Re: My experience and "succes" - Tomaž Žibert - 01-10-2012
I am not very familiar with the 20/25 expression, I measure the "quality" of my eyesight by comparing (subjectively of course) my "regular" vision compared with 20/20 flashes and I can say that I am quite close to 20/20 . I don't use the eye chart because I think the results might be discouraging and because I think you can only measure the quality of your eyesight subjectively and you alone know how good you see.
Re: My experience and "succes" - arocarty - 01-10-2012
If you are never using an eye chart, then how do you know with certainty that you are having "20/20" flashes to which you compare your 'regular' vision? What do you use for the basis of that 20/20 measurement?
Re: My experience and "succes" - Tomaž Žibert - 01-10-2012
Clear sight form 0 to infinity (no blur no nothing, just sharpness), I don't need any chart to know what 20/20 vision is .
Re: My experience and "succes" - FIAT2LUX - 01-10-2012
Tomaž Žibert Wrote:Clear sight form 0 to infinity (no blur no nothing, just sharpness), I don't need any chart to know what 20/20 vision is .
Sorta. You'd be amazed how clear 20/50 actually is. At a distance of, say, 6m if you can see your clock with such clarity that you can see the individual legs of the number, or the name of the manufacturer of an analog clock, then you are probably correct. Regardless of the ACTUAL results, as clear as you have stated is still pretty good.
Re: My experience and "succes" - Tomaž Žibert - 01-10-2012
I always thought 20/20 is as good as it gets, obviously not .
Well it depends on what you actually want and right now I am absolutely over the moon with my eyesight which is only getting better.
I might look into the 20/50 vision, just to see what is possible and probably try that out too. Sky is the limit
Re: My experience and "succes" - FIAT2LUX - 01-10-2012
Tomaž Žibert Wrote:I always thought 20/20 is as good as it gets, obviously not .
Well it depends on what you actually want and right now I am absolutely over the moon with my eyesight which is only getting better.
I might look into the 20/50 vision, just to see what is possible and probably try that out too. Sky is the limit
Sorry to have confused you. You should probably look up how an eye chart works. 20 feet (or nearly 6m) is the distance of testing, and normal acuity is the 20 line. Normal acuity should be capable of reading the 50 line at 50' (approximately 15m) but if you can see 20/50 that means that what the "normal eye" (as Dr. Snellen thought) can see at 15m, you can only see at 6m. So that is worse than 20/20. 20/10 (6/3) means that what the normal eye can only see at 10 feet (3m) you can see at 20 feet (6m). Again, research visual acuity to get a better understanding.
Re: My experience and "succes" - FIAT2LUX - 01-11-2012
So what I was saying is that while 20/50 is worse than 20/20, you'd be surprised how clear 20/50 is. And again, researching visual acuity is a great idea, AND, even of it isn't quite 20/20 yet, progress to your degree is still pretty awesome.
. I don't use the eye chart because I think the results might be discouraging and because I think you can only measure the quality of your eyesight subjectively and you alone know how good you see.
.