I've finally had a chance to check if differences in surfacing ' style' (for want of a better word) could explain it:
No they can't: inside on both pairs= close so plano but ever so slightly concave, outside convex. I still feel I'm the victim of a mess-up. Hate to speculate on intentional or not, but at the very least not well handled. br BertJan On Apr 17, 4:37 pm, Firewalker <[email protected]> wrote: > Although this can get a bit technical, take a look > athttp://www.laramyk.com/education/optical-theory/lens-form.html > > If you look at the 3rd diagram, you'll see some of the different ways > a lens can be surfaced, and why the different surfacing techniques can > result in thicker/thinner lenses. > > -=# Firewalker #=- > > On Apr 16, 3:28 pm, BJ <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > In my case the lenses are actually twice the same quality from the > > same manufacturer. > > > I had heard this term 'surfacing' before, but am not quite sure what > > it means. So it is actually a way of making thinner lenses? > > > It could be an explanation. But I find that strange, why would the > > same company do it in some cases, and not in other cases? > > > BertJan- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Check us out at the oft-updated http://glassyeyes.blogspot.com! You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "GlassyEyes" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/glassyeyes?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
