Visualizing wood interiors: A qualitative assessment of what people react to and how they describe it

Forest Products Journal

Volumn 55, Issue 2, 2005, Pages 81-86

  Nordvik, Enar ^a   Broman, N Olof ^a  

^a LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

IMAGE ANALYSIS; MATERIALS SCIENCE; STATISTICS; TEXTURES; VISUALIZATION;

COMPUTER VISUALIZATION; WOOD INTERIORS;

WOOD;

CAD CAM; STATISTICS; TEXTURE; WOOD;

EID: 14744269934     PISSN: 00157473     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (20)

1. Broman, N.O. 1995a. Visual impressions of features in Scots pine wood surfaces. Forest Prod. J. 45(3):61-66.
2. _. 1995b. Two methods for measuring people's preferences for wood. Mokuzai Gakkaishi 41(11):994-1005.
3. Broudy, H.S. 1987. The Role of Imagery in Learning. The Getty Centre for Education in the Arts, Los Angeles, CA.
4. Cox, D.J. 1990. The art of scientific visualization. Academic Computing 4(6):20-56.
5. Daniel, T. and M.M. Meitner. 2001. Representational validity of landscape visualizations: The effects of graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas. J. of Environ. Psych. 21(1):61-72.
6. Fridell Anter, K. 2000. What color is the red house?: Perceived color of painted facades. KTH, Stockholm, Sweden. 338 pp.
7. Glaser, B. and A. Strauss. 1967. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago, IL. 271 pp.
8. Hansen, E.N. and R.J. Bush. 1996. Consumer perceptions of softwood lumber quality. Forest Prod. J. 46(10):29-34.
9. _ and S. Weinfurter. 1999. Softwood lumber quality requirements: Examining the supplier/buyer perception gap. Wood Fiber Sei. 31(1):83-94.
10. Hesselgren, S. 1971. Experimental Studies on Architectural Perception. National Swedish Building Research, Stockholm, Sweden. 104 pp.
11. _. 1987. On Architecture: An Architectural Theory Based on Psychological Research. Chartwell-Bratt, Bromley, Kent, UK. 310 pp.
12. Marchai, R. and F. Mothe. 1994. Appreciations of oak wood for the French consumer and wood professionals. Annales des Science Foresteriere 51(3):213-231.
13. Miles, M.B. and A.M. Huberman. 1994. Qualitative Data Analysis: An Expanded Sourcebook. Sage, Thousand Oaks, CA. 338 pp.
14. Mitchell, A. A. 1983. The effects of visual and emotional advertising: An information processing approach. In: Advertising and Consumer Psychology. L. Percy and A. Woodside, eds. Lexington Books, Lexington, MA. pp. 197-217.
15. Rasmussen, S.E. 1962. Experiencing Architecture. MIT, Cambridge, MA. 245 pp.
16. Persson, E. 2001.Wood dimensions: On experiencing wood. Report TRITA-TRT- 1992-51. KTH, School of Architecture, Stockholm, Sweden. 72 pp. (in Swedish, abstract in English)
17. Sheppard, S.R.J. 2000. Visualization as a decision-support tool for managing forest ecosystems. The Compiler 16(1):25-40.
18. Silverstein, D.A. and J.E. Farrell. 2000. Efficient method for paired comparison. J. of Electronic Imaging 10(2):394-398.
19. Swearingen, K.A., E.N. Hansen, and J.E. Reeb. 1998. Customer preference for Pacific Northwest hardwoods. Forest Prod. J. 48(2):29-33.
20. Wiklund, M. 1992. A profitable wood tradition: Evaluation of the political prospect of forest products and techniques in wood working industries. Prepared for 1990's Commission on forest policy. Report TRITA-TRT-1992-51. KTH, Wood Technology and Processing, Stockhom, Sweden, (in Swedish)