AliceB

At the base lodge
Skier
Posts
2
Location
USA

Ryders Inside, where dim images are seen more easily so I presume dim light while skiing will be better.




Ryders outside in the sunshine for a minute or two

Note that left eye surgery was yesterday.

Ryders Inside, where dim images are seen more easily so I presume dim light while skiing will be better.




Ryders outside in the sunshine for a minute or two

Note that left eye surgery was yesterday.
Are these the Ryders "Face"? How are they working out for flat light? I just came back from 4 days in Deer Valley, first time skiing after a 30-year break and it was wonderful EXCEPT for the runs in flat light. Part of the problem was my glasses fogging under the goggles, so I'm interested in trying the Ryders route. Thanks!
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,951
I'm seeing conflicting information about the Prizm Persimmon tint. I swear I saw a page on the Oakley site which I can't seem to find now that says that the VLT is 70-something % for that tint. And on their lens guide, it shows the Prizm Persimmon aligned with the Prizm HI Pink. But on this site, which seems to have just copy-pasted product info from Oakley, it says that the VLT is 57% for that tint https://www.dicksboardstore.co.uk/2020-oakley-fall-line-xm-snow-goggle-prizm-snow-persimmon.

Based on what I've seen in person (though I didn't get a chance to put them on), I'm thinking that 57% sounds more accurate. The classic Persimmon was 54% according to this old product chart https://www.absolute-snow.co.uk/buying-guides/the-absolute-guide-to-buying-oakley-ski-or-snowboard-goggle-lenses. And in person, the HI Pink looks lighter than the Prizm Persimmon, not just a different color.
Did you get the Prizm Persimmon?
I’m very disappointed with the Hi Pink Prizm. I just want a High Persimmon again. For NewEngland, Hi Pink is not adequate.
 

Kneale Brownson

Making fresh tracks
Instructor
Posts
1,555
They ARE the Face Ryders. I've only gotten to use them on-snow parts of two afternoons early in December, but found them to work well. Vision on shaded slopes where snow variations were difficult to distinguish with the glasses off became wonderfully visible with them on. They darkened appropriately out in the sun. Changes are not instantaneous, but don't take a long time.
 

Jacob

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
509
Location
Luton, innit?
Did you get the Prizm Persimmon?
I’m very disappointed with the Hi Pink Prizm. I just want a High Persimmon again. For NewEngland, Hi Pink is not adequate.
I did a little test last month on a snowy day in Tignes. I asked a shop guy if I could take a pair outside and have a look around.

I didn't really notice the "Prizm" effect like I do with my rose lens. But, it seemed like a quality persimmon lens. It's been a while since I last wore my old HI persimmon goggles, so I'm not sure if the Prizm is as bright as the HI. But, the clarity seemed good.

Since I didn't get to ski with them, I can't really tell you what they're like in action. Maybe the "Prizm" effect will be more noticeable when you're on the mountain rather than at the base (albeit above tree line).
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,951
I really don't like the Prizm Rose in European near whiteout. There's an odd glow to some of the snow. Plus, it's too dark.
As I remember HI Persimmon had a flash coating on it to make it a little more vesatile in brighter light.

What do you find is the Prizm effect?
 

Marker

XLTL
Skier
I finally got to test the Smith Storm Yellow Chromapop vs the Oakley Hi Pink Prizm on recent snowy Killington days. I'd give the advantage to the Smith, but perhaps my eyes like yellow better than pink. The Oakley is fine on simple flat light days. I'm still waiting for that snow puking day to really put them through their paces, along with my Rangers. I missed the last few days of snow back at w**k.

One thing annoying about the Oakleys is how the lens can pop out of the frame if it is flexed too much when moving from the top of my helmet to my face. The glow of the Prizm effect seemed pretty obvious in the store, but I can't say I've noticed it on the snow.
 

Jacob

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
509
Location
Luton, innit?
What do you find is the Prizm effect?
Just that little bit of extra definition that helps you see the surface of the snow better.

Obviously, there are limits to what can be achieved. In snowy conditions above tree line, I still have to react to skiing over bumps, dips, etc., that I can't see, but I see a little more in those conditions than with other lenses I've had in the past.
 

mikel

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
774
Thanks to everyone for all of the input and discussion here. I am now sportin a new Smith 4D Mag goggle with the CP storm flash yellow lens for those bad days. Turns out the yellow flash works better for me than the rose. I also have the original photochromic lens and the newer CP photochromatic lens that are rose. I have used the yellow flash lens in some pretty flat light and in some snowy conditions. I have also used them in -14 degrees. With that temp I did get ice crystallization on the lens from my breath. Are they perfect for me in flat light? No, but they are a huge improvement over anything I have used in the past. I have to say that swapping out the lens is pretty easy with the 4D Mag. I also agree with the poster that mentioned the frame not being as tight form fitting. Definitely the case when compared to my IO7's.
 

