Many photographers spend lots of $$$ on cameras, lenses, computers, monitors, printers, and color management devices with the aim that what comes out of the printer is exactly what they saw when they took a photo or as displayed on the monitor. But this may all be for naught if the photographer's brain isn't seeing the scene accurately. A case in point is myself. Early in my 40's I began to have problems reading so I got reading glasses. This continued to deteriorate until I was told nothing more could be done due to cataracts and I needed to have my lenses replaced with new ones. My thought was that now I'll be able to read easier and I'll be able to pass a DMV vision test. I'm 67 now. I had one eye done on Wed. and I can indeed read my easier. Score one for the doc. But, what amazed me was what else changed. First hint was while sitting at home recuperating I could see some through the protective patch as it has a grid of round holes in it. I was seeing very bright things. So I started to compare one eye vs. the other. Through the unfixed eye an area of carpet looked a bit lighter biege than the rest due to light coming in through the door. Through my "new" eye that patch was completely blown highlights. I estimated that I had at least one stop greater light coming through. Amazing. I compared paper and I got off white vs. pure white. Computer images were much brighter and vibrant. Looking through my camera viewfinder I have a scale on the bottom. Old eye white, new eye yellow. Hmmm. something is really going on here. Looking at some projected images at a photography talk the other night, I had red flowers vs. magenta flowers. I've been doing lots of hand over the eye comparisons and am really surprised at some of the differences. Bottom line for me is that I may have been editing images based on my vision, which was way off, and not what the average person might see. This had happened so gradually, I had no idea of what had happened to my vision other than reading fine print. So, the take home message is if you've been told you have cataracts but have put off doing something about it; get it done. I'm only half way through my adventure but it's been all WOW so far. Can't wait to get the other done in a few weeks.
I debated about writing this as it might be seen as tooting my own horn but decided that if only one of our group used this as a catalyst to get their eyes checked or have the surgery, it was worth it. Thanks for listening.
Hi Peter. What you're saying makes perfect sense. I've been told I have the beginning of cataracts due to age and sun damage. Most of the time it doesn't bother me but late at night when my eyes are tired I can definitely notice a BIG difference in quality of vision. Whether this is caused by cataracts or not I'm not sure, but it's certainly something to be aware of. Thanks for posting.
Peter - Glad to hear about your experience, hope it all continues well..
I just wanted to say thanks for posting this. My Dad is turning 59 this year and has cataract surgery scheduled for June 5th.
His sight has always been pretty poor, but with the addition of cataracts it's turned from poor to horrible, and he's much too young to be suffering the ill effects. I sent my parents the excerpt of your post with the hopes it will aleviate some of their anxiety and give him a glimpse (sorry for the pun) into what he has to look forward to after his procedure.
Peter, so glad to hear that the operation has delivered what you expected - and more.
However, it's so ironic that this morning I was thinking to myself "I can never see what anyone else sees, so how do I know that what I see in my pictures is truly representative of what is?" I am 67 myself, and have worn glasses since my 40's but my eyesight has been pretty good (I can still find my wife's earring clasp that has fallen on the rug when she can't javascript:%20x()). But it does sneak up on you, and I can't help but wonder if I am calibrating my monitors, printers, etc. off the true colour of the image only because I see it that way (incorrectly). This then brings us into the realm do we really exist, or are we only illusions of ourselves; does a tree falling in the forest really make a noise if no one hears it; and ultimately does calibration really matter if "everyone" sees colour in their own personal way that we can never mimic. If two people look at a scene, it's true to each of them but which one is accurate? Is there some colour scale that can be measured electronically or mathematically that represents the true natural colour of the scene? Theoretically this is what camera sensors are supposed to do, but the problem with RAW files is they don't record white balance, so we play with it on our computers to come up with what we thought we saw. Some day, I would like to be able to have my computer read a RAW file and then adjust the monitor to represent the true mathematical colour values in the file. That would then give me a base line from which I can make a judgement as to whether that is what I saw or not, and at least know that what I am seeing is a little (or a lot) off from what is true in the natural world. On the other hand, does any of it really matter if it sells?
Garry Revesz
Toronto, ON
"Walk softly, leave only footprints, and carry a big camera"
Peter, I had my lens replaced 15 months ago and absolutely LOVE it. I wish I'd done it 10 years ago! I agree with you; anyone that is having cataract issues, go get the surgery done. It is easy and wow what a difference!
