[1]陈梓茹,傅伟聪,朱志鹏,等.全景呈现技术在景观视觉评价中应用的优劣势分析[J].西安建筑科技大学学报(自然科学版),2021,53(04):584-593.[doi:10.15986/j.1006-7930.2021.04.016]
　CHEN Ziru,FU Weicong,ZHU Zhipeng,et al.Analysis of advantages and disadvantages of panorama presentation technology in landscape visual evaluation[J].J. Xi’an Univ. of Arch. & Tech.(Natural Science Edition),2021,53(04):584-593.[doi:10.15986/j.1006-7930.2021.04.016]
点击复制

全景呈现技术在景观视觉评价中应用的优劣势分析()
分享到：

西安建筑科技大学学报（自然科学版）[ISSN:1006-7930/CN:61-1295/TU]

卷:
53
期数:
2021年04期
页码:
584-593
栏目:
出版日期:
2021-08-28

文章信息/Info

Title:
Analysis of advantages and disadvantages of panorama presentation technology in landscape visual evaluation
文章编号:
1006-7930(2021)04-0584-10
作者:
陈梓茹1; 傅伟聪2; 朱志鹏1; 董建文2
(1.福建工程学院(福州)建筑与城乡规划学院,福建 福州 350116; 2.福建农林大学 园林学院,福建 福州 350002)
Author(s):
CHEN Ziru1; FU Weicong2; ZHU Zhipeng1; DONG Jianwen2
(1.College of Architecture and Urban Planning,Fujian University of Technology,Fuzhou 350116,China; 2.College of Art & Landscape and Architecture,Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University,Fuzhou 350002,China)
关键词:
VR;  全景呈现;  景观;  视觉评价;  可行性
Keywords:
VR;  panoramic rendering;  landscape;  visual evaluation;  feasibility
分类号:
TU986
DOI:
10.15986/j.1006-7930.2021.04.016
文献标志码:
A
摘要:
通过对比全景VR评价、实景评价及二维照片评价中受试者的感知差异性,分析全景VR评价的优势与劣势及其在视觉景观评价中的应用价值.研究以福州梅峰山地公园中6个典型风景林地为研究对象,通过对比分析受试者的1)观景视角、2)心理指标、3)场景真实感,比较三种视觉景观评价方法之间的异同.结果显示:1)对比受试者在6个风景林地所拍摄的照片,结果显示受试者拍摄的代表性的照片存在差异; 2)受试者在实景评价与全景VR评价中观景视角相似,两种评价方式的观景视角无显著差异; 3)照片评价与实景评价的受试者在心理评价的12个指标中有10个指标存在显著性差异,如:“封闭性”、“宜人性”、“统一性”、“唤醒度”及“场景偏好”等; 而全景VR评价与实景评价对比仅有3个指标(“原创性Sig.=0.036”、“宜人性Sig.=0.025”、“唤醒度Sig.=0.035”)存在显著差异; 4)全景VR评价所呈现的场景现场感显著高于照片评价.表明:1)全景VR评价作为替代照片呈现形式应用于景观视觉评价研究中具有明显优势; 2)对比实景评价,全景VR评价具有变量可控、可重复性及便利性等优势.本研究为全景VR技术服务于景观评价研究提供了理论支持.
Abstract:
By comparing the perception differences of subjects in panoramic VR evaluation,real scene evaluation and photo evaluation,the advantages and disadvantages of panoramic VR evaluation and its application value in visual landscape evaluation are analyzed. In this study,6 typical scenic woodlands in Fuzhou Meifeng Mountain Park are selected as the research objects. Through the comparative analysis of the subjects’ 1)viewing angle,2)psychological indicators and 3)scene reality,the similarities and differences between the three visual landscape evaluation methods are compared. The results show that:1)A comparison of photos taken by the subjects in 6 scenic woodlands reveals differences in the representative photos taken by the subjects; 2)The subjects have similar viewing angles in the real scene and the panoramic VR scene,and there is no significant difference in the viewing angle between the two evaluation methods; 3)There are significant differences in 10 of 12 psychological evaluation indicators indicators between photo evaluation and real evaluation subjects,such as:“closedness” and “pleasantness”,“unity”,“awakening” and “scene preference”,etc.; however,there are only three indicators(“Original Sig.=0.036”,“Agreeable Sig.=0.025”,“Arousal degree Sig.=0.035”)that are significantly different between panoramic VR evaluation and real scene evaluation.; 4)The “scene reality” presented by the panoramic VR is significantly higher than the photo. It shows that:1)the panoramic VR evaluation,as an alternative photo presentation form,has obvious advantages in the study of landscape visual evaluation; 2)Compared with the real scene evaluation,the panoramic VR evaluation has the advantages of variable controllability,repeatability and convenience. This research provides theoretical support for panoramic VR technology to serve landscape evaluation research.

