure there's no bright light source behind your monitor - like a window. You should ensure the contrast differential between monitor and background is roughly the same
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
go straight to a 32" 1080P TV as it's cheaper than a 25" monitor
Re:Use a larger monitor. (Score:5, Interesting)
go straight to a 32" 1080P TV as it's cheaper than a 25" monitor
A lot of televisions will only correctly negotiate EDID on the active input, and won't activate an input other than the primary, without first having a signal.
This tends to be a problem for laptops which are not persistent about negotiating EDID. This tends not to be a problem on Mac OS X, but in general, it's a problem for Windows, which is what the original poster said they had.
Toshiba or Samsung laptops, in particular, have a hard time driving some Samsung televisions, Dell HD monitors, and LG televisions. Mostly these screens tend to not be multithreaded in their electronics, meaning that they won't negotiate the EDID on an inactive (unselected) input when the computer is coming up, and those laptops, and many desktops, aren't very persistent in their attempts to renegotiate until they get an answer.
You're typically better off with a monitor than a television, if you plan to hook it up to a computer, even though there's a tendency towards higher expense compared to the televisions.
Re: (Score:2)
So leave it on the active input. Works great for a lot of people
Re: (Score:2)
That was my solution. I've got a cataract on my left eye (which will be removed very soon, yay!) as well as strabismus and in general am very short sighted. In the end I just went out and bought a 28" monitor. Other solutions seem kludgy and rendering can be quite awful.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd also suggest that the OP probably is smart enough to figure out on his/her own that a larger monitor might help. Probably lacks either the cash or the room for a big screen. Or both
Reading glasses might help, and they're cheap. (At least in the US). But they tend to focus uncomfortably close to the screen
One thing that might help in some cases is selecting all the text of interest (Edit, Select all). That sometimes helps with the preposterous low contrast color schemes that many web site designers
Re: (Score:2)
Book-Reading glasses vs. Computer-Reading glasses (Score:2)
Computers are typically at 22-24" focal distance, compared to book-reading glasses, which have a focal distance shorter than that (I forget it it's 18" or what.) This means telling the eye doctor when I get an exam that I want to know the pupillary distance for the computer reading glasses. (Sometimes this requires a "yes, really" discussion, in addition to the "oh, you're ordering glasses online" one, but that lets me get multiple $20 computer glasses of the current prescription so there's one set at the
Re: (Score:2)
"Setting a lower resolution" was fine in the CRT era. But now that LCDs make up the vast majority of PC monitors, a lower resolution is most likely to produce a blurry picture.
Re: (Score:2)
Enlarging a picture using the monitor's built-in scaler makes it no longer nice, clean, crisp, square pixels but instead blur on top of blur.
NeWS PostScript-based Window System :-) (Score:2)
Back in the late 80s / early 90s, we were using Sun computers, with either NeWS or OpenLook. My manager had a 21" monitor, but even so was getting tired of switching between one set of glasses to read it and another set to talk to people, and printing out email to read it. So we just told his machine to use 24-point bold font as his default, and he could read it just fine. (Your operating system probably isn't as flexible, though maybe if you've got a Mac it'll do :-)
But hey (Score:1)
Our CEO Had Poor Vision (Score:1)
Our CEO had poor vision. We replaced her with a very small shell script [slashdot.org].
What's Out There For Poor Vision? (Score:5, Informative)
Optometrists. And "cheater" reading glasses.
Re:What's Out There For Poor Vision? (Score:5, Insightful)
Mod parent up. I started to find my monitor blurry despite wearing strong corrective lenses when I was about 40 or 45. It's hard to say exactly when because I didn't really notice for a while. Reading glasses don't really help for this if you are nearsighted, because the monitor is too far away--you need nearsightedness correction. But the correction of your regular distance vision lenses stops working for near-distance vision when you get old enough to develop presbyopia.
There are a number of ways to address this. You can get a pair of work glasses (I have a pair) that are a weak version of your regular distance vision prescription. This will allow you to clearly focus on a screen that's 24" (or whatever) away. Measure how far your eyes are from your screen with a tape measure and bring that measurement with you when you go to the optometrist.
