Evaluation of Urban Landscape Outdoor Advertisemen

land
Article
Evaluation of Urban Landscape Outdoor
Advertisement Signboards Using Virtual Reality
Young-Woo Lee 1 and Jun-Ho Huh 2, *
1 Department of Software, Catholic University of Pusan, Geumjeong-gu, Busan 46252, Korea; ywlee@cup.ac.kr
2 Department of Data Informatics, Korea Maritime and Ocean University, Busan 49112, Korea
* Correspondence: 72networks@kmou.ac.kr

Received: 2 March 2020; Accepted: 28 April 2020; Published: 7 May 2020
Abstract: The social interest in outdoor advertising signs, which have been recognized as an important
element affecting impressions of a town, has been gradually increasing. However, when these signs
are fully scattered around commercial areas, an oppressive feeling may be experienced by people,
which cannot be neglected. Thus, this paper attempts to identify the characteristics of such visual
oppression in urban landscapes through factor analysis, aiming to control them in such a way that does
not oppress people. In addition, comparisons between Japanese and foreign nationals (i.e., foreign
students from the Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China) were carried out, in order to
check for any differences in perception of oppressive feelings depending on nationality. At the same
time, to check for the possibility of different levels of perception depending on nationality, 20 Japanese
and 20 foreign nationals (including Koreans and Chinese) were selected as test subjects. We expect
this study to provide useful research material when reviewing the possibility of creating desirable
urban landscapes or establishing guidelines for outdoor advertisements. For the research, landscape
pictures focusing on outdoor advertising signs (15 wall, 6 roof-top, and 6 projection advertising
signs) were taken as a sample for analysis. They were then presented in a 3D cyberdome for factor
analysis, focusing on an impression evaluation test in relation to oppressive feelings. In addition,
among the data obtained from the sample analysis, “Proportion,” which was considered to be the
most influential factor on the oppressive feeling, was studied. The correlation coefficient between
these two populations was 0.918, revealing a high level of correlation; thus, all subjects were treated
as a single population. The factor analysis revealed 50.87% for the first factor (Evaluation), 25.39%
for the second factor (capacity), and 9.47% for the third factor (Emotion), suggesting a relationship
wherein the first factor decreased when the oppressive feeling increased; while the oppressive feeling
increased along with the second factor.
Keywords: landscape; outdoor advertisement signboard; pressure; image evaluation; VR;

virtual reality
1. Background and Objective of Research

Cities or urban landscapes are considered to be visual environments, which are maintained all
across the country to keep them in a favorable state [1]. Among them, outdoor advertising signs are
elements which have a relatively large influence on their impression. When outdoor advertising signs
are highly present in a commercial area—also referred to as “Visual noise”—they are considered to have
a harmful psychological effect on people, becoming one of the problems in the urban landscape [2–4].
In fact, in Kyoto (Japan), a trial concerning the oppressive impression of a certain building was carried
out in an attempt to prove its influence on the otherwise satisfactory city landscape surrounding the
building; the study results considered the oppressive feeling arising from the scale (height and/or area)
of the building used [4–8]. They showed that such oppressive feelings had started to become a social
Land 2020, 9, 141; doi:10.3390/land9050141 www.mdpi.com/journal/land

