But I have a round face! The Myth of the Face Shape system

"What face shape do I have?"
"I was reading on line about frame shapes and your face and they said…"  

Enough already!

I have heard this for the last twenty+ years, it always revolves around matching a conceptual idea of a face shape, round square, oval, heart, whatever to a frame shape.  Here’s the problem, spend thirty seconds googling face shapes and you get mixed information.

   Three charts each more confusing than the last.  Diamond shape, oval, long, 5?  What does all this mean?

I don’t know about you but I have never met anyone that fits cleanly into any of these designations.  Better yet, I would argue the problem is that we all have a skewed idea of what we look like.  Personally, I walk around with a mental image of myself looking like Pierce Brosnan ala James Bond/Mama Mia.  The reality is that I don’t look anything like him, unless Pierce gets heavier and bald than maybe I have a shot.  The point here is that we all think we look different than we really do. Something similar to how you hear yourself compared to what you sound like when played back to you.  In the end most people walk in the office stating they have a round face, while in reality they may have a square or oval face, maybe even a heart shaped face.

As an aside, what exactly is a heart shaped face?  Every time I hear it I think of Helena Bonham Carter in Alice in Wonderland.   

I would like to propose an alternative to this that may be easier.

If we simply break a face down, not in terms of shape, but in terms of three basic lines, we can make the eyewear selection process easier. By simply looking at the relations of the brow line, the jaw line and the relation of jaw to cheek, we can isolate the key characteristics of the face and identify quickly what frames we should try on and avoid.  If you’re an optician, this is also a great way to gain rapport with your patients quickly by showing them what you are looking at and how this effects the outcome of their choices.

Let’s look at an easy face to work with first.

And with the Reference line drawn

So, we now have a face with three reference points, the brow, the jaw line and the angle between the jaw and the cheek.  When we start picking out a frame for this person we're going to want a frame that respects these points.  To respect the reference points we want to echo the brow line and compliment the jaw line and angle between Jaw and Cheek.

The idea is to find a piece (or possibly create one) that will follow these simple rules. The result will be a frame that will balance well and compliment with the persons features.  Here’s the fun part, when done well this sytem results in eyewear that people compliment again and again.

For Ms. Jolie, if she were to step into Corner Optical, I would start with a frame like the
 Ronnie by Barton Perreira                                            









 and finish on either the BP Veronica in Heroin Chic
or something more some from Tom Davies with a similar line.

Interestingly a Tom Davies had the opportunity to design a frame for Ms. Jolie.



This basic system works every time.

 Try this face.                                                         
 

With Reference points.

This person has a lower arch to the brow but a steeper angle to the jaw and prominent cheek bones that are echoing the jaw line.  Here you would probably be best served with a soft catish shape on the bottom of the frame and a low or flat arch on the top.  BP Lila Jane comes to mind.

On a male face it’s the same.

 

With lines

Mr. Pitt 

 

 Mr. Pitt with Lines

Mr. Pitt is interesting in that the Jaw and the cheek are inline some of the more recent images show a jaw that is further out than the cheek.

Simply follow the contour of the face will result in better looking frame fits and more complimentary eyewear. This is a simpler stem compared to the older face shape system and is easier for both patients and opticians to work with and understand.

Do use hypoallergenic makeup?