Bifocals are a poor solution for this problem, because you really want your whole range of vision to work, not just the bottom half. However, you can get multifocus contact lenses if you wear contacts. These are a bit different than bifocals, and take some getting used to, but apparently work very well (I haven't tried them--I'm reporting what a friend who swears by them has told me).
Another thing you can do, as others have suggested, is get a really big monitor. This doesn't work as well as you might like with every operating system. I'm having great luck with a 40" samsung 4k display and a Chromebook, because ChromeOS does a stupid but effective hack to make it work: they tell the browser the resolution is half what it is, and use bigger fonts. My experience doing the same thing with Ubuntu has been less positive.
Re: (Score:2)
Prices are coming down. Mine was about $600, but I bet you can get one in a year or two for $400.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:What's Out There For Poor Vision? (Score:4, Interesting)
Finally somebody understands. Even with my someone decent vision, I never really got why people would buy super high resolution monitors. It really just makes everything on the screen smaller. You don't actually get any more usable space. You can use space on the screen more efficiently when there is higher resolution, but it doesn't scale linearly. You aren't getting 4 times more working space if you have a 4K monitor vs a 1080p monitor when the screen is only 20 inches. I admit that operating systems have gotten a lot better at handling higher resolution, so that things don't just end up smaller when you have a high resolution monitor, but there's a point where having a higher resolution doesn't make much of a difference and you'd be better off just getting a bigger screen.
Re:What's Out There For Poor Vision? (Score:5, Informative)
It really just makes everything on the screen smaller.
Sorry, not quite true. My mac with Retina display shows things at the same size as a non-retina display (if I leave the system settings alone). However, the clarity of the display is nothing less than amazing and it's immediately apparent to me the difference between the two, even without my reading glasses. It does occasionally have issues with programs that don't know how to handle high DPI, but I find those issues are pretty rare, and it's still usable though sometimes it looks a bit funny.
Re: (Score:2)
You have no clue. OP obviously has a vision problem that cannot be corrected with glasses.
Ironically, one of the contestants on the most recent season of "America's Got Talent" used a technological workaround of wearing Google Glass, with a specialized application that worked around his macular degeneration by distorting the visual field into the "halo". Generally speaking, the brain can "correct" processing, including an image which is flipped upside down, in order to compensate for the image distortion in this particular case.
More on similar applications, here: http://www.visionaware.org/blo. [visionaware.org]
Not Making Sense (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What we really need is the ability to increase the text size of just ONE small section.
Re: (Score:2)
Unfortunately, too many designers use tiny light gray type. CONTROL + and CONTROL - don't help much when the contrast is that low, and some designs don't expand enough to be easily readable.
If someone were to develop glasses that reduces one's ability to handle low-contrast text, it would be wonderful if all UI designers (including, but not limited to, Web designers) were forced to wear them while doing design work (and if any marketing and management types who interfered with the usability of the resulting designs were put to death immediately).
Re: (Score:2)
You mean like sunglasses? Or if you really want to reduce the contrast a ton, a welder's mask.
Anything to keep idiots from thinking that, for example, grey on black is appropriate for text that anybody would actually read.
My eyes are bad too and (Score:3, Interesting)
I use a 27" monitor, the NoSquint addon, and f.lux to dim the screen to softer colors at night. NoSquint is great because it can resize the entire webpage or just the text. There are also themes that can make your browser (I use FF) easier to read.
Re: (Score:2)
Low vision here too: 27" screen, and etext on a tablet for all books and magazines. I can have the font I need in the size I specify.
Re: (Score:2)
Avoid these like the plague. See an physician specializing in vision first, and optometrist or opthalmalogist.
what sort of "poor vision" (Score:2)
It's always been this way. . . (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
And tiny black slots on the side of black cases. I keep a flashlight next to the laptop so I can find them.
And blue on gray text on websites.
I use glasses half the needed strength so monitor and distance are equally blurry (I take off the glasses for close work and reading). :)
Windows 10, 1920x1080 with 150% increase in icons and text, at two meters to a 46 incher, works for me
There's keyboard shortcuts for the magnifier. (Score:5, Informative)
You can use win-plus and -minus to zoom in and out, and win-esc to end, if you didn't know that, try it.
