Can you identify "designer" eyeglasses? Take the quiz! (ANSWERS NOW POSTED!)

[skyrefuge]

In the image below, there are 5 "designer" frames (average price $246) and 5 "generic" frames (average price $22). Your task is to select the 5 that you believe to be "designer" frames.

I expect Mustachians to be especially bad at this task, but just go ahead and vote anyway, even if you don't feel confident in any of your choices. Patterns may still emerge in the aggregated results which could be interesting.

I will post the answers in a day or two, depending on how many votes are coming in.

I have now posted the answers lower down in the thread. I will keep the voting open if you still want to play along.



Background: my girlfriend, while sensibly frugal in some ways (car-free, no kids!) is something short of "Mustachian", and "designer" eyewear is one of her downfalls (I keep putting "designer" in quotes, because of course every piece of eyewear has a designer, they don't just pop into existence out of the ether!) I once made a brief attempt to suggest she check out Zenni Optical, but she quickly "ugh"ed at their non-"designer" frames. So I came up with this quiz to test if she can actually tell a difference between the frames, or if she was just responding to the knowledge that she was looking at "generic" frames. Of course, I had to photoshop out all the logos that I believe are actually what allow people to identify "designer" frames!

Also, if it turns out that Mustachians do well on the quiz, maybe I won't try it on her. :-) But don't let that keep you from trying hard to guess right!

[Gen Y Finance Journey]

Image?

About 6 years ago I bought a pair of ridiculously un-mustachian designer frames, but at least I'm still using them today and I absolutely love them. Their saving grace is that the logo is actually very small, so it's not immediately apparent they're designer. I'd feel so foolish wearing them around if everyone who saw me instantly knew I dropped that much money on glasses.

[arebelspy]

Interesting.  Thanks for posting.

Also, if it turns out that Mustachians do well on the quiz, maybe I won't try it on her. :-)

Well that's not cool.  Let her try.  If she can tell, and it's important to her, why are you dictating how she spends her money?

I can see the argument if she can't tell trying to convince her (but ultimately letting her decide anyways), but purposefully keeping the quiz because she might be able to tell the difference?  No.

[dragoncar]

So the designer ones are those that have photoshop artifacts?  Or did you photoshop all of them?

Also, you can post the answers now.  If you want, make the font color white so you have to select the text for visibility

Highlight hidden text below:
Hidden text goes here
yes it's slightly visible
but probably you can't read it

[NumberCruncher]

I really like #4 and #7...please tell me they're cheap and on Zenni.  Especially #4.

edit: I voted with the current majority - 1, 4, 6, 7, 10  I like black, rectangular lenses in general. :)  #2, 3, and 5 look kinda "cheap" to me. Not a fan of #8 or #9, the side detail just isn't something I'd go for.

[Emilyngh]

I just bought new glasses from Zenni (which reminds me to check the mail, maybe they're here!).   We'll see how this $22.50 pair compare to my previous pairs of >$300.   I'm hopeful.

[eil]

I wear designer glasses. I've worn glasses every waking moment since childhood. I'm buying the pair that makes me look and feel prettiest, and I don't much care what they cost. I'll economize pretty much anywhere else, but these are the dominant feature on my face.

Even though almost nobody you meet can tell the difference between your expensive designer glasses and similar ones that cost an order of magnitude less?

There's also the argument that "prettiness" comes more from personality and composure than an object you wear on your face but maybe that's getting too far off-topic...

[NinetyFour]

No option for "zero"?

[skyrefuge]

Well that's not cool.  Let her try.  If she can tell, and it's important to her, why are you dictating how she spends her money?

No matter what, there won't be any "dictating" happening here! And I did have a smiley after that comment. Actually, if the votes here showed that people are able to somewhat-reliably identify designer frames, that might increase my willingness to show it to her, since that would mean that the difference is actually a real thing. My bigger concern would be if she gets 4 out of 5 right through dumb luck (the age old luck vs. skill question), because that could actually increases her unwillingness to consider non-designer. Since (at the moment at least!) I'm not motivated enough to set up multiple trials to help tease out the skill component from the luck component!

[skyrefuge]

I wear designer glasses. I've worn glasses every waking moment since childhood. I'm buying the pair that makes me look and feel prettiest, and I don't much care what they cost. I'll economize pretty much anywhere else, but these are the dominant feature on my face.

