The motion of an observer in a given space produces a particular perception called motion perspective. This has been defined by Gibson as the gradual changes in the rate of displacements of contour lines in the visual field of the observer. This paper describes a new approach intended for analysing the motion perspective in order to quantify the morphology of urban open spaces along routes. It is based on spherical projections, which provide the shape of the sky boundary around the observer. The projections are studied through their skeletons, which are continuous sets of curves obtained by a progressive thinning down of the shapes around their main saliencies. The proposed method uses these skeletons to follow the variations in the shape of the sky boundary between the successive views. Measures of these variations have been developed and applied in a range of simplified theoretical examples and a real field example in order to show that they succeeded in capturing significant variations in spherical projections.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BattyM, 2001, “Exploring isovist fields: Space and shape in architectural and urban morphology”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28123–150
2.
BenediktML, 1979, “To take hold of space: Isovists and isovist fields”Environment and Planning B647–65
3.
BlumH, 1967, “A transformation for extracting new descriptors of shape”, in Proceedings of Models for the Perception of Speech and Visual Form (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA) pp 362–380
4.
BosselmannP, 1998Representation of Places: Reality and Realism in City Design (University of California Press, Berkeley, CA)
5.
CarvalhoRBattyM, 2005, “Encoding geometric information in road networks extracted from binary images”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design32 pp 179–190
6.
ChoiSWSeidelHP, 2001, “Hyperbolic Hausdorff distance for medial axis transform”Graphical Models63369–384
7.
CouprieMZrourR, 2005, “Discrete bisector function and Euclidean skeleton”, in Proceedings of Discrete Geometry for Computer Imagery (Springer, Berlin) 216–227
DubuissonMPJainAK, 1994, “A modified Hausdorff distance for object matching”, in Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Pattern Recognition pp 566–568
10.
DurandFDrettakisGPuechC, 1996, “The 3D visibility complex: A new approach to the problems of accurate visibility”, in Proceedings of the 7 th Eurographics Workshop on Rendering (Rendering Techniques '96) pp 245–257
11.
DurandFDrettakisGPuechC, 1997, “The visibility skeleton: A powerful and efficient multipurpose global visibility tool”, in Proceedings of SIGGRAPH'97 pp 89–100
12.
Fisher-GewirtzmanDWagnerI, 2003, “A 3D visual method for comparative evaluation of dense built-up environments”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design30575–587
13.
Fisher-GewirtzmanDShachDWagnerIABurtM, 2005, “View-oriented three-dimensional visual analysis models for the urban environment”Urban Design International1023–37
14.
GibsonJJ, 1950The Perception of the Visual World (Houghton Mifflin, Boston, MA)
15.
KleinPTirthapuraSSharvitDKimiaB, 2000, “A tree-edit distance for comparing simple, closed shapes”, in Proceedings of the Symposium on Discrete Algorithm (SODA '00) pp 696–704
16.
KoenderinkJJvan DoornAJ, 1976, “The singularities of the visual mapping”BioCyber2451–59
17.
LeymarieFBoichisNAiraultSJametO, 2005, “Semi-automatic road tracking”Proceedings of the Remote Sensing for Geography, Geology, Land Planning and Cultural Heritage Conference SPIE 2960, pp 84–95
18.
LynchKAppleyardDMyerJR, 1966The View from the Road (MIT Press, Cambridge, MA)
PeponisJWinemanJRaschidMKimSHBafnaS, 1997, “On the description of shape and spatial configuration inside buildings: Convex partitions and their local properties”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design24761–781
22.
PocchiolaMVegterG, 1996, “The visibility complex”International Journal on Computational Geometry and Applications6279–308
23.
RattiCRichensP, 2004, “Raster analysis of urban form”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design31297–309
24.
RoteG, 1991, “Computing the minimum Hausdorff distance between two point sets on a line under translation”Information Processing Letters38123–127
25.
RucklidgeW, 1996Efficient Visual Recognition Using the Hausdorff Distance (Springer, Berlin)
26.
SarradinFSiretDTellerJ, 2003, “Visual urban space assessment from sky shape analysis”, in Proceedings of Enviro Info 2003 pp 231–238
27.
SiddiqiKBouixSTannebaumAZuckerSW, 2002, “Hamilton – Jacobi skeletons”International Journal of Computer Vision48215–231
28.
TekHKimiaBB, 1999, “Perceptual organization via symmetry map and symmetry transforms”, inProceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV '99)22470–2477
29.
TellerJ, 2003, “A spherical metric for the field-oriented analysis of complex urban open spaces”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design30339–356
30.
TellerJAzarS, 2001, “Townscope II: A computer system to support solar access decision making”Solar Energy Journal70187–200
31.
ThielE, 1994Les Distances de Chanfrein en Analyse d'Images: Fondements et Applications PhD thesis, Universite Joseph Fourier (Grenoble I), France
32.
ThielP, 1961, “A sequence experience notation for architectural and urban spaces”The Town Planning Review3233–52
33.
TurnerA, 2003, “Analysing the visual dynamics of spatial morphology”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design30657–676
34.
TurnerADoxaMO'SullivanDPennA, 2001, “From isovists to visibility graphs: A methodology for the analysis of architectural space”Environment and Planning B: Planning and Design28103–121