Re: (Score:2)
Here's what you need to do (Score:2)
Freely scaling everything is still pretty crusty in most operating systems, so just get a display with a low DPI.
What comes to bright backgrounds, lower the brightness of your display and make sure that the surrounding room lighting is adequate.
Re: (Score:2)
just get a display with a low DPI.
Good luck with that these days, with all manufacturers boasting about how many pixels they can fit into a tiny area for improved video performance (and screw text size!)
Re: (Score:2)
No, go the other way as high res as possible. Scaling in OS X on a Retina class screen is quite good. The default is to display @2x - 2x2 physical pixels is 1 "pixel" but you can scale up or down and it looks OK. On my 13" laptop, I run it at a resolution similar to a 15" and everything looks good. On a 27" desktop, you could happily run it at a lower resolution and everything will scale. Things like fonts etc are generally drawn at the native resolution, so they're sharp and crisp. If the app is retina-awa
Color adjustments (Score:2)
Helpfully, AMD, Nvidia, and Intel all arrange these controls somewhat differently(and sometimes rearrange them between driver versions); bu
I can't read your headline! (Score:1)
You insensitive clod! You're headline is too small for me to read!
Get a TV (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Fully agree - typing this on the 32" TV i use as a monitor.
buy glasses. (Score:4, Interesting)
Honestly learn how glasses are prescribed and how to modify a prescription. go to am optometrist and get a baseline made for reading then modify and order from a place that doesn't ask questions and will make dirt cheap glasses like Zenni.
I have a special set of computer glasses that are useless for seeing anything outside of my arms length but they magnify everything clearly within arms length. so I can even easily use a 11.8 inch 1080p screen at native resolution on my surface pro.
use optics to get your vision as clear as it possibly can for the monitor distance and then start toying with the software and contrast, it works a LOT better that way. and yes everyone can benefit from optics to correct as much as possible first.
Re: (Score:2)
Holy shit, loving all the fabulous advice in this thread!
Let's all assume the OP counts as a complete idiot and hasn't considered glasses or a bigger monitor, and recommend committing a fucking felony rather than addressing his question directly!
Brilliant, lads, just brilliant!
Re: (Score:2)
Honestly learn how glasses are prescribed and how to modify a prescription. Holy shit, loving all the fabulous advice in this thread! Let's all assume the OP counts as a complete idiot and hasn't considered glasses or a bigger monitor, and recommend committing a fucking felony rather than addressing his question directly! Brilliant, lads, just brilliant!
Got to agree with you. These posts assume the problem is one that can be fixed with a different lens, and that there is not another underlying problem, such as a form of retinopathy (retinal disease) that lenses will not be able to compensate for. To use an old camera analogy, lenses can't compensate for bad film. Or to use a car analogy, changing the wiper blades isn't going to make a cracked windshield better.
Glasses cannot fix a hole or tear in the retina, blood vessels and membranes growing on the sur
Re: (Score:2)
Committing a felony? are you that fucking retarded that you think such stupid shit?
Personally I am amazed that you can walk and chew gum at the same time.
Re: (Score:2)
"So we consider these things dangerous/important/abusable enough to require a doctor's order to get them."
"Wait, what if someone fakes a doctor's orders to get them?"
"Oh, that would never happen!"
"Heh, of course not, what was I thinking??? Meeting adjourned!"
Re: (Score:2)
The crime here has nothing to do with the glasses, Saul, but rather, forging a prescription (and don't get cute about "correcting" it - same crime). It doesn't matter what the prescription deals with, whether drugs or glasses or dental varnish or CPAP machines.
Were I to break a leg, and a Dr to prescribe using crutches using ones that weren't prescribed to me would not be a felony.
If you altered that prescription (even though you don't actually need
Re: (Score:2)
Probably the optometrist will be fine with writing you a prescription for glasses that will focus at your desired distance. Assuming your vision can be corrected to normal, it's an easy calculation to make it, say, a half meter: drop two diopters, if I remember correctly.
Re: (Score:2)
If your professional reputation depended on a layman's interpretation of your advice, would you feel fine with someone altering that advice?