So did you vote? And you could even vote for the ones that you think would make you look and feel prettiest, rather than the ones that you specifically think are "designer", since that's what the poll should really be getting at anyway.  It might be informative for you to record your votes here in this thread (I don't think it will distort the voting too much for people to make their own votes public), so then you can compare with the actual results.

One advantage of going generic is that it greatly increases your available search-space. For example, Zenni currently lists 1554 women's frames to choose from, while LensCrafters has a mere 458. That means that if you're shopping at a place that focuses on designer frames, you're actually unnecessarily limiting yourself in your quest to find the prettiest-for-you. And of course paying 10x more for what might be an inferior choice.

Also note that in terms of your "$200 extra" for the designer route, from what I understand (I haven't actually bought glasses in forever), the lens cost at places that sell designer frames is also greatly inflated over a place like Zenni.

[Norrie]

I also pick the glasses that I like the best and are the most comfortable, and don't care much about the price. I wear the same frames for about four years, or until they break to a point that is almost impossible to fix.
My current glasses were stupidly expensive designer frames, and they make me happy every single day (cat eyes! with little fake diamonds! totally ridiculous and rad). My glasses right before these cost about $25, I think. I also loved them for the three or more years that I had them.

I have glasses on my face at every waking minute of the day, and I want to love the hell out of them. Right now I'm even considering getting a second pair for the first time in my life. Unbelievable luxury.

[skyrefuge]

So the designer ones are those that have photoshop artifacts?  Or did you photoshop all of them?

That's for you to determine! :-) Maybe I photoshopped all of them, maybe some of those "photoshop artifacts" are just JPG artifacts, maybe there's a "designer" out there selling $1000 frames and his style is to paint things that look like photoshop artifacts into them!

Also, you can post the answers now.  If you want, make the font color white so you have to select the text for visibility

Yeah, too risky. I like my data as clean as possible!

[Gen Y Finance Journey]

I wear designer glasses. I've worn glasses every waking moment since childhood. I'm buying the pair that makes me look and feel prettiest, and I don't much care what they cost. I'll economize pretty much anywhere else, but these are the dominant feature on my face.

Even though almost nobody you meet can tell the difference between your expensive designer glasses and similar ones that cost an order of magnitude less?

There's also the argument that "prettiness" comes more from personality and composure than an object you wear on your face but maybe that's getting too far off-topic...

I pick the glasses I like best, without looking at the price or brand. Right now they're designer. They haven't always been. A slight change in the shape of the frame between two similar looking styles (say, heavy black plastic frames) makes a big difference in how they look on a face. I don't care if people can tell my glasses are designer; I do care that they flatter me best.

And yes, of course prettiness comes from personality and composure. But that doesn't mean I want to wear ugly glasses and rely on my personality alone. When I buy an expensive frame, it's about $200 extra. Given that I wear my glasses for 3 or more years, it amounts to under 20 cents a day. Well worth it to me.

But how do you shop for frames in a designer-agnostic way? All the frame stores I've ever been to sell either only designer frames or only cheap frames, with just a handful of designer or mid-tier frames thrown in the mix. Maybe I just haven't gone to the right stores?

[skyrefuge]

No option for "zero"?

Hmm, to be clear, there are 5 designer frames in the photo. Your task is not to determine how many of them are designer frames, since I already told you that. Your task is to indicate which 5 out of #1-#10 are designer frames. Thus, you should check exactly 5 of the 10 boxes.

[NinetyFour]

No option for "zero"?

Hmm, to be clear, there are 5 designer frames in the photo. Your task is not to determine how many of them are designer frames, since I already told you that. Your task is to indicate which 5 out of #1-#10 are designer frames. Thus, you should check exactly 5 of the 10 boxes.

I read it as, how many of the glasses pictured can you identify as designer.  My answer is zero.  Hmm.

[dragoncar]

Yay, the five I voted for are the five frontrunners.  Anyways, give us the results already.  PM me if necessary.  Do it and I'll burn your house down.

[Gen Y Finance Journey]

Yay, the five I voted for are the five frontrunners.  Anyways, give us the results already.  PM me if necessary.  Do it and I'll burn your house down.

