 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeArticlesDiving DestinationsLearning Scuba DivingMarine LifeMiscellaneousDiscussion GroupsGeneralScuba EquipmentScuba LocationsAustralian ScubaUK ScubaDirectoryScuba Clubs |
Scuba Forum / Scuba Equipment / November 2003Scuba contact lenses
I'm looking for glasses or contactlenses for use when scuba diving. Is this possible? Does anybody know where to find more info on this subject... It would be nice to dive without the mask :-) I know about a tribe of sea gipsy called "chao ley" they have learnt to see better below water as kids. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no I were glasses. When in scubadiving, i usually were contact lenses. Normal ones. They work ok if you remember you are wearing them. Other option is to graduate with lenses your diving mask. If you lose your lenses before or during your dive, you may replace the mask and continue the dive. Ric > I'm looking for glasses or contactlenses for use when scuba diving. > Is this possible? Does anybody know where to find more info on this [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > :-) Tor > www.gjerrestad.no I don't want the mask at all.. I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. Tor På Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:33:02 -0000, skrev Ricardo <ricardogermano@netcabo.pt>: > I were glasses. When in scubadiving, i usually were contact lenses. > Normal [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] >> -- :-) Tor >> www.gjerrestad.no :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no > I don't want the mask at all.. > I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. > Tor Given the human eye is designed to work in a medium with the refractive index of air suddenly putting it in water is going to cause problems - its why underwater is blurry. I should imagine contact lenses would be impossible as would glasses purely due to the small size you'd need and the distance involved. > I don't want the mask at all.. > I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. During the basic scuba course, you instructor should have explained that this is rather impossible. You need the air-gap in order to focus. And you need that airgap connected with your nose, otherwise when you go down, the pressure would push your eyes into your head. Not a pretty thought. I have a Mares Seta mask with a set of lenses (-4.5 and -5.5), and a set of spare lenses in case one breaks. Works fine. The only real problem is on the boat/shore between the time I take my glasses off and put the mask on. /Marcin > > I don't want the mask at all.. > > I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > go down, the pressure would push your eyes into your head. Not a pretty > thought. You need correction and I suppose a set of rigid contacts could be designed to do that. Assuming that was true the major problem would be keeping them in. Surface tension is used and that does not work well under water. They might also have to be a bit thick making blinking a bit of a problem. The closer a mask is to your face the wider the vision but the closer the sides are, the narrower the vision. These lenses might be like looking through two tubes. > > I don't want the mask at all.. > > I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. > During the basic scuba course, you instructor should have explained > that this is rather impossible. You need the air-gap in order to focus. > And you need that airgap connected with your nose, otherwise when you > go down, the pressure would push your eyes into your head. Not a pretty > thought. I don't need an air gap to focus, only to focus clearly. While it may not be possible to do so, I will need to be convinced that a contact lens can not be constructed to compensate for the difference. Keeping such a lens in place, however, might be a serious problem. With contacts, there is probably no unfilled air gap between the eye and the lens. As a result, there's no eye squeeze involved as there surely is with goggles and other devices that provide an air gap but do not allow for equalization. Lee På Mon, 27 Oct 2003 18:16:20 GMT, skrev Mike Painter <mdotpainter@att.net>: >> > I don't want the mask at all.. >> > I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Surface > tension is used and that does not work well under water. This is the practical problems. i'm not interested in theese. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no <snip> > And you need that airgap connected with your nose, otherwise when you > go down, the pressure would push your eyes into your head. Not a pretty > thought. My instructor never covered that. It seems to me that when you equalize the mask (to keep your sinuses from having issues), you increase the pressure inside the mask to the same as the pressure outside the mask. If your eyeballs were going to get pushed into your head, htey should do it regardless of if the pressure is coming from the air or the water (I'd think). C Guynn > <snip> > > And you need that airgap connected with your nose, otherwise when you [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > regardless of if the pressure is coming from the air or the water (I'd > think). It's good that he or she didn't. If you don't equalize the lower pressure in the mask will try to "suck" your eyes out of your head, not push them in. The pressure on our hypothetical contacts would be the same as that on the eyes and would not push the eyes in. På Mon, 27 Oct 2003 16:14:56 GMT, skrev Marcin Dobrucki <Marcin.Dobrucki@FAKE.nokia.com>: >> I don't want the mask at all.. >> I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > thought. > /Marcin Bullshit Marcin... Be serious.. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no > And you need that airgap connected with your nose, otherwise when you > go down, the pressure would push your eyes into your head. Not a pretty > thought. Geeze, go re-read you textbooks, lol, or are you messing with his mind? when you go down without equalising the pressure causes the airspace to srink, and as the glass is too reigid to bend, the eyes get pulled out into the airspace to fill it. rhys På Mon, 27 Oct 2003 16:14:56 GMT, skrev Marcin Dobrucki <Marcin.Dobrucki@FAKE.nokia.com>: >> I don't want the mask at all.. >> I want to use lenses to see clearly without the mask. > > During the basic scuba course, you instructor should have explained > that this is rather impossible. -- more stuff You don't see the question here! Explain why a divemaster can explain this complex matter? :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no > I don't want the mask at all.. want to use lenses to see clearly without > I the mask. Get reborn as a fish or something similar, only way. >replace spamblock with my family name to e-mail me På Tue, 28 Oct 2003 17:37:00 +0900, skrev Jerome Meekings <warm-water-diver@spamblock.net>: >> I don't want the mask at all.. want to use lenses to see clearly without >> I the mask. > > Get reborn as a fish or something similar, only way. Bullshit Jerome... Be serious.. