fixed glasses

[kalos]

hello!

I need a pair of rx glasses, that are nicely fixed to head
they must be rimless, they must have titanium or similar light and bendable frame and they should be easily fixed securely to head, like that maybe? :



anyone knows anything?

thanks!

[app103]

Try these searches:

athletic eyeglasses
sports eyeglasses

[40hz]

I have a set of glasses with Flexon frames. Mine have extremely narrow rims (although rimless models are available) because I've learned to dislike rimless glasses. Coupled with a set of ultralight (and expensive)  Transitions progressive bifocal lenses, they weigh about an ounce and don't fall off my face despite my very straight nose and having very strong corrective lenses.

I'm happy with them. Sometimes I forget I have them on. Which is more than I can say for any other pair of glasses I've ever owned. And I've owned plenty.

[kalos]

I've learned to dislike rimless glasses

-40hz (February 07, 2013, 01:01 PM)

I think that the objective fact that rimless glasses do not limit the optical field, should make them number one option

[kalos]

Try these searches:

athletic eyeglasses
sports eyeglasses

-app103 (February 07, 2013, 12:48 PM)

I want them a bit 'curved' or 'wrap-around' face, do you know how are these called?

[Tinman57]

Try these searches:

athletic eyeglasses
sports eyeglasses

-app103 (February 07, 2013, 12:48 PM)

I want them a bit 'curved' or 'wrap-around' face, do you know how are these called?

-kalos (February 07, 2013, 02:19 PM)

  Wrap-Around is normally the term used.

[app103]

Try ones made specifically for racquetball, maybe?

[40hz]

I've learned to dislike rimless glasses

-40hz (February 07, 2013, 01:01 PM)

I think that the objective fact that rimless glasses do not limit the optical field, should make them number one option

-kalos (February 07, 2013, 02:17 PM)

Purely a matter of personal preference. The thin frames don't impair the optical field because your eyes learn to look around them so to speak.

My experience with rimless glasses is that they're too easy to damage and require constant "adjustment bending" since they're a little too flexible. YMMV.

That may also be a problem if you want a headband in the back to keep them on - as the picture you posted seems to indicate. , Since the only thing attached to the lenses would be the nose bridge and side pieces with a rimless design, all the pressure from the headband is going to put be on the bridge, and the lenses will constantly being pulled back and against your face like goggles. That would likely be very uncomfortable.

Maybe you'd be better off just getting contact lenses

[Stoic Joker]

I should probably mention that I worked in the optical field for several years, so I've had frequent occasion to watch this end badly.

I've learned to dislike rimless glasses

-40hz (February 07, 2013, 01:01 PM)

I think that the objective fact that rimless glasses do not limit the optical field, should make them number one option

-kalos (February 07, 2013, 02:17 PM)

Purely a matter of personal preference. The thin frames don't impair the optical field because your eyes learn to look around them so to speak.

-40hz (February 08, 2013, 06:22 AM)

Correct, to put it simply the above assertion is more of a subjective 'fact'. Rimless glasses have a very square edge which gets polished for aesthetics. This polished edge however can actually induce glare in different lighting by either catching it and lighting up the edge, or just reflecting it back into your eyes. Granted the effect varies depending on your prescription but the minimum thickness imposed by/for the groove tend to guarantee some hassles...it can also add back the weight to the lens that you though you were subtracting from the frame.

My experience with rimless glasses is that they're too easy to damage and require constant "adjustment bending" since they're a little too flexible. YMMV.

-40hz (February 08, 2013, 06:22 AM)

Correct, drill mounts are another even worse idea for exactly the same reason.

That may also be a problem if you want a headband in the back to keep them on - as the picture you posted seems to indicate. , Since the only thing attached to the lenses would be the nose bridge and side pieces with a rimless design, all the pressure from the headband is going to put be on the bridge, and the lenses will constantly being pulled back and against your face like goggles. That would likely be very uncomfortable.

-40hz (February 08, 2013, 06:22 AM)

This too is an excellent point. Most of the sports glasses one sees these days are of the full rim wrap-around variety. The reason being that the design simply works. I'm guessing this has much to do with why the "style" has remained in vogue for almost 20 years now.

[kalos]

I've learned to dislike rimless glasses

-40hz (February 07, 2013, 01:01 PM)

I think that the objective fact that rimless glasses do not limit the optical field, should make them number one option

-kalos (February 07, 2013, 02:17 PM)

Purely a matter of personal preference. The thin frames don't impair the optical field because your eyes learn to look around them so to speak.

My experience with rimless glasses is that they're too easy to damage and require constant "adjustment bending" since they're a little too flexible. YMMV.

That may also be a problem if you want a headband in the back to keep them on - as the picture you posted seems to indicate. , Since the only thing attached to the lenses would be the nose bridge and side pieces with a rimless design, all the pressure from the headband is going to put be on the bridge, and the lenses will constantly being pulled back and against your face like goggles. That would likely be very uncomfortable.

Maybe you'd be better off just getting contact lenses

-40hz (February 08, 2013, 06:22 AM)

while I agree with the fact that they may require more "adjustment bending" (however, titanium and other memory materials overcome this problem, or transparent frames)
I don't agree that the fact eyes learn to look around them
imo, it is the brain who learns to ignore the presence of the frames, and this does mean that optical field becomes limited
i accept that the limitation may be insignificant, but imo it is not
rimless glasses cause limitation of the optical field as well, since at the edges of the lenses, there is no (at least clear) visibility, but probably less significant than this of frames glasses

as for the goggles, probably, I was just thinking that there could be a way to fix that