Analysis of Stereoscopic Images as a New Method for Daylighting Studies

This article presents the comparison analysis and results of an experiment designed with two presentation modes: real environments and stereoscopic images. The aim of this article is of a methodological nature, with a main objective of analyzing the usability of stereoscopic image presentation as a research tool to evaluate the daylight impact on the perceived architectural quality of small rooms. Twenty-six participants evaluated 12 different stimuli, divided in equal parts between real rooms and stereoscopic images. The stimuli were two similar rooms of different achromatic-colored surfaces (white and black) with three different daylight openings in each room. The participants assessed nine architectural quality attributes on a semantic differential scale. A pragmatic statistical approach (Bland-Altman Approach) for assessing agreement between two methods was used. Results suggest that stereoscopic image presentation is an accurate method to be used when evaluating all nine attributes in the white room and nearly all attributes in the black room.

[1]  J. M. Kittross.  The measurement of meaning , 1959 .

[2]  Yvonne de Kort,et al.  Virtual Laboratories: Comparability of Real and Virtual Environments for Environmental Psychology , 2003, Presence: Teleoperators & Virtual Environments.

[3]  Francis Rumsey,et al.  On Some Biases Encountered in Modern Audio Quality Listening Tests-A Review , 2008 .

[4]  Stephen Kaplan,et al.  The Visual Environment: Public Participation in Design and Planning , 1989 .

[5]  Barbara Matusiak,et al.  Width or Height? Which has the Strongest Impact on the Size Impression of Rooms? Results from Full-Scale Studies and Computer Simulations , 2008 .

[6]  Raphaël Labayrade,et al.  Validation of an online protocol for assessing the luminous environment , 2013 .

[7]  Naoyuki Oi.  The difference among generations in evaluating interior lighting environment. , 2005, Journal of physiological anthropology and applied human science.

[8]  Jennifer A. Veitch,et al.  Preferred Surface Luminances in Offices, by Evolution , 2004 .

[9]  Richard H. Price,et al.  Person-environment psychology : new directions and perspectives , 2000 .

[10]  Ilona Heldal,et al.  Perception of color and space in virtual reality: a comparison between a real room and virtual reality models , 2004, IS&T/SPIE Electronic Imaging.

[11]  Caitlin Akai,et al.  Depth perception in real and virtual environments: An exploration of individual differences , 2007 .

[12]  A. Valberg.  Light Vision Color , 2005 .

[13]  Ardeshir Mahdavi,et al.  Subjective Evaluation of Architectural Lighting Via Computationally Rendered Images , 2002 .

[14]  Peter Zolliker,et al.  Web-based psychometric evaluation of image quality , 2009, Electronic Imaging.

[15]  Jennifer A. Veitch,et al.  Lighting quality research using rendered images of offices , 2005 .

[16]  Masashi Okubo.  Shape Evaluation Properties in Real Space and Virtual Space , 2011 .

[17]  Anna Pellegrino,et al.  Assessment of artificial lighting parameters in a visual comfort perspective , 1999 .

[18]  Douglas G. Altman,et al.  Measurement in Medicine: The Analysis of Method Comparison Studies , 1983 .

[19]  Christine J. Ziemer,et al.  Estimating distance in real and virtual environments: Does order make a difference? , 2009, Attention, perception & psychophysics.

[20]  study Newsham,et al.  Preferred surface luminances in offices , by evolution : a pilot , 2002 .

[21]  D. Altman,et al.  Agreement Between Methods of Measurement with Multiple Observations Per Individual , 2007, Journal of biopharmaceutical statistics.

[22]  D. Altman,et al.  STATISTICAL METHODS FOR ASSESSING AGREEMENT BETWEEN TWO METHODS OF CLINICAL MEASUREMENT , 1986, The Lancet.

[23]  William B. Thompson,et al.  A comparison of size perception in real and virtual environments using judgments of action capability. , 2012 .

[24]  A. Stamps.  Use of Photographs to Simulate Environments: A Meta-Analysis , 1990 .