←back to thread

Ask HN: Do your eyes bug you even though your prescription is "correct"?

340 points jbornhorst | 6 comments | 07 Mar 25 17:09 UTC | HN request time: 0.414s | source | bottom

I’m digging into an idea around eyeglasses, screen-time, and vision discomfort. If you wear prescription glasses but still get headaches, eye strain, or blurry vision after long screen days, I’d love to chat briefly (20–30 min).

Pure research, zero selling.

Interested? Drop a comment below or email me directly at jbornhorst [at] gmail.com. I’ll coordinate a convenient time to talk.

Show context
bmurphy1976 ◴[07 Mar 25 17:37 UTC] No.43292191[source]▶
Yes, I'm very nearsighted. I've worn progressive lenses for years but they continue to drive me crazy. I can see fine with them, but my eyes easily get fatigued and I have to take long breaks to get them to calm down.

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.

replies(7): >>43292232 #>>43292397 #>>43292613 #>>43292938 #>>43293069 #>>43298922 #>>43299039 #
1. theogravity ◴[07 Mar 25 17:59 UTC] No.43292397[source]▶
Same, I have occupational lenses that are also focused to arms length, and it has made a huge difference for me as well when using it for reading things on my computer screens. It makes reading small text easier and feels crisp.

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.

replies(4): >>43292934 #>>43294260 #>>43298139 #>>43300235 #
2. bmurphy1976 ◴[07 Mar 25 18:43 UTC] No.43292934[source]▶
>Using it outside of its intended distance will cause eye strain since your eyes won't be able to focus properly.

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.

replies(1): >>43300244 #
3. jbornhorst ◴[07 Mar 25 20:32 UTC] No.43294260[source]▶
Would love to speak with you for 20 mins to learn from your experience. If interested, ping me at jbornhorst [at] gmail [dot] com and I'll coordinate times.
4. mdnahas ◴[08 Mar 25 07:02 UTC] No.43298139[source]▶
Me too. My progressive lenses give me eye strain and it is much worse at the computer. I have non-progressive lens for work and they’re much more comfortable. (Especially with my large monitor.)
5. cableshaft ◴[08 Mar 25 13:50 UTC] No.43300235[source]▶
> Using it outside of its intended distance will cause eye strain since your eyes won't be able to focus properly.

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.

6. cableshaft ◴[08 Mar 25 13:51 UTC] No.43300244[source]▶
Same. I've driven short distances sometimes to pick up lunch or something 5-10 minutes away because I forgot to switch my glasses. It wasn't ideal but perfectly doable.

I've only done it a handful of times, though. And also I wouldn't do so at night.