Land 2020, 9, 141 2 of 23
problem; therefore, the necessity of setting criteria or a measuring method to make judgments on the
subject of “oppressive feeling” in urban landscapes has become apparent as well.
There have been many research works focused on creating a good city landscape. Studies concerning
the oppressive feeling perceived with respect to the buildings in various construction fields have made
much progress (i.e., planting trees to ease the oppressive feeling or researching the permissible limit
of such a feeling) [9,10]. Nonetheless, studies related to outdoor advertisement signs, which can be
considered as an important landscape element, are still scarce.
Moreover, considering the sophistication of urban cities in the Republic of Korea, city environments
have become mechanical and disorderly, where outdoor advertisement signboards cause visual
pollution due to their different colors and sizes [11]. Although this may be considered an inevitable
and necessary process to go through when a city or town is growing, residents are nonetheless feeling
pressure from them.
One of the most important issues in the development process of a city is creating a visually pleasing
environment; furthermore, residents have increasingly demanded high-quality urban landscapes.
Even though there have been a series of micro-perspective research works in the city planning, civil
engineering, and architectural fields, which have been reflected in reality, providing a great effect;
however, there has been a growing need for research on satisfying human sensibilities.
Thus, this study seeks to investigate and analyze the current status of outdoor advertising signs in
city landscapes, quantify the oppressive feeling felt by people by performing impression evaluations
along with a factor analysis, and determine the characteristics of such feelings through correlations
with the elements (e.g., percentages, colors, and so on) of outdoor advertising signs and relevant factors.
For the experimental setup, a 3D cyber dome which can provide a high sense of realism and immersion
was used to create a condition close to an actual environment. The result is expected to be useful when
developing guidelines for reducing the oppressive feeling generated by outdoor advertising signs,
which is the ultimate objective of this study.
2. Related Research
It is critical to devise an improvement plan through the evaluation of landscapes when conducting
urban planning. For this, Hyeon-Soon Lee and Chang-Hwan Kang (2017) attempted to propose an
improvement plan for the underrated areas of individual landscape features based on the quantitative
evaluation of each landscape type in Changwon City in the Republic of Korea: 60 representative
landscapes were carefully selected and classified into six types for image evaluation based on the
five categories. As a result, festival, culture, and art landscapes were found to have been overrated,
as opposed to industrial and architectural landscapes [12]. Most tourist cities have been trying to attract
tourists by upgrading the openness of their landscapes through the improvement of their physical
elements. Kyeon-Hwa Byeon and Tai-Yeong Kim (2013) attempted to determine the physical elements
that affect urban landscapes by evaluating the openness and attractiveness features of Seongangil Road
in the Republic of Korea. Their evaluation items were Openness, Unsatisfactory openness, Dullness,
and Attractiveness; the openness of the road rated as being low in general, whereas dullness was
rated relatively higher. Moreover, attractiveness was rated low, thus requiring improvement of the
openness and/or attractiveness of the road [13]. Therefore, such evaluation of landscapes for the
physical improvement of urban landscapes is expected to lead to a significant result.
Research on an evaluation system is also required to evaluate landscapes. Gwang Young Lee
and Hak-bong Kyoung (2019) proposed an analysis model for the implementation and evaluation of
urban landscape planning based on a normative and phenomenological approach by analyzing the
contents of landscape planning, which they applied to the Cheonan and Asan cities of the Republic of
Korea; in particular, concerning their deliberation in terms of architectural, public design, and urban
dimensions. As a result, 16 approach elements (e.g., ecology, road, skyline, and so on) were drawn up
for landscape planning involving the urban dimension, along with 28 details from them [14]. The data
obtained from this task can be quite useful when implementing landscape planning. It is quite difficult
Land 2020, 9, 141 3 of 23
to perform the actual on-site evaluation of landscape planning, as there are physical limitations to the
number of evaluation members actually studying the landscape. Thus, it is appropriate and meaningful
to use VR to evaluate the environment created in the same manner as the real one. Won-Pyo Son et al.
(2012) proposed a method for selecting a landscape with an excellent level of landscape, technological,
and environmental qualities, based on a roadside landscape design evaluation system using VR to
measure the level of a driver’s satisfaction with the road; the alternatives obtained from the evaluation
were eventually applied. The results showed that drivers were more satisfied while they were driving
on the planned road, as compared to a general city road, as the balance and comfort significantly
affected their satisfaction [15]. In addition, Hyun Choi (2006) performed road design, wherein a
sense of reality was emphasized based on a VR technique, for an environmental impact evaluation.
He proposed a visualization technique through the construction of a 3D model and its simulation.
His model was designed to become a tool that could efficiently show the final view of a road after it
was completed by visually maximizing it [16].
Considering the research works mentioned above, it became clear that the landscapes were
evaluated quantitatively, and that the results were used for improvement in the establishment of a city
plan. In addition, VR was used to overcome the limitations of landscape evaluation in urban areas.
Thus, in this study, we attempted to perform an image evaluation of outdoor advertisement signboards
in Urban Landscapes by using VR techniques.
2.1. Landscape and Urban Landscapes