Posted by Fred Stearns on May 23, 2012 at 12:46 AM
I had contact surgery several years ago. I couldn't see through the gauze as they used a metal eye cover. But, when the cover was removed, I was in disbelief. I didn't realize how far off my vision was. Through the untreated eye, paper was now yellow and in the treated eye it was almost painfully white. I now have a slight correction for farsightedness after a lifetime of being very nearsighted.
For those concerned about being too young for cataract surgery, I have known people as young as 49 who had the surgery.
Peter, some of the difference that you're seeing is getting into the psychology of perception and how the brain "interprets" the visual input. I've read that our eyes can only handle 2 - 3 stops of brightness, but that as they roam a view, we adjust the brightness automatically so that our perception "sees" 6 - 8 stops of brightness (more than a digital back can see). In your case one eye is seeing much more light than the other, so the brain doesn't know how to "interpret" the scene colorwise and white in the "good" eye looks yellow in the "bad" eye due to the brightness difference. I expect that these differences will all go away once the other eye is fixed and that if you processed and printed images while using only one eye (how fun! ) everything would look fine.
Thanks for your input Mark. In playing the good eye/bad eye game, I've noticed that there is definite differences between how each eye sees. It is interesting in how the brain interprets these differences. With both eyes open, I'm finding the brain, by and large, uses the info from the left eye (new lens) as the dominant view. And, in fact, that is my dominant eye. Very interesting.
I have about 13 years experience in working in ophthalmology, about 1/2 of it in retina and the other 1/2 in general ophthalmology.
Cataracts happen to EVERYONE. It's not a hereditary factor or genetic, or linked directly to activity. If you live long enough, you WILL get cataracts. They start forming (for most people) in their 40's or earlier. As we age, the natural lenses in our eyes lose their ability to 'rack focus'. So most people in their early to mid-40's start to realize they can't read things as closely as before - they counter this change by holding things further away or finally buying reading glasses (or getting bifocals/trifocals/progressive lenses put into their frames if they've worn glasses before). As we age further, the lens begins to opacify in different ways and patterns. The location of this opacification (and the patterns they form) are how doctors 'rate' and diagnose various cataract types. Cataracts can affect your vision in a myriad of ways: blurring, discoloration, 'haziness', difficulty reading, halos around lights, and difficulty with night driving, etc.
Cataract surgery is one of the most successful surgeries done today. There are several options that are available, including: setting both eyes for distance (understanding that you will need reading glasses to read), 'mono-vision' - which is setting one eye for distance and the other for close work (the brain can basically take over with the appropriate eye for the task at hand), multi-focal correction (similar to having a progressive lens built into your eyes), and astigmatism correcting lenses. Or combinations of these options. The surgery itself is (typically) pretty straightforward, and quick - average times 'under the knife' is around 8 minutes per eye, from start to finish.
You need to really pay attention to your doctor though and ask questions. It may be a generally very successful surgery, but there are still instances when things go wrong. You may not think about it, but a surgery meant to correct your vision CAN result in blindness (rarely), or the need for further surgeries. Infection is a possible risk as well. Despite the best surgeon, surgical staff, pre-surgery testing and evaluation, you may still need corrective glasses to see at your full potential. Just be well educated and don't be afraid to ask questions. We've done cataract surgery on patients in their teens and even early childhood (generally as a result of trauma to the eye or a congenital disorder) - but cataract surgery should not be taken lightly or done until you absolutely feel it should be done, because there is a documented risk to any surgery.
I too am an eye doctor and have just undergone cataract surgery myself. While not a surgeon I do all the pre op and post op testing on our group's patients. Dave's post above is right on. I love the results with the one eye that was done. The fellow eye is still OK for now. Only thing I would add is that I chose to have a clear lens put in rather than one of the yellow tinted lenses. Some feel that the yellow lens simulates the vision of a 50 year old. I cold have had a toric lens (corrects for astigmatism), but since I only have a small amount of astigmatism and the prime lens that corrects for it is yellow tinted, I opted to have a clear lens and correct the minor astigmatism with glasses. I can see 20/20 without Rx but see "better" with it.. I am thrilled with the result and do see a huge increase in contrast and clarity.
Photographers have a lot of questions to ask their surgeons and optometrists.
Interesting discussion...
I'm 65.5 and use trifocals...
my wife had the procedure done and wants me to get it.
All I know is they had better put me 100% under if they are gonna' mess with my eyes.
Y'all have given me a lot to consider.
Thanks for the input.
Posted by David Taylor on June 26, 2012 at 1:05 PM
Tom - Most cataract surgeries are very easily accomplished under simple local anesthesia. There are cases of course, where general anesthesia is needed, but it is a less used option, simply because of the added risks. I think you may find, after having a thorough discussion with your eye surgeon, that your fears are unwarranted. That said, I can easily see where anxiety comes in to play with any eye surgery. Having talked with thousands of post-operative patients, the number of people that have had a negative story about their procedure (pain/discomfort wise), can likely be counted on just one hand.