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no > Bullshit Jerome... Be serious.. A BS question deserves a BS answer .... and Why Be serious?? Go diving, or get a sense of humor, or a life, or something. >replace spamblock with my family name to e-mail me På Fri, 31 Oct 2003 01:07:54 +0900, skrev Jerome Meekings <warm-water-diver@spamblock.net>: >> Bullshit Jerome... Be serious.. > > A BS question deserves a BS answer .... and Why Be serious?? > > Go diving, or get a sense of humor, or a life, or something. I'm diving, and i have sense of humor, but u cant see when to differ.... Sorry, no more arguing about this stupid thing. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no > I'm looking for glasses or contactlenses for use when scuba diving. > Is this possible? Does anybody know where to find more info on this [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I know about a tribe of sea gipsy called "chao ley" they have learnt to > see better below water as kids. Freedivers have developed goggles that are very small and is water filled. Still uses a strap though and apparently isn't suitable for scuba. Called Liquivision fluid goggles they are made by Eric Fattah from Vancouver, Canada. A review is posted here www.deeperblue.net/article.php/299/18 I had heard that the Australian navy had done some trials with contacts that correct for the distortion created by water but that it didn't work out. Brian Edmonton, Alberta www. På Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:48:52 +0100, skrev Tor <tor@gjerrestad.no>: > I'm looking for glasses or contactlenses for use when scuba diving. > Is this possible? Does anybody know where to find more info on this [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > I know about a tribe of sea gipsy called "chao ley" they have learnt to > see better below water as kids. The newsgroup: sci.optics has an fairly different approach to this subject. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no > P? Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:48:52 +0100, skrev Tor <tor@gjerrestad.no>: > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > The newsgroup: sci.optics has an fairly different approach to this subject. I remember seeing that and bet that it's more a brain thing than an optics question. After a few months in Baja and several hours a day in the water I noticed that the fish I speared under water was the same size as the (same) fish above water. My brain adjusted. I then remembered reading about this in "The Silent World" as a kid. Cousteau's photographers started taking fuzzy pictures. They found out that they were estimating distances correctly and focusing on the actual distance. The camera never learned this. As near as I can tell it never goes away, even if you've been out of the water for a number of years. > > P? Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:48:52 +0100, skrev Tor <tor@gjerrestad.no>: > > [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > As near as I can tell it never goes away, even if you've been out of the > water for a number of years. As I understand it, this sounds like much the same phenomenon you experience when you see the moon just over the horizon. It looks enormous. If you photograph it, it is normal sized. From what I understand, your mind is so used to seeing this get smaller as they approach the horizon that when something doesn't (the moon), your brain says it must have expanded and so you see an even larger moon. Or something like that... <snip> > As I understand it, this sounds like much the same phenomenon you experience > when you see the moon just over the horizon. It looks enormous. If you > photograph it, it is normal sized. From what I understand, your mind is so > used to seeing this get smaller as they approach the horizon that when > something doesn't (the moon), your brain says it must have expanded and so > you see an even larger moon. Or something like that... Not at all. In fact the next time you see the moon like that turn around, bend over and look at it between your legs. Bang, the moon appears normal. It is an optical illusion and looking at it in a different manner breaks the illusion. The between the legs thing *really* works but any odd angle works. In diving objects actually are magnified as light passes from water to air. That's why the camera always must be focused to the apparent distance rather than the real distance. But our brains can learn to ignore the difference. > <snip> > > [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > illusion. > The between the legs thing *really* works but any odd angle works. Woudn't that also fit into what I said? Since you aren't used to looking at things from that angle, you see what is actually there... > In diving objects actually are magnified as light passes from water to air. > That's why the camera always must be focused to the apparent distance rather > than the real distance. > But our brains can learn to ignore the difference. True, but couldn't that be basically the same concept? We learn to see it's actual distance instead of its apparent distance... Either way, it's pretty neat. Richard Whitcom wrote: > ". I should imagine contact lenses would be impossible as would glasses > purely due to the small size you'd need and the distance involved. Jaccque Mayol wore hard contact lenses that allowed him to see without an airspace. Umberto Pellizari and a few other people have used newer soft lenses for the same kind of freediving attempts. The company that makes the lenses charges about 10,000$ for a set, so usually a regular set of goggles goes over top, filled with water so that they don't get lost. The problem with them is that they can shift during the dive and the diver loses sense of direction. Erik Y. På 30 Oct 2003 15:00:27 -0600, skrev Erik <greatspirit63@yahoo.com>: > Richard Whitcom wrote: > > ". I should imagine contact lenses would be impossible as would [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > Posted via Deeper Blue [ http://www.deeperblue.net ] > freedive.scuba.travel - The Online Resource for the Underwater World This is close Erik. What are the idiots around this forum use for thinking. Now, im not aiming at u folks thinking that this is possible :-) Use your brain for it's purpose. :-) Tor www.gjerrestad.no Erik wrote: > Jaccque Mayol ......blah, blah..... Erik Y. Here's the link : http://www.otticarocchi.com/inglese/lentiapnea_uk.htm |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2008 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.