Author Topic: active focus with book vs computer  (Read 1430 times)

Offline CapitalPrince

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
active focus with book vs computer
« on: January 12, 2015, 12:17:36 AM »
Here's a new article on frauenfeld that suggests active focus on the computer may not be good and instead read a book

http://frauenfeldclinic.com/trouble-finding-active-focus-screen/

This is consistent with my experience. No matter how i try, print pushing with the computer doesn't work for me well. I made almost no progress print pushing with the computer for the last several months (and i do alot of computer work). And the improvements I made are probably due to reading the book (definitely need to spend more time with leisure reading).

But i still think the best way to find active focus is
1) looking at distance without any lens (if you have better than 20/40)
2) look at a moving object
3) have an intent on seening clearly (like focusing and identifying players i soccer)

Reading with a strong plus is good, but you would to do it for long periods of time.


Offline OtisBrown

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1766
Re: active focus with book vs computer
« Reply #1 on: January 12, 2015, 04:49:16 AM »
Hi Jim,

Thanks for your excellent commentary.

I have found that each person, who rejects the minus (assuming 20/40 vision), must work out his own "style", or routine, for wearing the plus for near.  Thus I see no contradiction in Warnbd's use of his preventive methods, with a plus, and Capitol's  plus-wear. 

The important issue is that they believe they can accomplish what Todd accomplished, and they know how to check for 20/20, with their own minus lens.  I like Capital's idea of wearing a plus for the computer, and a stronger plus, for reading.  (We tend to read at about 16 inches, while our computer-work is at about 24 inches.  (That does make a difference.)

There is no "locked in" improvement, because long-term near, creates a slow "down" change in refractive state of the natural eye.  There is not "cure" but wise "avoidance".

In fact, even Lasik patients, who get to 20/20, by that operation, when they go back to, "long-term near" find themselves becoming nearsighted, yet a SECOND TIME.   Even Lasik, at $4,000, does not "lock in" anything. 

I wear a plus, and check my refraction myself - for exactly that reason.

Capital has supplied some expert commentary, on "active focus" and how to find it on a computer and a book.

But, as always, this is a matter of person's understanding and objective measurements of his own Snellen visual acuity.  It indeed
requires a person with long-term resolve to achieve the desired result.


This statement would contradict warnbd's experience. In his thread, you can read that he has mostly been using print pushing on a laptop to achieve a remarkable improvement.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2015, 05:56:02 AM by OtisBrown »

Offline gekonus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 84
Re: active focus with book vs computer
« Reply #2 on: January 12, 2015, 05:51:32 AM »
You're saying that in different resolution or different colours its possible to improve faster?

I dont know, but even if the text isnt as sharp, you still have that active focusing feeling in the eyes..

Offline CapitalPrince

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 187
Re: active focus with book vs computer
« Reply #3 on: January 12, 2015, 07:05:12 AM »
i'm not an expert on this topic. You should email the frauenfeld staff or post in the frauenfeld forum if you have specific questions.

I'm not sure why computer print pushing doesn't work well for me. My 14 inch laptop has a 1366x768 resolution with subpar color gamut and color accuracy. I have not tested print pushing on a better display. *Maybe* you get better results with a 14inch laptop with a 1920x1080 IPS display with high adobeRGB color gamut.

Sometimes with distance i get the "active focus moment" when i try to focus on a object and i immediately feel a strong pull with the ciliary muscles trying to focus. Again this is very rare and hard to replicate.