Hypoallergenic makeup was introduced to the market in 1953. It describes products that are less likely to cause an allergic reaction. It is not an official medical term, so claims that a product is hypoallergenic might apply to some people and not to others who are actually allergic to the products that other people are not allergic to. In any event, better safe then sorry when it comes to your eyes! Signs of eye allergies that might be caused by the type of eyeliner or mascara you use include itching, tearing and puffy lower eyelids.
Product Approval and Regulation
FDA’s legal authority over cosmetics is different from other products regulated by the agency, such as drugs, biologics, and medical devices. Cosmetic products and ingredients are not subject to FDA premarket approval authority, with the exception of color additives. However, FDA may pursue enforcement action against violative products, or against firms or individuals who violate the law.
Cosmetic firms are responsible for substantiating the safety of their products and ingredients before marketing. Failure to adequately substantiate the safety of a cosmetic product or its ingredients prior to marketing causes the product to be misbranded unless the following warning statement appears conspicuously on the principal display panel of the product’s label:
“Warning–The safety of this product has not been determined.” (21 CFR 740.10)
In general, except for color additives and those ingredients which are prohibited or restricted from use in cosmetics by regulation, a manufacturer may use any ingredient in the formulation of a cosmetic provided that the ingredient and the finished cosmetic are safe, the product is properly labeled, and the use of the ingredient does not otherwise cause the cosmetic to be adulterated or misbranded under the laws that FDA enforces.
Your best bet is to use a product from an established cosmetics company; one with many products on the market and a good reputation as there is no regulatory agency that approves cosmetics to market.


Do Not share eye makeup with others
Eye makeup applicators become contaminated with bacteria the second the bottle is opened, and get a heavy dose of bacteria when applied to the margins of the eyelids or the eyelashes. One role of the eyelashes is to collect microorganisms like bacteria and viral particles before they get in the eye, so they are loaded with these vermin. The lower eyelids are a common place for bacteria to thrive, so applying makeup to them causes you to wipe up some bacteria onto your applicator and introduce it into the cosmetic vial you are using where it multiplies. Did I gross you out? Don’t share!
Do not apply eye makeup on eyelid margin behind eyelashes
There are important glands that are on the margins of the eyelids just behind (closer to the eye) the eyelash line. By applying makeup along the inner eyelid margins, the glands can become clogged and lead to a condition known as meibomitis.

One last tip, do not poke yourself in the eye with mascara brush
Just had to throw this one in – hope you knew it already.

KC

Permission is a funny thing

A couple of days ago I was talking about having the permission to fail. Whats interesting is that we as people need permission to do all sorts of things. We even need permission to eat healthy. I know this sounds strange but I was reading an article about Chef Tal Ronnen,  and there was one quote that stood out, 

"So many people tell me, 'I could be a vegan if it weren't for bacon,' and I tell them, 'Be a "vegan" who eats bacon,'"

There it was, permission to eat the way you want. Why on earth would someone need permission to do something so basic? Kind of makes you wonder what you need permission to do.

Permission to Fail

I was asked today, 'Why can you create eye wear that other offices say can't be done?'  The answer was easy.

I allow myself to fail.

Actually I enjoy the failure.

When I made my first Franklin Bifocal I blew through 3 sets of lenses before I got it right. The difference is I didn't just fail three times I actually discovered three unique ways of  not making a proper Franklin Bifocal. 

The key is to fail intelligently much like DARPA has done with their scramjet last week.

Failure is good but only if  you learn. Failure without learning is just spending money.

I Have a Question.

I have a question. If there is difference that makes no difference, is it still a difference?  Is there a real difference between a hammer with a red handle and a hammer with a blue handle?  Even if the blue-handled hammer is made by Sears and the other by Makita, are they somehow functionally different?  Is there a real difference in my optical care if the optometrist who sees me works in an office owned by an optometrist or one owned by an optician?  I suggest that these points are the same: a hammer is a hammer regardless of color or manufacturer and the care provided by an optometrist is the same regardless of who owns the space they are in.  

That is why I cannot understand the difference between an optometric office that is owned by an optician and one that is owned by an optometrist.  I ask this question because there is a very large corporation called VSP (Vision Service Plan) that says it sees a difference. I simply don’t understand what it is.

What I do understand is that VSP was started by a group of optometrists many years ago. This was before vision insurance was generally available. This group of optometrists wanted a way to bring more patients into their offices and began selling a program to local business to increase patient traffic.