And on the off chance you actually said "yes", imagine that you may actually bear some legal liability for the accuracy of "your" recommendation - "Your honor, Mr. Jones died because david_thornley decided that the safety interlocks on that x-r
Re: (Score:2)
For example, when someone mentions you learning how optics work, and then discussing how your eye doctor probably won't mind [possibly missing word here] changing a prescription, that carries the implicit idea of you, not your eye doctor, modifying the prescription. The entire discussi
Re: (Score:2)
I am not an optometrist. I know something about optics and human vision. After an exam once, I asked an optometrist about a prescription for computer glasses, and he dashed off one fast. (I got headaches from them, so never asked for that prescription again.) I know the sort of calculation they make. Therefore, if you're getting a prescription, you can ask for a prescription for glasses to focus at a certain distance, and the optometrist will probably just write you another prescription after doing a
Re: (Score:2)
If fundamental problems have developed with the eye, go to an ophthalmologist, not an optometrist. Huge difference. Lenses can only do so much.
Improving web browsing colors (Score:2)
Use Windows 10 (Score:1)
I will get a lot of hate for this suggestion, but mainly from coke-bottle glasses-wearing neckbeards.
I suggest you get Windows 10 (I can't bring myself to recommend it, but OSX might be alright too). The High DPI scaling of the OS has been markedly improved since 7 and even 8 (which was a step up in the first place).
I am one of the "unfortunate" to get stuck trying to make a 3k resolution my home on a 13" laptop, and although many legacy windows apps just end up crudely blowing up the bitmapped image of th
Re: (Score:2)
One problem with this solution is there are still some Windows native apps that are pixel-based instead of percent or resolution based. We have a 15.6" laptop with a 3840x2160 screen, and have encountered a couple of apps that now display in impossible-to-use resolutions.
For example, QuickBooks displays a page of instructions in a tiny window that I can literally cover with my thumbnail. The minimize/restore/close icons at the upper right corner of each window are less than 1mm high, and very difficult fo
TV. (Score:2)
I have to second all the opinions saying "use a large TV". My only caveat would be that if you're going to sit two feet (or less) from it, you don't need the brightness all the way up. This also will reduce the heat it throws off, which can be considerable at that distance if it's CCFL-backlit LCD rather than LED -- which I actually recommend because of the better blacks. (It's still better than a similarly sized CRT though.) Also, pick something that has decent off-center performance (like an IPS panel rat
Re: (Score:2)
That is horrible advice - sitting close to a large TV will wreak havoc on your eyes' ability to focus, as well as their actual physical shape given enough time.
Please explain how an IPS panel designed to be a television is any different from an IPS panel designed to be a monitor, when seated at the same distance from each (aside from maximum brightness, which is typically greater on a television)? This isn't the bad old days of 640x480 CRT television. I'm not advising he stick his face in the damn thing. As a matter of fact, the whole point of using a larger display at the same resolution is to make it so he doesn't HAVE to stick his face right into it to read it.
ZoomText, Magic, SuperNova (Score:1)
There are Screen Magnification software programs that can enlarge the entire screen. This is like the built-in Windows Magnifier on steroids. Among other options, you can change the contrast (like a film negative), change it to a specific tint (for example - no reds or yellows, only shades of blue), enlarge the mouse cursor, even read things aloud to you.
All of these have a 30 day trial. More features = more expensive.
ZoomText - www.aisquared.com - $600
Magic - http://www.freedomscientific.com/Products/Lo
Re: (Score:3)
Have you tried NegativeScreen (Score:4, Interesting)
http://arcanesanctum.net/negat... [arcanesanctum.net]
It works with windows 7 and above and it requires Aero to provide the filtering.
I get headaches from blinding white backgrounds and after spending way too much time trying various solutions like CSS and Windows accessibility themes which don't work I found NegativeScreen.
It works by putting a filter over the whole screen and allowing you to apply a matrix transform on the pixel values. Out of the box it will reverse the colours so every window gets a black background but there are other transforms supplied (submarine mode is cool). And you can edit the config file to create your own, here's mine which adds a blue tint to the otherwise harsh black:
Blue Blacks=win+alt+F12
{ -1, 0, 0, 0, 0 }
{ 0, -1, 0, 0, 0 }
{ 0, 0, -0.85, 0, 0 }
{ 0, 0, 0, 1, 0 }
{ 1, 1, 1, 0, 1 }
ObLinux: xcalib -i
A Mac (Score:2)
Get a Mac. No matter what's on-screen, you can hold the control key and scroll (or swipe up/down on a trackpad) to zoom the whole screen. Move the mouse cursor to the edge to pan. It's intuitive, it doesn't take any screen space, it's variable zoom, and it doesn't limit magnification to a portion of the screen.