I voted for the 5 frontrunners as well. I'm so curious if we're all right!

[Sylly]

One advantage of going generic is that it greatly increases your available search-space. For example, Zenni currently lists 1554 women's frames to choose from, while LensCrafters has a mere 458. That means that if you're shopping at a place that focuses on designer frames, you're actually unnecessarily limiting yourself in your quest to find the prettiest-for-you. And of course paying 10x more for what might be an inferior choice.

Like serpentstooth, I've worn glasses pretty much for forever. Price is also not a dominant determining factor in which frame I choose (within the typical 1-200ish price range). It's whatever fits my face comfortably and make me look good. I personally don't care what brand the frame is, but I can definitely tell you this based on many years of picking out frames: between similar looking frames, I consistently pick the more expensive ones after handling or trying them on and picking the more comfortable and/or the better constructed ones. The cheap no brand frames available at all the brick and mortar opticals I've been too have always been either heavier, have a worse fit, or both. When something is sitting on the bridge of my nose for all my waking hours, I'm picking the lightest, most comfortable one.

I have no problem with Zenni in principle. Except that picking out a frame is something I highly prefer to do in person, and I can't do that with Zenni (without much hassle of possibly multiple order/returns). I don't know if their frames are of quality more in line with brand names or no names available at physical opticals. Maybe one of these days I'll feel inclined to order and try out their frames. But since they don't replace lenses (which I assume is what I'd have to do if I buy the frames from them frame-only in order to be able to 'try them on')... I'd have to find an optical to get my lenses anyway...

[OldDogNewTrick]

$246.00 is designer? They go much higher in optical boutiques. Much. If GF wants a pair of $246.00 frames... she's being relatively modest.

[LennStar]

I voted on the principle that "designer" is either no-nonsense or heavy frills.

Hope you put the results out.

[Nancy]

I hit submit instead of 10. Doh! My picks are1,5,6,7, and 10.

[AJ]

between similar looking frames, I consistently pick the more expensive ones after handling or trying them on and picking the more comfortable and/or the better constructed ones. The cheap no brand frames available at all the brick and mortar opticals I've been too have always been either heavier, have a worse fit, or both. When something is sitting on the bridge of my nose for all my waking hours, I'm picking the lightest, most comfortable one.

Yeah, I expect you'd get more accurate guesses if people could see & try on the frames.

[deborah]

While frames do add to the cost, since my lenses are specially ground, they cost so much that I have never bothered about the cost of frames.

You need to be happy with what you are wearing. I once read a book which advised you to look at your clothes in terms of how much they cost you per wear. This makes frames incredibly cheap.

[kyanamerinas]

I wear designer glasses. I've worn glasses every waking moment since childhood. I'm buying the pair that makes me look and feel prettiest, and I don't much care what they cost. I'll economize pretty much anywhere else, but these are the dominant feature on my face.

Even though almost nobody you meet can tell the difference between your expensive designer glasses and similar ones that cost an order of magnitude less?

There's also the argument that "prettiness" comes more from personality and composure than an object you wear on your face but maybe that's getting too far off-topic...

I pick the glasses I like best, without looking at the price or brand. Right now they're designer. They haven't always been. A slight change in the shape of the frame between two similar looking styles (say, heavy black plastic frames) makes a big difference in how they look on a face. I don't care if people can tell my glasses are designer; I do care that they flatter me best.

And yes, of course prettiness comes from personality and composure. But that doesn't mean I want to wear ugly glasses and rely on my personality alone. When I buy an expensive frame, it's about $200 extra. Given that I wear my glasses for 3 or more years, it amounts to under 20 cents a day. Well worth it to me.

totally agree, my current glasses have cost me about $30 a year (3 years wear). They make a much bigger impact on my face than makeup and i'm sure many women (probably even some mustachians) would consider $30/year for face-decorating (makeup v glasses) perfectly reasonable.
it's not like clothes where you can get very similar things for less without the designer tag or where you can get it tailored. a small shift makes a huge difference to how you look, feel and are perceived every single day.

[Russ]

someone more committed than I would separate the images and run them through GIS

anyway, fun poll. not sure that I agree with the whole girlfriend thing, but that's your deal

[MrFancypants]

$246.00 is designer? They go much higher in optical boutiques. Much. If GF wants a pair of $246.00 frames... she's being relatively modest.