参考文献/References:

[1]KRAUSE Christian L. Our visual landscape managing the landscape under special consideration of visual aspects[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2001,54:239-254
[2]米勒·P A,刘滨谊,唐真. 从视觉偏好研究:一种理解景观感知的方法[J]. 中国园林,2013,29(5):22-26.
MILLER P A,LIU Binyi,TANG Zhen. Visual Preference Research:An Approach to Understanding Landscape Perception[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,2013,29(5):222-26
[3]章志都,徐程扬,龚岚,等. 基于SBE法的北京市郊野公园绿地结构质量评价技术[J]. 林业科学,2011,47(8):53-60.
ZHANG Zhidu,XU Chengyang,GONG,et al. Assessment on Structural Quality of Landscapes in Green Space of Beijing Suburban Parks by SBE Method[J]. Sciential Silvage Sinicae,2011,47(8):53-60
[4]范榕,刘滨谊. 基于AHP法的景观空间视觉吸引评价[C]∥中国风景园林学会2014年会论文集,沈阳,2014:5.
FAN Rong,LIU Binyi. Evaluation of visual attraction of landscape space based on AHP method[C]∥Proceeding of 2014 Annual Meeting of Chinese Society of Landscape Architecture,Shengyang,2014:5.
[5]冯纪忠. 组景刍议[J]. 中国园林,2010(11):20-24.
FENG Jizhong. Over “Landscaping Organizing”[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,2010(11):20-24.
[6]BROWN T C,DANIEL T C. Modeling forest scenic beauty:Concepts and application to ponderosa pine[D]. Fort Collins:USDA Forest Service Research,1984:256.
[7]DANIEL T C,BOSTER R S,FOREST R M. Measuring landscape esthetics:the scenic beauty estimation method[D]. Fort Collins:USDA Forest Serv Res,1976.
[8]兰格 E,勒格瓦伊拉 I,刘滨谊,等.视觉景观研究:回顾与展望[J].中国园林,2012,28(3):5-14.
LANGE E,LEGWALLA I,LIU Binyi,et al. Visual Landscape Research:Overview and Outlook[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,2012,28(3):5-14.
[9]王向歌. 基于城市景观视觉的山地公园植物景观规划设计研究[D]. 重庆:西南大学,2016.
WANG Xiangge. On design of plant landscape in mountain parks of Chongqing based on the urban visual analysis[D]. Chongqing:Southwest University,2016.
[10]SONG C,IKEI H,KOBAYASHHI M,et al. Effects of viewing forest landscape on middle-aged hypertensive men[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening. 2017,21:247-252.
[11]王保忠,王保明,何平. 景观资源美学评价的理论与方法[J]. 应用生态学报,2006(9):1733-1739.
WANG Baozhong,WANG Baoming,HE Ping. Theories and Methods of Aesthetic Evaluation of Landscape Resources[J]. Chinese Journal of Applied Ecology,2006(9):1733-1739.
[12]BRUSH R O. The attractiveness of woodlands:Perceptions of forest landowners in Massachusetts[J]. Forest Science,1979,25(3):495-506.
[13]BISHOP I D,ROHRMANN B. Subjective responses to simulated and real environments:a comparison[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2003,65(4):261-277.
[14]陈筝,杨云,邱明,等.面向城市空间的实景视觉体验评价技术[J].风景园林,2017(4):28-33.
CHEN Zheng,YANG Yun,QIU Ming,et al. In-situ assessment of visual experience for urban space[J]. Landscape Architecture,2017(4):28-33.
[15]孙漪南,赵芯,王宇泓,等.基于VR全景图技术的乡村景观视觉评价偏好研究[J].北京林业大学学报,2016,38(12):104-112.
SUN Yinan,ZHAO Xin,WANG Yuhong. Study on the visual evaluation preference of rural landscape based on VR panorama[J]. Journal of Beijing Forestry University,2016,38(12):104-112.
[16]朱彦,刘佳伟,梅婉琪,等.基于VR全景图技术的校园景观视觉评价偏好研究:以安徽新华学院为例[J].现代园艺,2020,43(19):36-37.
ZHU Yang,LIU Jiawei,MEI Wanqi,et al. Research on the preference of campus landscape visual evaluation based on VR panorama technology:taking anhui xinhua university as an example[J]. Modern Gardening,2020,43(19):36-37
