Haim Shlomo [Shamir]

Dear Colleagues, Can anyone explain the difference between NOD and NWD as it defined in the DCS: NOD - (numeric;) Refracted object distance at near viewing point (meters). NWD - (numeric;) Working object distance at near viewing point (meters). We would like to use the one who fits most to describe the reading distance measured by the ECP. Thank you in advance for your support. Stay safe Haim S. - Shamir Optical Ind.

Dear Colleagues, As you might already know from our previous conversations, Shamir is using in some cases more than one base per Rx range, where one considered to be the primary and the rest are secondary option. Can we use the Min/Max values in the JSON format to describe the span of bases can be used for the specific Rx range, where the first column is the primary, the Min is the minimum secondary base and the Max is the maximum secondary base? "AddMin": 0.75, "AddMax": 4.00, "Lines": [ "-1200, 0, null", "-900, 0, 150, 50, 150", "-500, 0, 300, 150, 450", "-100, 0, 500, 300, 650", ...... ] Thanks for your reply. Haim S.

Dear Colleagues, Can someone explain what is the meaning of the 3 numbers under ERNRIN/UP described in the LPDS V0.78 example for layouts (p. 30)? What are they describing? Thanks, Haim S.

I also voted yes. I also don't see that as a major change that requires special action from those parties who would like to comply with the new standard. It is just as good to declare you are not able to support 3.13 as to 4.something.

Hi Yaron, First, the suggested label is BEROC_ so actually the first letters are BER and not ER. Front side is the easier case, and it is explained in the document A&R provided prior to the DCS request. I agree with you that there should be only one ER for each lens but that is still the case, at least as I understand it. Only one ER, that can appear on the front side or the back, not on both. Personally, I currently don't see how these labels should affect the way we engrave the OC of the lens. It should only affect the description of the measuring points location on the front side of the lens (as defined in ISO/ANSI). These points should be described with reference to the back side engravings (in case they are on the back), and that is what the new suggested system is trying to define. As you described, there is a chance that we missed the mismatch with some old labels. I pass your notes to our algorithm team for review. I will definitely share their conclusions when ready. Maybe we can have a phone call to exchange insights on that. Thanks a lot for your notes and hope to see you in the next convention as well. Haim S.