Yeah, I once accidentally went into a place that sold true designer frames....  I doubt I could have walked out of there without paying less than $400 on just the frames.

Went to Sam's Club and probably still spent enough that I'd get chastised by the more hardcore members of this forum, but I'm happy and so is my wife.

I've been of the attitude that I'm happy to pay extra for something nicer if I feel that the item I'm purchasing could be more durable over the long term.  About five years ago I spent $150 on a pair of polarized Oakleys and they've been worth every cent, and are still in excellent shape.  After an experience in the desert using cheap sunglasses and then trying some more expensive ones I realized that there actually can be a drastic optical quality difference.

[samburger]

So I came up with this quiz to test if she can actually tell a difference between the frames, or if she was just responding to the knowledge that she was looking at "generic" frames. Of course, I had to photoshop out all the logos that I believe are actually what allow people to identify "designer" frames!

You're being kind of a child. This is not how you handle relationship issues.

The poll was fun for me, though.

[arebelspy]

someone more committed than I would separate the images and run them through GIS

I thought of that as well, but didn't care enough.

[Grateful Stache]

This fascinating '60 Minutes' clip explains that they are all made by the same company, just with different 'designer' labels and therefore different price points.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM

P.S. I get compliments on my $30 Wal-Mart frames all the time.

[Gracie]

I've had inexpensive glasses look great. I've had designer glasses look great. Last time I was on Zenni, I didn't find a frame I liked.
Though having had both, the metal Banana republic frames I am wearing are far sturdier than any other I've had.

I also agree with everyone that said when you have to wear something on your face all the time, you need to really like it.

As for the OP, "Well, bless your heart."

[MrsPete]

I wear designer glasses. I've worn glasses every waking moment since childhood. I'm buying the pair that makes me look and feel prettiest, and I don't much care what they cost. I'll economize pretty much anywhere else, but these are the dominant feature on my face.

I have no idea whether the glasses I'm wearing right now are "designer" or not, but they are the pair I liked best based upon size/color/shape.  I agree that since you're going to wear these every day, it's not a place to economize. 

On the other hand, if you're gravitating towards a pair of frames SIMPLY BECAUSE they bear a famous name, that's foolish. 

Similarly, when we were shopping for mattresses a couple years ago we saw Vera Wang and Paula Deen mattresses . . . and we couldn't understand how a clothing designer and a cook have anything positive to add to the mattress world . . . or why anyone would pay more for a designer name that's literally going to be hidden under sheets. 

But back to the glasses . . . I question the $250-ish vs. $25-ish frame prices.  I just purchased new glasses for one of my daughters last month, and I didn't see a single pair of frames ANYWHERE for less than $60-70 . . . and those were on the "returned and refurbished" table.  And very few pairs were in the upper limit.  Rather, most of the frames we saw hovered between $100 and $150 -- not enough difference to sway me, given that the glasses'll probably be worn for 2-4 years every single day. 

I just bought new glasses from Zenni (which reminds me to check the mail, maybe they're here!).   We'll see how this $22.50 pair compare to my previous pairs of >$300.   I'm hopeful.

I bought a pair of prescription sunglasses from Zenni, and it was NOT a good experience.  I loved the look of the frames, and the prescription was dead-on . . . but the frames didn't fit.  The "legs" were much too short, and if I wore them for more than a few minutes, they gave me a headache.  I tried to have them adjusted locally, but the frames simply didn't have enough material.

Even though they were inexpensive, they ended up being donated to the eyeglasses box at Walmart.  I'll never buy another pair of frames that I can't try on. 

[wtjbatman]

If you think your $20 frames look high end, you haven't bought $450+ frames. As a (former) lifetime glasses wearer, there is no comparison. They feel higher quality, they are more comfortable, and they look better. And yes, for something that's going to be stuck on your face the majority of the time you're awake, you want all of the above.

Don't buy the name, but don't assume the more expensive options are only more expensive because of the name. There could be some real differences in quality, comfort, and style.

[skyrefuge]

A picture of glasses isn't particularly helpful if you can't see them on your face.