They decided that part of this program was that they would exclude anyone that wasn’t at the party when it started. Initially that meant the only offices in the program were those owned by one of the optometrists who had started VSP.  As would happen when a good idea comes along, things got bigger than anyone expected and these few optometrists needed more offices to satisfy the growing demand. So they called up their optometrist friends and invited them to join.  

VSP continued as an OD only program for decades, growing year after year.  Finally, when they had exhausted the OD community and needed to bring in new blood and new services, VSP decided to invite ophthalmologists to join.  Ophthalmologists of course are MD’s and therefore sit at the top of the optical food chain.  Surgery, refractions and by now eyewear are all within the scope of an MD’s practice.

But VSP continued to require that a covered office had to be owned by an optometrist or ophthalmologists.  Any office that was owned by an optician would be excluded.  As VSP likes to say, “By Optometrists For Optometrists.” 

At the same time VSP was growing larger and larger, opticianry was dying a slow death. Between the large national chains and vision insurance, opticianry has been relegated to a supporting role.  In most states opticians are not even licensed (which is a true shock).

One may think that in today’s competitive world VSP would have dropped the ownership requirement.  In fact I think that it has. At least it did for itself when Cisco announced it would be building its own eye care clinic on its corporate headquarters campus. VSP could either allow Cisco’s employees to use their VSP benefits at this clinic or Cisco would switch to a competitive company. VSP, being no dummy, made the exception and hired an independent OD to work in Cisco’s new clinic at the Cisco corporate campus. Apparently VSP doesn’t see a difference in ownership, so long as a large enough contract is involved.   

Here is my quandary. I am a board certified optician and own my own optometric practice, which is not a franchisee or a chain.  As the owner and operator, I employ a fully licensed and trained optometrist to provide care for our patients.  Patients come to my office not only for dispensary needs but also to see our doctor. She provides them with a thorough exam and expert advice as to their eye care needs, including eyewear and contact lenses.  If necessary, we refer patients to an MD for further care.

Of importance is that the optometric care and services that patients receive in my optician-owned office from our optometrist are the same as they would receive in an optometrist-owned office.  We have the same equipment and the people providing the care have the same credentials as in an optometrist-owned office.  

Thus, we have a difference (ownership of the physical location) that in reality makes no difference.  In other words, an optometric office is the same regardless of who owns the fixtures.

So, why does VSP continue to draw a line?  Why does the title of the person that signed the lease make a difference?  Maybe someday I’ll understand.  In the mean time, if a benefits manager out there wants to help a small local business, feel free to tell VSP you won’t renew your contract if they won’t sign my office on as a panel provider.

The Self-Righteous Housewife: THAT DRAWER and BAND POLOS

The Self-Righteous Housewife: THAT DRAWER and BAND POLOS

Great essay from our friends at Laramy-K

This is from from one of our suppliers. Just a great essay and certainly one that needs repeating. 


For some back history, please understand that one company, Luxottica, owns;


Lenscrafters, Pearle Vision, Every leased optical in department stores, Sunglass Hut, Optique, Eyemed (vision insurance) and produces most of the name brand eyewear today (Prada, D&G, Oakley, Ray-Ban, Polo, etc.). This company has thus far never been challenged by the US Government for Anti-Trust laws.

The State of the Industry…In My Opinion.


Dear Friends and Valued Customers,



First, let me say that I have never been a political junkie. However, in recent years I have been forced to pay attention. There is a situation that affects not only the optical industry, but, in fact, all small businesses in America. I have listened to our government. Every administration has talked about how small business is the backbone of the US economy, and is collectively the largest employer in our country. Why, then, does it feel like we are being served up on a plate? As the government allows foreign entities to come in and monopolize the business world, the ones who suffer are the very people that are supposed to be the “backbone” of the economy. Is it any wonder that we’re in the mess we are facing? It makes for a crippled country and economy when pieces of the core structure are being sold off bit by bit. The unemployment line is filled with people who have been left in the wake of these administrative decisions. Here is what I’ve seen in our specific industry:

In conversations I have had with many people in these past months, it is obvious that some of our vendors have been very effective at one thing in particular. They have taken prescription eyewear out of a healthcare related field and moved it into a retail commodity. There is, in fact, a concerted effort to eliminate the Independent, in the wholesale, retail and even in the optometry divisions. Vendors and insurance companies have offers flying around wildly in an effort to control the optical industry completely.

