The Image and Preference Comparison between 'Opened Landscape' and 'Filtered Landscape' - Focused on With and Without Parallax Effect -

'열린경관'과 '가려진경관'의 이미지와 선호도 비교 - 패럴랙스(Parallax) 효과 유무를 중심으로 -

  • Rho, Jae-Hyun (Dept. of Landscape Architecture and Urban Design, Woosuk University)
  • 노재현 (우석대학교 조경도시디자인학과)
  • Published : 2007.10.31

Abstract

The purpose of this study is not only to compare between 'Opened Landscape' and 'Filtered Landscape' image and preference but also to suggests a guide line of planting design for progressive realization. For this, the image structures of photo-sketch simulation for parallax landscape have been investigated by Semantic Differential scale(S.D. scale) and the Factor analysis. The results could be summarized as follows. The results of S.D. scale values for landscape through parallax were greater than non-parallax landscape. The scenes through parallax were better preferred to direct view. Thus the results of photo-sketch simulation test support the expected hypothesis that the visual environment of complexity and variety is closely correlated with the parallax effect and monotonous or non-parallax environment, and parallax effect on close view more bigger than the distant view. Factors covering the spatial image of parallax landscape were found to be seven and Total values were 60.35 %. The most important factors determining the parallax effect were Factors I 'depth of space' and VI 'expectation of space and interest'. An outstanding view must be handled properly to be preserved or accentuated. In this sense, the parallax spatial beauty with tree could be improved through the visual aspects of plan arrangements and the progressive realization appeared to be one effective design technique for landscape planning and design.

Keywords

References

  1. 김세천(1999) 국립공원의 시각자원관리를 위한 경관분석에 관한 연구. 경희대학교 대학원 박사학위논문. pp.126-133
  2. 노재현(2007) 차폐 유형과 차폐도를 달리한 패럴랙스 공간의 시각 선호도. 한국조경학회지 35(2): 57-63
  3. 서주환(1987) 산림경관에 대한 계량적 분석에 관한 연구. 경희대학교 대학원 박사학위논문
  4. 양병이(1990) 경관선호도의 인지인자에 관한 연구. 한국조경학회지 17(3):19-20
  5. 조대성(1982) 도시건축의 환경지각과 Parallax의 공간미에 관한 연구. 국토계획학회지 17(2): 27-39
  6. 최영철, 홍승재, 김효선, 윤희상, 남호연, 박언곤(1989) 정자건축의 난간과 공간연출에 관한 연구. 대한건축학회논문집 9(2): 205-208
  7. 한동수(1997) 중국고건축.원림감상입문. 도서출판 세진사: 192-202
  8. 大山陽生(1970)造園美學.造形構成.誠新光社刊: 64-65. 126-127
  9. Alexander. C., S. Ishikawa and M. Silverstein (1977) A pattern language. New York. Oxford Univ. Press. pp. 1108-1111
  10. Collins. Peter (1999) Changing ideals in modern architecture. Montreal. McGill Queen's Univ. Press: 27-28. 292-303
  11. Cullen. G.(1964) Townscape, New York. Reinhold Publishing Co.: 126-132
  12. David. Center (1973) Psychology for Architectects. pp. 105-109
  13. Giedion, S. (1967) Space. time and architecture 5th. Cambridge. Harvard Univ. Press. pp. 285-290. 436
  14. Gimblett. H. R., R .M. Itami and J. E. Fitzgibbo(1985) Mystery in an information processing model of landscape preference. Landscape Journal 4(2): 87-95 https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.4.2.87
  15. Henry. F. A (1980) Trees in urban design. Van Nostrand Reinhold Co. pp. 35-42
  16. Kaplan, S., R. Kaplan and J. S. Wendt(1973) Rated preference and complexity for natural and urban. Visual Material, Perception and Psychophysics 12(4): 111-121
  17. Osgood C. E.(1968) Method and theory in experimental psychology. NY Oxford Univ. press
  18. Rapport. A. and R. E. Kantor(1970) Complexity and ambiguity in environmental design. J. of the American Institute of Planners (July). pp. 165-207
  19. Rapport. A. (1977) Human aspect of urban form. Oxford. Pregamin Press. p. 208
  20. Robinette. G. D.(1977) Plant. people and environment quality. American Society of Landscape Architects Foundation.1: 30-35
  21. Sanoff. Henry (1977) Measuring Attributes of the Visual Environment. Design for Human Behavior. eds. John Lang et al. Stroudsburg Penn.: Dowden. Hutchinson & Ross. Inc
  22. Simonds. S. J. O. ( 1961) Landscape architecture. Mcgraw-Hill Book Company. Inc. pp. 115-123