What you see is not always what you get: A qualitative, comparative analysis of ex ante visualizations with ex post photography of landscape and architectural projects

Landscape and Urban Planning

Volumn 142, Issue , 2015, Pages 136-146

  Downes, Melanie ^a   Lange, Eckart ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Architectural photography; Communication; Landscape; Visualization

Indexed keywords

COMMUNICATION; DECISION MAKING; FLOW VISUALIZATION; PHOTOGRAPHY; VISUALIZATION; WIND POWER;

ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS; COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS; DECISION MAKING TOOL; LANDSCAPE; LANDSCAPE VISUALIZATION; PLANNING AND DESIGN; POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE EFFECT; PRODUCTION TECHNIQUES;

IMAGE ANALYSIS;

EID: 84944164808     PISSN: 01692046     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.landurbplan.2014.06.002     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Appleyard D. Understanding professional media: Issues, theory and a research agenda 1977, 43-88. Institute of Urban and Regional Development, University of California, Berkeley, Reprint No. 150 from Human Behavior and Environment 2.
2. Bruce V., Green P.R., Georgeson M.A. Visual perception, physiology psychology and ecology 1996, Psychology Press, East Sussex.
3. Daniel T.C. Whither Scenic Beauty? Visual landscape quality assessment in the 21st century. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 54:267-281.
4. Daniel T.C., Meitner M. Representational validity of landscape visualizations: The effects of graphical realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas. Journal of Environmental Psychology 2001, 21(1):61-72.
5. Department for Communities Local Government Environmental impact assessment: A guide to procedures 2006, Thomas Telford, Tonbridge.
6. Ervin S.M. Digital landscape modeling and visualization: A research agenda. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 54:49-62.
7. European Commission EIA directive on environmental impact assessment (online) 1985, Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/eia/eia-legalcontext.htm Accessed 30.01.14.
8. European Commission Directive on public participation in respect of the drawing up of certain plans and programmes (online) 2003, Available from: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?.uri=OJ:L:156:0017:0024:EN:PDF Accessed 30.01.14.
9. Gibson J.J. The perception of the visual world 1950, The Riverside Press, Cambridge, USA.
10. Gill L., Lange E., Morgan E., Romano D. An analysis of usage of different types of visualisation media within a collaborative planning workshop environment. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2013, 40(4):742-754.
11. Kingery-Page K., Hahn H. The aesthetics of digital representation: Realism, abstraction and kitsch. JoLA 2012, 7(2):68-75.
12. Landscape Institute Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11. Photography and photomontage in landscape and visual assessment (online) 2011, Available from: http://www.landscapeinstitute.org/PDF/Contribute/LIPhotographyAdviceNote01-11.pdf Accessed 30.01.14.
13. Landscape Institute with the Institute of Environmental Management Assessment Guidelines for landscape and visual impact assessment 2013, Routledge, London and New York. 3rd ed.
14. Lange E. Integration of computerized visual simulation and visual assessment in environmental planning. Landscape and Urban Planning 1994, 30:99-112.
15. Lange E. The limits of realism: Perceptions of virtual landscapes. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 54:163-182.
16. Lange E. Issues and questions for research in communicating with the public through visualizations (online) 2005, Available from: http://www.kolleg.loel.hs-anhalt.de/studiengaenge/mla/mla_fl/conf/pdf/conf2005/11lange_c.pdf Accessed 30.01.14.
17. Lange E. 99 volumes later: We can visualise. Now what?. Landscape and Urban Planning 2011, 100:403-406.
18. Lange E., Hehl-Lange S. Combining a participatory planning approach with a virtual landscape model for the siting of wind turbines. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management 2005, 48(6):833-852.
19. Lange E., Legwaila I. Visual landscaperesearch - overviewandoutlook. Chinese Landscape Architecture 2012, 28(195/03):5-14.
20. Lewis J.L. More art than science: The sources and effects of stylistic variation in visualization for planning and design. Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design 2012, 39(3):551-565.
21. Macaskill M. Firms 'rig images to downplay turbines' 2010, Sunday Times Scotland 16/05/10, Available from: http://martinfrost.ws/htmlfiles/scotnews10/100516-rigpix.html Accessed 30.01.14.
22. Macdonald A. The visual issue - An investigation into the techniques and methodology used in windfarm computer visualisations 2007, Available from: http://docs.wind-watch.org/visualissue.pdf Accessed 30.01.14.
23. MacFarlane R., Stagg H., Turner K., Lievesley M. Peering through the smoke? Tensions in landscape visualisation. Computers, Environment and Urban Systems 2005, 29:341-359.
24. McCormick B.H., DeFanti T.A., Brown M.D. Visualization in scientific computing. ACM SIGGRAPH 1987, 21:6.
25. Mitchell W.J. The reconfigured eye. Visual truth in the post-photographic era 1992, MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.
26. Repton, H. (Loudon, J. C. Ed.) (1840). The landscape gardening and landscape architecture of the late Humpry Repton, Esq. being his entire works on these subjects. London: Longman & Co.
27. Ribe R.G., Armstrong E.T., Gobster P.H. Scenic vistas and the changing policy landscape. Visualizing and testing the role of visual resources in ecosystem management. Landscape Journal 2002, 21(1):42-66.
28. Sanoff H. Visual research methods in design 1991, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
29. Sheppard S.R.J. Visual simulation. A user's guide forarchitects, engineers, and planners 1989, Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York.
30. Sheppard S.R.J. Guidance for crystal ball gazers: Developing a code of ethics for landscape visualization. Landscape and Urban Planning 2001, 54:183-199.
31. Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) Visual Representation of Windfarms. Good Practice Guidance. Report No: FO3 AA 308/2 (online) 2006, Available from: http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/A305436.pdf Accessed 30.01.14.
32. University of Newcastle Visual Assessment of Windfarms Best Practice 2002, Scottish Natural Heritage Commissioned Report F01AA303A (online), Available from: http://www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/publications/commissioned_reports/f01aa303a.pdf Accessed 30.01.14.
33. Watzek K., Ellsworth J. Perceived scale accuracy of computer visual simulations. Landscape Journal 1994, 13(1):21-36.
34. Wergles N., Muhar A. The role of computer visualization in the communication of urban design - A comparison of viewer responses to visualizations versus on-site visits. Landscape and Urban Planning 2009, 91:171-182.
35. Zube E.H., Sell J.L., Taylor J.G. Landscape perception: Research, application and theory. Landscape Planning 1982, 9:1-33.