Yeah, so Zenni (and I assume all the other online vendors) show the glasses (scaled properly) on a photo of your face. It seems to do a pretty good job IMO, but I can understand people wanting to see them from different angles, see how different light reflects off them, etc. But for this aspect at least, you're a perfect candidate for online ordering, since "look at a photo of them on my face" is already your method in the real world!

go the Zenni route, but there are good reasons not to.

Certainly. I have no doubt that there are a lot of people for whom online ordering would not be the best option, but I bet there are at least as many for whom it would be the superior choice.

[arebelspy]

With these $100 glasses you can order 5 pairs, have them shipped to you to try them out, and then ship back any (or all) you don't like:
http://lifehacker.com/5919905/try-on-five-pairs-of-glasses-for-free-at-home-with-warby-parkers-try-on-program

http://www.warbyparker.com/home-try-on

Return shipping is free, so no cost at all.

I still prefer Zenni Optical myself, but for those that have to try it on for some specific reason, there's an option.

[skyrefuge]

The cheap no brand frames available at all the brick and mortar opticals I've been too have always been either heavier, have a worse fit, or both. When something is sitting on the bridge of my nose for all my waking hours, I'm picking the lightest, most comfortable one.

I have to wonder how much of that effect is an intentional marketing strategy of the brick-and-mortar stores: stock particularly low-quality generic frames in order to make their higher-profit designer frames appear better in comparison.

Especially because "weight" and especially "fit" aren't metrics upon which I would expect designer frames to particularly differentiate themselves from generics.

For weight, they're all made from various plastics and metals, to which every supplier has access these days. Maybe the generics are less likely to spring for "specialty" metals like titanium, but I can't imagine their plastics being much different.

And I don't think I'll ever understand the "fit" argument. "Fit" is not a property intrinsic to the frame itself. It is the combination of the frame and your face together. Yes, the frame that happens to match your face the best may be a designer frame, but that's just dumb luck, and there is no reason to expect that to hold true across the population. Given the variation in human faces, both designer and generic frames can be expected to fit just as well or just as poorly, it all depends on the face that they're matched with.

I hear the same argument made that "better fit" is an advantage of designer clothes, and it makes no sense there either. Yes, if the designer is targeting rail-thin people, and you happen to be rail-thin, you'll get a better fit. But your plump girlfriend might get a better fit with the store brand.

If your clothes/glasses are being custom-made for your body/face, then yes, I would definitely expect the more-skilled (and thus, more-expensive) craftsman to create a better fit than an amateur, but in the world of off-the-rack clothes/glasses, I expect "fit" to be uncorrelated with price.

[skyrefuge]

You need to be happy with what you are wearing. I once read a book which advised you to look at your clothes in terms of how much they cost you per wear. This makes frames incredibly cheap.

Yes, it's definitely good to at least get a lot of use out of the things you spend a lot of money for, but simply using something a lot is not a reason to pat yourself on the back if you paid 20 times more for it than you needed to.

"I ride my bike 5 miles to work every day, so that makes my $11,000 Trek Madone incredibly cheap!" Um, no.

[skyrefuge]

it's not like clothes where you can get very similar things for less without the designer tag

Why not?

At least for visual appearance, this unscientific poll has shown otherwise.

[rocklebock]

This is not how you handle relationship issues.

 If my boyfriend pulled this on me, I'd wonder why he went to such effort to prove me wrong about something so trivial.

[LucyBIT]

Seeing a pair of glasses superimposed over a photo of your face is not the same as trying them on. Sure, it's a good start, and yeah, a lot of online options let you order multiple pairs and then you return the ones you don't want, but I've never tried it because every time I get new glasses, I have to try on more than 5 pairs, usually a lot more than 5 pairs. It's difficult for me to find a good and comfortable fit, because oddly enough, different humans have different head shapes. Who knew?

I agree, skyrefuge, fit is a combination of frames + face, and shouldn't have anything to do with price. In my experience the price is irrelevant to how it fits my face.

I wear contacts most of the time and I've had my current glasses for 4 years even though the prescription needs to be updated; I'm not a daily wearer, just nights/weekends. They were originally ~$250 (total, including lenses) and they're in much better shape after 4 years than, say, the $30 pair I had when I was 15, which I kept having to get fixed.