I have a nearly blind friend who ranted for years that nothing adequately replaced her Windows XP magnifier, and that a good screen reader would cost a fortune. I kept telling her to go to a Mac store
Re: (Score:2)
FWIW my vision is only marginally bad (I'm far-sighted, and getting worse with age), and I have corrective glasses, and even my very modest disability is helped by such an easy zoom. I use it constantly. It's such a natural and integral part of using my Mac that I forget about it when I contemplate switching from a Mac to something else...until I use something else.
Re: (Score:2)
A mac would be good, if only for the zoom ability available on Safari and Chrome (might be available on Windows too). Pinch out on the trackpad to zoom a web page (really zoom, not just change text size).
Re: (Score:2)
That's not too surprising. I have a family member who is legally blind and finds the zoom feature in the Mac adaptive tools better than anything else available. The scaling is much smoother than the Windows mag tool.
Re: (Score:2)
When you do the entire screen, the pictures, ads, and white space (usually from columns just used at the very top) end up taking up way too much space and the 'main' text is pushed to a small fraction of the screen.
Re: (Score:2)
PC does the same thing and this is worthless. We WANT to limit the magnifcation just to one section, we don't want to do the entire screen.
When you do the entire screen, the pictures, ads, and white space (usually from columns just used at the very top) end up taking up way too much space and the 'main' text is pushed to a small fraction of the screen.
You have clearly never used the Mac feature. It zooms based on mouse location, so it's targeted. It's also way smoother than on Windows (I'm not familiar past Win7, so maybe they improved things since then). I really find it handy (even with near-perfect vision) for too-small product images on say, Amazon - it's not unlike the double-tap-to-zoom feature in iOS, but smoother.
If you want just the text, all main browsers in OSX can use pinch/spread multitouch (or IIRC, CTRL+scrollwheel) to modify text size
Re: (Score:2)
Windows also have those features built in and the ability to invert the screen but Windows has one extra, it has high contrast themes, including white on black. What put me off even considering Mac is the lack of high contrast themes as I *need* white on black text in my UI. Inverting the screen is great but not when all your photos and videos are inverted, too.
I'm not saying Windows is better, I'd love to use OSX for some needs but the lack of high contrast themes is a let down. I hope it's something th
Eye implants (Score:2)
I'm waiting on these so I can become a robot overlord.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/health/b... [ctvnews.ca]
Simple, not cheap or convenient (Score:2)
Try 16 point text in your browser (Score:2)
I like to use Linux Firefox with DejaVu Sans 16 point (minimum font size set to 16 as well, plus I don't allow pages to use their own fonts) and it's quite shocking how many sites break with this. Web designers don't seem to think anyone would ever use than 10 point fonts (which are ludicrously tiny on my monitor). It's annoying how Web fonts have crept into sites in recent years as well. Rather than images, they set up Web fonts for navigation icons, social media icons etc. which come out as hieroglyphics
Special glasses (Score:1)
I was in a school once where a kid had special "zooming" glasses that greatly magnified a small portion of the field of vision.
Since they were probably classified as "medical devices" they probably weren't cheap, but today Google Glass or something similar probably could do the job.
I do not know how well these glasses worked when pointed at a modern computer screen (or, for that matter, a CRT).
An option like this should at least be considered. If it's not terribly expensive, it should be seriously consider
Special device (Score:2)
The device is called 'reading glasses'. They cost a couple of bucks in the supermarket.
ZoomText for the PC, or use an IPAD. (Score:2)
20/200 Sysadmin here.. (Score:2)
This is my set of tools/techniques in Windows.
1) I use Windows 8, you now have high contrast themes and full screen magnification together (this wasn't possible on 7 below)
2) Not all, but more and more applications support the built in high contrast themes these days. When I find an application that doesn't I usually email the company/developer and politely ask them to fix it and offer to beta test any changes. Sometimes that helps.