SSSdave

life is short precious ...don't waste it
Skier
Posts
864
Location
Silicon Valley


There is and has always been considerable partial non-sense on the web as to flat light on snow, especially if one web searches on say "snow goggles flat light". The following presents why incident light onto snow creates diffuse reflections that is part of the physics behind flat light. Note I am no physics expert on light phenomenon so I welcome others input adding to or changing the below.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffuse_reflection

The most general mechanism by which a surface gives diffuse reflection does not involve exactly the surface: most of the light is contributed by scattering centers beneath the surface. If one were to imagine that the figure represents snow, and that the polygons are its (transparent) ice crystallites, an impinging ray is partially reflected (a few percent) by the first particle, enters in it, is again reflected by the interface with the second particle, enters in it, impinges on the third, and so on, generating a series of "primary" scattered rays in random directions, which, in turn, through the same mechanism, generate a large number of "secondary" scattered rays, which generate "tertiary" rays, and so forth. All these rays walk through the snow crystallites, which do not absorb light, until they arrive at the surface and exit in random directions. The result is that the light that was sent out is returned in all directions, so that snow is white despite being made of transparent material (ice crystals).

When one views a snow surface, one sees a white surface. When one views a crack in deep snow or ice, the deeper one looks, the bluer the snow becomes. What that shows is the shorter blue light wavelengths are less affected by the above snow diffuse reflection phenomenon than longer wavelengths that more readily escape back to the snow surface from short snow depths then back out to our eyes. Thus those longer wavelengths are less affected by the diffuse reflection phenomenon. By using a yellow or amber goggle lens, we are thus viewing wavelengths less affected by that part of the flat light phenomenon.

Additionally affecting flat light is the nature of the incident light. On a sunny day from the essential point source of sunlight from the sun, the same snow that causes flat light during dim or cloudy conditions, will appear in clear contrasting detail. However as the sun reaches higher altitudes in the sky at mid day, the high brightness can over saturate our organic eye receptors also decreasing our ability to see and contrast due to shadowing also decreases. However a neutral gray lens with a darker lower VLT transmission, will reduce that to readily visual levels with reasonable contrast so that the primary visual reduction is only due to less shadowing. It is easiest to view snow on sunny days away from mid day with the sun at lower altitudes because that generates strong contrasty shadowing on irregular snow surfaces at light levels our eyes better work with.

When the sky is sunny blue and a snow slope is in full shadows, dominant incident light is at the blue (450nm wavelength) shorter end of the visual light spectrum that has intensity about 4 times that of red light at 650nm due to Rayleigh scattering. Again, the blue wavelengths are more affected by the above diffuse reflection phenomenon versus longer wavelengths. Because the source is much broader than the narrow point source sun, shadows also disappear. When one uses a high VLT yellow or rose lens, it reduces the amount of total light making a snow scene dimmer, but removing more of the blue light, it allows one's eyes to see the longer wavelengths that are less affected. However one would see less detail versus a cloudy flat light condition because the ratio of short wavelengths to longer wavelengths is higher.

During cloudy flat light conditions where the sky is white, the incident light is also coming from all areas of the white sky eliminating shadow definition, but because the wavelengths are more evenly at all visual light frequencies, the ratio of shorter wavelengths to longer is lower, more even. Thus flat light beneath clouds may affect our yellow lens goggle vision less than if we are viewing dim shadowed slopes under a blue sky.

And what is going on when we are next to trees where in flat light we can see somewhat better versus out in an expanse of just white snow? The nearby dark trees that absorb all wavelengths more evenly, reduces the amount of incident diffuse white cloud light or blue sky in shadows light while providing nearby non-diffuse directional reflected light that better generates shadowing and thus contrast. Thus the ratio of non-diffuse directional light to diffuse ambient light increases.

The larger goggle manufacturers like Smith and Oakley have studied with spectroscopic instruments what causes flat light in more serious science depth. One thing they have found is by eliminating some narrow wavelengths between our eye's 3 cone red green blue color receptors, that can also result in better overall contrast. The difference between $200 goggles and $40 goggles with the same tint is mostly due to this other factor.
 
Last edited:

jmills115

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
458
Location
Salt Lake City, Utah
Did you get the Prizm Persimmon?
I’m very disappointed with the Hi Pink Prizm. I just want a High Persimmon again. For NewEngland, Hi Pink is not adequate.
The Hi Pink Prizm works better for my eyes than either the Hi Persimmon or Hi Intensity Yellow.
mrsjmills prefers the Hi Yellow in flat light. I don’t have the Prizm Rose but would like to try it as well
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,951
The Hi Pink Prizm works better for my eyes than either the Hi Persimmon or Hi Intensity Yellow.
mrsjmills prefers the Hi Yellow in flat light. I don’t have the Prizm Rose but would like to try it as well
You’re out west? You’ve got 1-2 miles less atmosphere.
Prizm Rose is darker. Some find it acceptable low light in the west.
 

Jacob

Out on the slopes
Skier
Posts
509
Location
Luton, innit?
You’re out west? You’ve got 1-2 miles less atmosphere.
Prizm Rose is darker. Some find it acceptable low light in the west.
Acceptability depends somewhat on what your expectations are and how you ski in low visibility.

I know that no goggles will really allow me to read the surface in bad visibility, so I don't try. Instead, I try to keep my head up and look out for things like piste markers, lift towers, and other people. So for me, an acceptable lens for those conditions is one that doesn't hinder my ability to see those things.

In truth, no lens will significantly change how I ski in those conditions.
 

James

Skiing the powder
Instructor
Posts
8,951
Anyone looking for an inexpensive low light goggle- here’s a Uvex for $45-85 for goggle and lens. Just the clear lens is $35.

 
Top