Glasses are in an odd category, I think. Technically, they're an assistive device; just because we as a culture have also decided they're an accessory doesn't mean we need to solely consider them as such when we, the wearers, are obtaining them. Purchasing glasses does not have the same considerations as a handbag, because I need glasses to, um, SEE. And yeah, quality is a thing. Avoiding 'designer' frames is going to limit your available options just as surely as avoiding cheap frames will, and I'd rather not limit myself when choosing an assistive device.

So my point, there are a lot of things to consider when choosing glasses, and they all have to be weighed, and how we weigh those is an personal decision. The fact that glasses have become an accessory has muddied the waters and requires more effort to be frugal in this area.

[skyrefuge]

I bought a pair of prescription sunglasses from Zenni, and it was NOT a good experience.  I loved the look of the frames, and the prescription was dead-on . . . but the frames didn't fit.  The "legs" were much too short, and if I wore them for more than a few minutes, they gave me a headache.  I tried to have them adjusted locally, but the frames simply didn't have enough material.

Zenni lists pretty detailed measurements for each frame on their website (including weight!) Were those listed measurements inaccurate/insufficient, or did you just not know what those measurements should be for you?

It's actually prescription sunglasses that my girlfriend is looking to get, so it's good to hear that you at least liked the other aspects to them. The way I look at it, it seems like you can order 3 frames, throw the two that you don't like in the garbage (even though that's quite wasteful and unMustachian) and still come out ahead of LensCrafters.

[skyrefuge]

This is not how you handle relationship issues.

 If my boyfriend pulled this on me, I'd wonder why he went to such effort to prove me wrong about something so trivial.

The goal is not to "prove her wrong". The goal is to help her in her efforts to strengthen her frugality muscles, by letting her see through the fog of bullshit that marketers are forever blasting at us. And having an extra $350 every few years to put towards something else is an amount that's trivial to neither her nor me.

But yes, I definitely am a child when it comes to relationships, so I welcome any more detailed advice! Are you guys saying that we shouldn't make any attempts to persuade others to become more Mustachian? Or that we should only make the attempt on people who aren't our significant other? Or (hopefully) that there are other methods of persuasion that would be less dickish in this case?

[Sylly]

With these $100 glasses you can order 5 pairs, have them shipped to you to try them out, and then ship back any (or all) you don't like:
http://lifehacker.com/5919905/try-on-five-pairs-of-glasses-for-free-at-home-with-warby-parkers-try-on-program

http://www.warbyparker.com/home-try-on

Return shipping is free, so no cost at all.

Thanks for the info. That certainly has potential., though if I remember my strong prescription correctly, it falls under the 'Call us' category. Worth remembering at least.

I have to wonder how much of that effect is an intentional marketing strategy of the brick-and-mortar stores: stock particularly low-quality generic frames in order to make their higher-profit designer frames appear better in comparison.

That's certainly a possibility.

And I don't think I'll ever understand the "fit" argument. "Fit" is not a property intrinsic to the frame itself. It is the combination of the frame and your face together. Yes, the frame that happens to match your face the best may be a designer frame, but that's just dumb luck, and there is no reason to expect that to hold true across the population. Given the variation in human faces, both designer and generic frames can be expected to fit just as well or just as poorly, it all depends on the face that they're matched with.

Sorry if I came off implying that I think the better fitting ones are so because they're more expensive. I don't think that's true. It's just in my experience that tends to be the case. It could be that weight is a factor in the overall comfort that I translate to 'fit', and because the weight of my lenses, I certainly tend to opt for the lighter, generally premium material.

I don't know how your GF would react to your quiz, but I kind of think the quiz is a fun one. If someone pulls that on me to convince me to not bother with designer/brand names, I'd be receptive to it. But then.. I generally don't care to be a walking advertisement for companies whose products I buy anyway. You know your GF better than anyone here, so you're the best person to judge whether this is something she'd respond to or would backfire horribly on you.

This fascinating '60 Minutes' clip explains that they are all made by the same company, just with different 'designer' labels and therefore different price points.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gDdq2rIqAlM

P.S. I get compliments on my $30 Wal-Mart frames all the time.

That doesn't really surprise me. I do wonder if the stand-alone opticals tend to stock more of the 'brand name' more expensive frames than say.. Walmart or Costco.

