Hindsight is 20/20.
They obviously don’t wear glasses.
That’s also Dr. Glaucomflecken a semi-famous optometrist.
It took me a while to get the joke. I was just like, yeah that’s probably close to her prescription.
Ophthalmologist
I’m not sure what he can find to be optimistic about in this economy.
I think you’ve confused his job. The study of birds is a very interesting field of study.
I think you’ve confused his job. The study of fields is very interesting for birds.
No, you’re thinking of an ornithologist. An opthalmologist is someone who practices dark arts.
That’s an occultist.
An opthalmologist is an appointed official who investigates complaints by taxpayers against government departments.
You’re thinking of an ombudsman. An ophthalmologist is a grappling submission that uses your legs and hips to hyperextend an opponent’s shoulder joint.
Damn, it took me a while, haha 😂
Might depend on the material. I have -3.5dpt on both sides and my glasses have half the width and glare. Or are those some random units again?
I assumed he’d estimated it based on how distorted the face appears behind the glasses. I do that all the time.
At this angle it’s hard for me to do that, since I usually use the edges of the face to estimate it. negative glasses pull the line inwards, positive outwards. I can reliably tell when someone is wearing fake glasses (0 strength) for example, and probably estimate strength within 30% of the actual value.
If the image was higher res maybe I could estimate this case too. Or this professional optometrist is just a lot better at it than I am.
Strong negative glasses: (Note the faces contours in the glasses appearing well inside the faces contours around the glassed)
Fake glasses:
Positive glasses:
PS: Searching for generic terms yields 100% fake glasses, so I took a specific person I remember having strong glasses for myopia.
Just looked in the mirror… Checks out! :)
Thanks for the explanation. And yeah, on the op picture you can’t see any of that clearly, so he needs to have serious practice for that statement.
Surely that was on purpose.
Diopter was my first reading too, and my account isn’t even “Dr. Glaucomflecken”.
Guy is a social media actor shorts comedian and is pretty based. So not only would he not say something like shitty that, he wouldn’t say it publicly. On yt he has 1.27m subscribers.
So given Dr. Glaucomflecken is an opthalmologist, I’m at least 37.3% sure he meant her eyeglass prescription in diopters. Isn’t that right, Johnathan?
deleted by creator
You might have phrased this a lot better by keeping your stupid mouth shut. Take that as general advice.
And you’re dying alone so what
I’m putting on my needs context hat and standing next to the needs context sign.
Comment refers to the girl’s eyeglass prescription, not a ranking of her attractiveness.
Based on the distortion visible in her glasses, her prescription is approximately -1.00 to -1.50 diopters. Severely nearsighted prescriptions would cause the wearer to appear to have much smaller eyes; farsighted prescription would cause the eyes to appear larger.