3) I use the built in Windows magnifier combined with an Autohotkey script
Reading glasses (Score:2)
After reading (with my reading glasses) all of the comments here proposing complicated and expensive monitor and software solutions, I would like to suggest that you just get a pair of reading glasses. The are designed to magnify things at close distance. You should adjust the distance to your monitor to about 18" which is the focal length of most reading glasses.
Reading glasses are cheap and come in magnifications of 1.5 to 2.75.
Get laser surgery... (Score:2)
Technical and Medical (Score:2)
Technical, consider a Mac. I'm sure you can borrow one and get help to get accustomed with its visibel impaired modes.
Medical, consider a lens implant/artificial lens.
ZoomText but it's $$$ (Score:2)
ZoomText is by far the most functional, but you will pay anything between $50 and $1,000 depending on the version.
Re: (Score:2)
The ability to zoom in to catch the smallest text is nice, but one of my most common requests from older computer customers is, "Can you make the text larger?" Windows is actually ahead in this area, with its global ability to change the size of all onscreen text. On Macs, you have to change the text size application by application.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Does the "giant $400 monitor" come with a battery? If not, it won't help laptop users as much as font size options will. And no, OS X isn't the only operating system with font size options.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nowhere. I've just noticed this "everybody uses a desktop, and nobody needs to use a laptop because everybody drives" mentality, and I felt like reminding people that laptops still existed. I have a family member who uses a laptop and reading glasses and may benefit from a solution that works on laptops as well.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
For the basics, Firefox has (in Options-> Content -> Fonts & Colors -> Advanced) a fairly simple configuration menu that allows you to specify preferred fonts, font sizes, and choose whether or not your preferences are applied only to sites that don't
Re: (Score:2)
Lasik doesn't help with presbyopia.
Re: (Score:2)
Actually, not quite solved. It requires collaboration between the opthalmalogist/optician and the person.
I had terrible problems reading computer display screens until I worked with my optical experts and discovered the "reading" glasses are set for around an 18" focal point...but when I measure the distance from the plane of my eyes to the plane of the screen, it's about 25". If you're getting older, your "accommodation" (i.e., ability to do dynamic focusing on demand) diminishes, and so you're stuck wit
Exactly (Score:2)
I use regular progressive bifocals for everything but computer work. If you try to use typical reading
Re: (Score:2)
by way of an analogy
"bad black and white film in the camera can not be made in to hi-res color with better lenses"
Avalanche Biotechnologies in Menlo Park and the University of Washington in Seattle have cooperative agreements, and have successfully used gene therapy to treat a number of retinal issues.
Including curing color blindness: http://www.neitzvision.com/con... [neitzvision.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Can better lenses reverse macular degeneration? Why no, no they can't.
Horrible analogy. The poster isn't loosing his color vision his vision is getting blurry and he needs to compensate by making everything bigger.
You realize that you typically shouldn't take analogies literally, right?
"Apples and oranges? The OP can't see! He doesn't need more fruit in his diet, he needs an optometrist!".
Re: (Score:2)
Here's a contra-intuitive solution that worked for me (I've got PDR [wikipedia.org]). On your smart phone, make the fonts the largest size, and use a hand magnifying glass. MUCH easier than using an on-screen magnifier, and you might be able to find an app for the website you want, which will be tailored to having a much narrower screen.
There's also the advantage of being able to read in bed, on the couch, wherever, because your phone and a magnifying glass are a lot more portable than even a laptop.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, no. There are lots of ocular problems which are not related to refraction errors.
For instance, macular degeneration is the death of the most sensitive part of the retina. A person's peripheral vision is still intact, but the sharp middle part is gone. It is still possible to read, but you need to be able to magnify as the "high res" receptors in the eye are gone.
Re: (Score:3)
Bifocals suck for computer work. Speaking from experience. You want near-distance reading glasses, not bifocals. These would have the same prescription as the bottom of your bifocals, but across the entire lens.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
If you don't have corrective lenses then I recommend going to the eye doctor and "looking" into it. You may find that all your problems can be solved with glasses.
Slashdot, meet Field Marshal Obvious. He's worked his way up from Captain thanks to sheer bloody hard work. It's not easy being that stupid.