As we see vertical integration progress, the victim will be your patient. The gift of sight is irreplaceable, and they are playing with it. Just a few facts that are accessible on websites such as PreventBlindness.com and others:

■Approximately 75% of all learning is acquired through sight.
■33% of school children in New York City alone have vision problems which could affect behavior and learning.
■86% of people with an EXISTING eye disease do not have access to routine eye exams.
We tend to take for granted such things as reading a book, ordering from a menu, driving, crossing a busy street and even navigating our own homes. Corrective prescription eyewear changes people’s lives. I have been honored to witness this with a 14 month old child seeing his mother for the first time. It is not something I am about to forget.

How important is accuracy in prescription eyewear? The American National Standards Institute, known as ANSI, has guidelines, or tolerances, for fabrication. They have changed rather dramatically over the years. When I started in this industry, the tolerance for a cylinder axis on a +/-.25 was 3-5 degrees. The new standards that took effect in 2010 relaxed that to a new tolerance of 13-15 degrees. Pretty radical. In the area of power allowances, with a lens measuring plano to +/-.25, we used to be held to .06 of a diopter. The new ANSI more than doubled that allowable error.

In today’s laboratory, we have access to equipment (some manufactured and sold by our “competitive” vendors) that can produce a prescription to a hundredth of a diopter. Essentially, this equipment produces perfect product. Why, then, have ANSI standards been relaxed rather than tightened? While I am not suggesting that relaxed tolerances could result in blindness, it can certainly create discomfort, mild to severe headaches, inability to read street signs, and avoidance of certain activities or hobbies.

It appears that the attention to detail in the manufacturing of prescription eyewear, as a general rule, has taken a back seat to the corporate bottom line. All businesses have a right to make money, but in my opinion, not by using confusing marketing, misrepresenting product, selling certain products only as a package deal with high cost add ons required, or at the expense of an unsuspecting patient. Cash incentives are offered to dispensers for using certain products. Some are being offered cash or credit to remodel with contracts to use specific labs or product. Vendors are even offering 3 months free after committing to the first 3 months, again for using that vendor's lab or product.

Molded progressive lenses are quickly becoming a thing of the past. This presents a problem for vendors with outdated inventory. To combat this, in steps the marketing department…What are HD or Enhanced lenses, anyway? Is this new product or a spin to reduce stagnant inventory? I assure you, it is the latter. They take a molded lens, run it on the more precise freeform generator, and ta-da! A molded lens with a very accurate prescription! Many misleading adjectives are being used and creating mass confusion when it comes to defining product coming in on the coattails of true freeform technology.

Despite these turbulent times in our industry, or perhaps more accurately, because of these times, I want you to know that Laramy-K still believes what my late husband and co-founder, JB, taught us many years ago: ANSI is for amateurs. We will continue to produce way above those standards for you, your patient, and for our own integrity. Our original mission statement declared, “By providing you with our best, and our attention to detail, we are ultimately honoring God.” That is important to us. We will continue to serve our customers with the same personal service, concern for detail and the desire to provide the most accurate product we can produce…regardless of the direction the rest of our industry might choose.

In closing, I want to reassure you of who we are, and impress upon you how very important you are to us. I also want to thank you for allowing us to be a part of your small business. Laramy-K is still here because of each and every one of you, and we continue to appreciate your support. That’s what it will take to reclaim our industry: Supporting the Independent. Is it too late? I sincerely hope not.


From my heart to yours,



Janet and the entire Laramy-K gang

For the original post go to www.facebook.com/laramyk

.