[17]SHEPPARD S R J. Guidance for crystal ball gazers:developing a code of ethics for landscape visualization[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning. 2001,54(1):183-199.
[18]怀松垚,陈筝,刘颂. 基于新数据、新技术的城市公共空间品质研究[J]. 城市建筑,2018(6):12-20.
HUAI Songyao,CHEN Zheng,LIU Song. The quality of urban public space based on new data and new technologies[J]. Urbanism and Architecure,2018(6):12-20.
[19]LANGE E. 99 volumes later:We can visualise. Now what?[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2011,100(4):403-406.
[20]HIGUERA-TRUJILLO J L,LPEZ-TARRUELLA Maldonado J,LLINARES Millán C. Psychological and physiological human responses to simulated and real environments:A comparison between Photographs,360° Panoramas,and Virtual Reality[J]. Applied Ergonomics,2017,65:398-409.
[21]LOVETT A,APPLETON K,WARREN-KRETZSCHMAR B,et al. Using 3D visualization methods in landscape planning:An evaluation of options and practical issues[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2015,142:85-94.
[22]ADELA B,TORRALBA B A. Semantic Understanding of Scenes through the ADE20K Dataset[J]. International Journal of Computer Vision,2016(3):302-321.
[23]田松. 所见即所能见:从惠勒的实在图示看科学与认知模式的同构[J]. 哲学研究,2004(2):63-69.
TIAN Song. What You See Is What You Can See:Seeing the Isomorphism of Science and Cognitive Model from Wheeler’s Realistic Diagram[J]. Philosophical Research,2004(2):63-69.
[24]HANDS T,SHAW A,GIBSON M,et al. People and their plants:The effect of an educational comic on gardening intentions[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening,2018,30:132-137.
[25]BIRENBOIM A,DIJST M,ETTEMA D,et al. The utilization of immersive virtual environments for the investigation of environmental preferences[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2019,189:129-138.
[26]龚鹏,刘纯青,古新仁.照片、动画媒介在城市植物视觉景观评估中的替代效应研究[J].中国园林,2017,33(8):97-102.
GONG Peng,LIU Chunqing,GU Xinren. Research about substitution effects of photograph and animation media in the assement of urban plant visual landscape[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,2017,33(8):97-102.
[27]徐磊青,孟若希,黄舒晴,等.疗愈导向的街道设计:基于VR实验的探索[J].国际城市规划,2019,34(1):38-45.
XU Leiqing,MENG Ruoxi,HUANG Shuqing,et al. Healing oriented street design:Experimental explorations via virtual reality[J]. Urban Planning International,2019,34(1):38-45.
[28]林月彬,刘健,余坤勇,等.冠顶式步道景观环境感知评价研究:以福州“福道”为例[J].中国园林,2019,35(6):72-77.
LIN Yuebin,LIU Jian,YU Kunyong,et al. Research on perceived evaluation for landscape environment of treetop walk:A case study of “Fu forest trail” in Fuzhou[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,2019,35(6):72-77.
[29]陈筝,赵双睿. 提升心理健康的城市绿色开放空间规划设计[J]. 城市建筑,2018(24):51-56.
CHEN Zheng,ZHAO Shuanrui. Enhancing planning and design of mental health urban green open spaces[J]Urbanism and Architecure.,2018(24):51-56.
[30]ODE Å,TVEIT M S,FRY G. Advantages of using different data sources in assessment of landscape change and its effect on visual scale[J]. Ecological Indicators,2010,10(1):24-31.
[31]GRAHN P,STIGSDOTTER U K. The relation between perceived sensory dimensions of urban green space and stress restoration[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2010,94(3/4):264-275.
[32]USOH M,CATENA E,ARMAN S. Using presence questionnaires in reality[J]. Presence Teleoperators Virtual Environ,2000,9:497-503.