[skyrefuge]

After ~24 hours and 73 ballots cast, your results!  Thanks to everyone for voting, this was a fun experiment, and I couldn't have done it without you!

The 5 designer frames are:

#1: $226 Luxottica (Tory Burch)
#2: $180 Bottega Veneta
#5: $265 Luxottica (Prada)
#7: $138 Michael Kors
#8: $420 Luxottica (Bulgari)

The 5 Zenni frames are:
#3: $28
#4: $10
#6: $24
#9: $19
#10: $28

Takeaways:

• The most-voted frame (#10), and 3 of the top 5 (#10, #6, #4) are from Zenni
• The three lowest-voted frames (#8, #2, #5, respectively) are designer frames
• #8, the lowest-voted frame, with only 14% of people voting for it, is by far the most expensive, at $420.
• By these results, I feel confident in saying that in a visual photo test, more-expensive designer frames are not distinguishable from generic frames.
• However, the designer frames actually fared worse than I expected them to. I would have expected them to be favored equally with the generics (a random distribution), but these results actually suggest a fairly strong inverse relationship between price and votes. It's possible that this could be due to experimenter bias (see below).
• When assembling the candidates, I attempted to make rough "pairings" of frames. First I would semi-randomly choose a designer frame from LensCrafters etc., and then I would find a frame in a similar style at Zenni. These "pairings" are (designer frame first): #1:#10, #2:#6, #5:#3, #7:#4, #8:#9. In 4 of the 5 pairings, the Zenni frame got more votes than its matching designer frame (and the fifth pairing, #7:#4 was basically a tie). Perhaps this is where some bias was introduced, where I tried to select a frame at Zenni that looked "better" than the designer frame.
• On the other hand, I figured #10 would get the least votes, and it got the most, so what the hell do I know? (maybe it's the gold-ish color that made people think "ooh, fancy, designer!"?)
• And even if I did introduce bias to the experiment that way, it still indicates that people are likely to be able to find a frame at Zenni that they like (visually) as much or more than a designer frame.

Image shows Designer vs. Zenni, number of votes received, and ranking based on number of votes

[Clover]

The method here is that you should mind your own business. You're being a jerk.

Oh, please.  If he dances around singing I told you so after she unknowingly chooses Zenni frames he would be a jerk.  But this exercise is no different than a beer or wine taste test.  Maybe she'll look at frames that she wouldn't have considered before.  Then again, maybe not. 


I thought I had a much better shot at a designer product contest than I ever would at a mustachian contest.  I only got 2 out of 5 right.  Maybe there's hope for me.  lol

[zarfus]

Jeeze, lots of angst in this thread...

I only buy prescription sunglasses from zenni, they rock and the tint is great (80% gray).  I seem to lose sunglasses more often than normal glasses, so $20 is a lot easier to swallow!

Now that my eyes are done changing, I do prefer to go into the store and buy ones that I can live with every waking day.  I'd be lying if I said I didn't look at price, no way in hell I'd pay more than $150 for a frame.  Ever.

As far as settling relationship arguments...every couple is different. 'nuf said.

[LucyBIT]

You're a jerk if you aren't honest with her, and/or just spring it on her and refuse to discuss with her unless and until she takes the quiz.

"Hey honey, can you help me out? I'm trying to figure out which of these frames are designer and which are cheapies. You're so good at telling the difference!"
"Sure, honey! Thanks for respecting my knowledge and making me feel needed!" [takes quiz, gets at least one wrong because odds]
"SUCKAH! Not only did I lie to you, I manipulated you and now you feel like a fool. Love you!"

or

"Hey honey, can you help me out? I'm trying to figure out which of these frames are designer and which are cheapies. You're so good at telling the difference!"
"Why on earth would you need to figure that out?"
"Oh, just for fun."
"Why is that fun?"
"Oh, you know. Just take the quiz."
"I feel like you're not telling me something."
"No, it's nothing like that, I'll tell you why after you take the quiz."

vs

"Hey honey, I heard about studies done where they swapped labels on wine bottles, and turns out the biggest factor in whether or not people like a wine is how expensive they perceive it to be. Isn't the human mind interesting? Hey, what do you think about doing something similar with glasses frames?"

[Russ]

After ~24 hours and 73 ballots cast, your results!  Thanks to everyone for voting, this was a fun experiment, and I couldn't have done it without you!