Discussion
11 repliesI debated about writing this as it might be seen as tooting my own horn but decided that if only one of our group used this as a catalyst to get their eyes checked or have the surgery, it was worth it. Thanks for listening.
I just wanted to say thanks for posting this. My Dad is turning 59 this year and has cataract surgery scheduled for June 5th.
His sight has always been pretty poor, but with the addition of cataracts it's turned from poor to horrible, and he's much too young to be suffering the ill effects. I sent my parents the excerpt of your post with the hopes it will aleviate some of their anxiety and give him a glimpse (sorry for the pun) into what he has to look forward to after his procedure.
Thanks again for sharing your experience!
However, it's so ironic that this morning I was thinking to myself "I can never see what anyone else sees, so how do I know that what I see in my pictures is truly representative of what is?" I am 67 myself, and have worn glasses since my 40's but my eyesight has been pretty good (I can still find my wife's earring clasp that has fallen on the rug when she can't javascript:%20x()). But it does sneak up on you, and I can't help but wonder if I am calibrating my monitors, printers, etc. off the true colour of the image only because I see it that way (incorrectly). This then brings us into the realm do we really exist, or are we only illusions of ourselves; does a tree falling in the forest really make a noise if no one hears it; and ultimately does calibration really matter if "everyone" sees colour in their own personal way that we can never mimic. If two people look at a scene, it's true to each of them but which one is accurate? Is there some colour scale that can be measured electronically or mathematically that represents the true natural colour of the scene? Theoretically this is what camera sensors are supposed to do, but the problem with RAW files is they don't record white balance, so we play with it on our computers to come up with what we thought we saw. Some day, I would like to be able to have my computer read a RAW file and then adjust the monitor to represent the true mathematical colour values in the file. That would then give me a base line from which I can make a judgement as to whether that is what I saw or not, and at least know that what I am seeing is a little (or a lot) off from what is true in the natural world. On the other hand, does any of it really matter if it sells?
Garry Revesz
Toronto, ON
"Walk softly, leave only footprints, and carry a big camera"
For those concerned about being too young for cataract surgery, I have known people as young as 49 who had the surgery.
Cataracts happen to EVERYONE. It's not a hereditary factor or genetic, or linked directly to activity. If you live long enough, you WILL get cataracts. They start forming (for most people) in their 40's or earlier. As we age, the natural lenses in our eyes lose their ability to 'rack focus'. So most people in their early to mid-40's start to realize they can't read things as closely as before - they counter this change by holding things further away or finally buying reading glasses (or getting bifocals/trifocals/progressive lenses put into their frames if they've worn glasses before). As we age further, the lens begins to opacify in different ways and patterns. The location of this opacification (and the patterns they form) are how doctors 'rate' and diagnose various cataract types. Cataracts can affect your vision in a myriad of ways: blurring, discoloration, 'haziness', difficulty reading, halos around lights, and difficulty with night driving, etc.
Cataract surgery is one of the most successful surgeries done today. There are several options that are available, including: setting both eyes for distance (understanding that you will need reading glasses to read), 'mono-vision' - which is setting one eye for distance and the other for close work (the brain can basically take over with the appropriate eye for the task at hand), multi-focal correction (similar to having a progressive lens built into your eyes), and astigmatism correcting lenses. Or combinations of these options. The surgery itself is (typically) pretty straightforward, and quick - average times 'under the knife' is around 8 minutes per eye, from start to finish.
You need to really pay attention to your doctor though and ask questions. It may be a generally very successful surgery, but there are still instances when things go wrong. You may not think about it, but a surgery meant to correct your vision CAN result in blindness (rarely), or the need for further surgeries. Infection is a possible risk as well. Despite the best surgeon, surgical staff, pre-surgery testing and evaluation, you may still need corrective glasses to see at your full potential. Just be well educated and don't be afraid to ask questions. We've done cataract surgery on patients in their teens and even early childhood (generally as a result of trauma to the eye or a congenital disorder) - but cataract surgery should not be taken lightly or done until you absolutely feel it should be done, because there is a documented risk to any surgery.
Photographers have a lot of questions to ask their surgeons and optometrists.
I'm 65.5 and use trifocals...
my wife had the procedure done and wants me to get it.
All I know is they had better put me 100% under if they are gonna' mess with my eyes.
Y'all have given me a lot to consider.
Thanks for the input.