[33]俞孔坚,吉庆萍. 专家与公众景观审美差异研究及对策[J]. 中国园林,1990,6(2):19-23.
YU Kongjian,JI Qingping. Research and countermeasures on the aesthetic differences between experts and the public[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,1990,6(2):19-23.
[34]陈鑫峰. 京西山区森林景观评价和风景游憩林营建研究:兼论太行山区的森林游憩业建设[D].北京:北京林业大学,2000.
CHEN Xinfeng,Research on Forest Landscape Evaluation and Scenic Recreation Forest Construction in West Beijing Mountain:Concurrently Discuss the Construction of Forest Recreation Industry in Taihang Mountain[D]. Beijing:Beijing Forestry University,2000.
[35]KULIGA S,THRASH T,DALTON R. Virtual reality as an empirical research tool-Exploring user experience in a real building and a corresponding virtual model[J]. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2015,54:363-375.
[36]袁勋,许超,包志毅. Lumion软件在植物景观设计中的应用[J].福建林业科技,2013(4):114-116,130.
YUAN Xun,XU Chao,BAO Zhiyi. Application of the Lumion software in the plant landscape design[J]. Journal of Fujian Forestry Science and Technology,2013(4):114-116,130.
[37]SHEPPARD S R J. Guidance for crystal ball gazers:developing a code of ethics for landscape visualization[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2001,54(1):183-199.
[38]陈梓茹,傅伟聪,董建文. 基于场景可视化的城区山体美学质量评价研究:以福州市为例[J]. 中国园林,2017,33(10):108-112.
CHEN Ziru,FU Weicong,DONG Jianwen. Scenic Beauty Estimation of Urban Massif Based on Scenario Visualization:A Case Study of Fuzhou[J]. Chinese Landscape Architecture,2017,33(10):108-112.
[39]BOURNEZ E,LANDES T,NAJJAR G,et al. Sensitivity of simulated light interception and tree transpiration to the level of detail of 3D tree reconstructions[J]. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening,2019,38:1-10.
[40]FRANK S,FüRST C,KOSCHKE L,et al. Assessment of landscape aesthetics:Validation of a landscape metrics-based assessment by visual estimation of the scenic beauty[J]. Ecological Indicators,2013,32:222-231.
[41]王建伟,魏淑敏,姚瑞,等.园林空间类型划分及景观感知特征量化研究[J].西北林学院学报,2012,27(2):221-225,229.
WANG Jianwei,WEI Shumin,YAO Rui,et al. Quantitaive evaluation of landscape perception features and classification of garden space[J]. Journal of Northwest Forestry University,2012,27(2):221-225,229.
[42]刘滨谊,郭佳希.基于风景旷奥理论的视觉感受模型研究:以城市湿地公园为例[J].南方建筑,2014(3):4-9.
LIU Binyi,GUO Jiaxi. Study on a visual evaluation model based on kuang-ao theory:Take urban wetland park as an example[J]. South Architecture,2014(3):4-9.
[43]SMITH E L,BISHOP I D,WILLIAMS K J H,et al. Scenario Chooser:An interactive approach to eliciting public landscape preferences[J]. Landscape and Urban Planning,2012,106(3):230-243.
[44]BARDO M T,DONOHEW R L,HARRINGTON N G.Psychobiology of novelty seeking and drug seeking behavior. Behav. Brain Res. 1996,77,23-43.
[45]付婧莞,陆明. 寒地校园冬季景观对大学生脑疲劳的感知恢复效用研究[J]. 西安建筑科技大学学报(自然科学版),2020,52(6):905-911.
FU Jingwan,LU Ming. Perceived restorative effects of winter campus landscape on university students’ mental fatigue in winter cities[J]. J. Xi’an Univ. of Arch. & Tech.(Natural Science Edition),2020,52(6):905-911.
(编辑 桂智刚)

备注/Memo

备注/Memo:
收稿日期:2021-01-10 修改稿日期:2021-06-25
基金项目:福建工程学院科研计划项目(GY-Z20087); 福建省教育厅中青年科技项目(JAT190147); 国家林业公益性行业科研专项(201404301)
第一作者:陈梓茹(1992-),女,博士,讲师,主要研究风景园林设计、视觉景观.E-mail:fjchenziru@126.com
通信作者:傅伟聪(1989-),男,博士,讲师,主要研究风景园林设计.E-mail:weicongfufj@163.com
更新日期/Last Update: 2021-08-28