The 5 designer frames are:

#1: $226 Luxottica (Tory Burch)
#2: $180 Bottega Veneta
#5: $265 Luxottica (Prada)
#7: $138 Michael Kors
#8: $420 Luxottica (Bulgari)

The 5 Zenni frames are:
#3: $28
#4: $10
#6: $24
#9: $19
#10: $28

Takeaways:

• The most-voted frame (#10), and 3 of the top 5 (#10, #6, #4) are from Zenni
• The three lowest-voted frames (#8, #2, #5, respectively) are designer frames
• #8, the lowest-voted frame, with only 14% of people voting for it, is by far the most expensive, at $420.
• By these results, I feel confident in saying that in a visual photo test, more-expensive designer frames are not distinguishable from generic frames.
• However, the designer frames actually fared worse than I expected them to. I would have expected them to be favored equally with the generics (a random distribution), but these results actually suggest a fairly strong inverse relationship between price and votes. It's possible that this could be due to experimenter bias (see below).
• When assembling the candidates, I attempted to make rough "pairings" of frames. First I would semi-randomly choose a designer frame from LensCrafters etc., and then I would find a frame in a similar style at Zenni. These "pairings" are (designer frame first): #1:#10, #2:#6, #5:#3, #7:#4, #8:#9. In 4 of the 5 pairings, the Zenni frame got more votes than its matching designer frame (and the fifth pairing, #7:#4 was basically a tie). Perhaps this is where some bias was introduced, where I tried to select a frame at Zenni that looked "better" than the designer frame.
• On the other hand, I figured #10 would get the least votes, and it got the most, so what the hell do I know? (maybe it's the gold-ish color that made people think "ooh, fancy, designer!"?)
• And even if I did introduce bias to the experiment that way, it still indicates that people are likely to be able to find a frame at Zenni that they like (visually) as much or more than a designer frame.

Image shows Designer vs. Zenni, number of votes received, and ranking based on number of votes

sooooo you didn't introduce any bias except your own very significant bias?

[skyrefuge]

You have not determined that designer frames are indistinguishable from cheap ones. You've determined they are indistinguishable in a stand-alone photograph, which is completely irrelevant to glasses wearers. I don't care how my glasses look off my face. I care how they look and feel ON MY FACE.

Yikes! Yes, I completely agree with you. I explicitly made that exact caveat (twice!) in my conclusions. Maybe my bolding made you miss it; I'll reverse it: "in a visual photo test, more-expensive designer frames are not distinguishable from generic frames." Don't worry, I have no intention of coming over to your house and stomping on your designer frames, so your (what I interpret-over-the-confusing-Internet as) defensiveness is an unnecessary waste of energy!

The experiment was originally conceived as a visual test only. Essentially "Do 'designers' make more visually-attractive glasses than generics (because they know 'style', 'trends', etc.)?"  I completely agree that there are additional factors beyond that that people should concern themselves with when making a decision on glasses.

[thepokercab]

Wow- didn't know glasses was a hot topic here.  Personally, i've worn them my entire life, and i couldn't tell you the brand i'm wearing right now, let alone whether it's designer or not.  They did cost around $200 i think, but I got a discount through my insurance.  I think they're fine.  There always is a wall somewhere in the store that I don't look at because the prices seem kind of crazy.  Maybe my face doesn't know what it's missing. 

On a separate note, not sure how i'd feel about my wife giving me some sort of blind test just to prove that my tastes are misguided or something.  Seems kind of passive aggressive.  I'd much rather her just come out and say what she's thinking, and then I can argue with her for awhile, and then I can slowly come around to her point.     

[Clover]

Enlisting an entire forum to vote and prove your girlfriend wrong? Insisting that you know much better than her what she should spend her money on? Maintaining that this is "helping her strengthen her frugality muscles" regardless of her interest in the same? Sounds like a jerk to me.

I believe he was starting with the forum to see if it was worthwhile to try it with her.  And, who knows, maybe she'll prove him wrong. 

I'd much rather her just come out and say what she's thinking, and then I can argue with her for awhile, and then I can slowly come around to her point.     

Skyrefuge, this is probably the best advice you're going to get on this thread.  Or anywhere else for that matter.