‘Landscape’, as defined in the Article 2 of Chapter 1 of the Korean Landscape Act, refers to
the regional characteristics of natural and artificial elements at the boundaries of people’s lives.
Further details can be found in [17–19]. The definition of landscape may vary between researchers,
depending on which area(s) they place academic significance in. This study defines it as “the scenes
or surrounding environment of space where people are living, including a physical environment
embodying the structures, outdoor signboards, atmosphere, and surrounding environment” [20,21].
Likewise, urban landscapes refer to the environment surrounding everyday urban life, including
visual urban landscapes in a narrow sense, or the image or atmosphere of the city environment in a
broad sense [22]. All natural and artificial creations, such as forests, trees, water, structures, streetscapes,
and outdoor advertisement signboards can be included. As people’s intangible attributes, such as
cultural tastes or living environments, can affect urban landscapes, it is a holistic concept involving
visual and perceptual views, including historical or cultural venues [23].
Recreating an urban landscape in virtual reality assists in creating a cyberspace in which people
can foresee what the future landscape will be like, walk through it, and make adjustments. A variety of
conceptual dimensions and details can be reflected in such virtual urban landscapes, until the design is
satisfactory enough for the residents. For the virtualization, such as in Data Mountain [24], semantics
or layouts need not be defined in advance and users are able to plan a neighborhood environment for
webpage snapshots. City of News [25] adopted an urban landscape visualization technique for its
webpages, in order to show various neighboring districts (including shopping and banking facilities)
as well as adding some additional sections, introducing bookshops and sports events, among others.
Meanwhile, the urban landscape example we created shows a dynamically synthesized view reflecting
an abstract concept, which is nonetheless realistic to a certain extent. The previously introduced
urban landscape design plans did not reflect spatial considerations in the allocation of objects and, so,
the concept of parallel co-ordinates [26] was adopted in the proposed approach for the development of
urban landscapes [27].
There are many structures in an urban landscape, and it is clear that the sense of openness or
oppressiveness that they provide is an important factor. Taeyon Hwang et al. (2009) devised criteria
for measuring oppressiveness and openness according to the solid angle of an object, which was used
to check the limitations in using the solid angle as an index for evaluating physical oppressiveness or
openness [28].
Land 2020, 9, 141 4 of 23
Furthermore, Kurotaki et al. (2005) studied the sense of oppressiveness provided by skyscrapers
by conducting an empirical analysis on whether the subjects actually felt oppressiveness from selected
high-rise buildings [29]. The street space in an urban landscape is known to be an important key
element; Munakata et al. (2008) conducted a research on the factors involving the oppressiveness and
openness of urban street spaces while considering regionality [30].
2.2. Outdoor Advertisement Signboards

In the Outdoor Advertisement Act, signboards installed outside are defined as those being shown
to the public constantly (or for a certain period), which can be seen at places where people can travel
freely [20,23].
Outdoor advertisement signboards play an important role as urban compositional elements, as well
as in providing necessary information while being regarded as an important element that determines
the impression of urban streetscapes. Nonetheless, their sizes have been becoming larger and larger,
and their colors are getting fancier within the individual logic of competition, such that residents
often experience psychological pressure due to visual confusion. Thus, in this study, we attempt to
analyze such visual pressure experienced by humans as a result of outdoor advertisement signboards,
through an empirical study using Virtual Reality (VR). In addition, for the experiment, Japanese
subjects were compared with foreigners (Korean and Chinese subjects) to consider differences with
respect to nationality.
The main academic significance of the study lies in the fact that an empirical study utilizing VR
has been performed for image evaluation, and that a visual judgment was made against outdoor
advertisement signboards on the basis of psychological pressures. We expect this study to lead to
further studies, enabling the quantitative measurement of visual pressures (i.e., indicating invisible
temperatures in figures).
2.3. Virtual Reality and Landscape

As an important visualization technique, VR has been utilized in a variety of industries and has
been studied widely for its applications. Some interesting aspects of VR can be found in journals
such as Environmental Communication [31] or Landscape and Urban Planning (to be published soon).
A series of notable research works have been introduced in these journals: VR-based visualization
techniques have been use for environmental communications and with a specific objective, such as
a showcase. While all of these works described applications or new technological dimensions of
visualization techniques/technologies, a common element was the construction or utilization of VR
(see, e.g., Ball, Capanni, and Watt, 2008 [32]; Bishop, Wherrett, and Miller, 2001 [33]; Ghadirian and
Bishop, 2008 [34]; Lange, 2011 [35]; Paar, 2006 [36]; Portman, 2014 [37]).
Different from ’visibility’, ’visuality’ is what connects visualization and VR, and has become a
significant factor in modern communication technology. Tufte (1990) [38] claimed that visualization
was a more effective and efficient method when representing a huge volume of complex data, compared
to the traditional methods of representation often used, such as text or voice.
Some researchers (e.g., Bruce, Green, and Georgeson, 1996 [39]; Rose, 2012 [40]) have claimed that
the sense of sight is superior to the other human senses in terms of perception and has been recognized
as the most popular sense for the modern scientific observation of objects, phenomena, graphics,
images, or data or tables relevant to the above, which can all be visualized for easier understanding
by viewers (Hansen and Machin, 2013 [41]; Valiela, 2009 [42]; Ware, 2013 [43]). VR is not limited
to providing a realistic view or experience but offers more functions when it is used for a designed
purpose that requires flexibility or imaginative skills.
Adopting various types of simulation technologies when developing a universal virtual platform
or application for a particular industry (e.g., games, automation, communication industry, and so on)
has attracted the interest of some researchers engaged in the field of design (e.g., Koutsabasis, Vosinakis,
Malisova, and Paparounas, 2012 [44]). The visual quality of VR in an online game such as World of
Land 2020, 9, 141 5 of 23
Warcraft or Second Life is superior to that which is being used in the other games or developed by
many professional VR research institutions; collaborative research efforts among the design professions
or institutions/labs to improve the level of VR-construction skills has not been performed enough,
despite its importance in the field of visual design (Gill et al., 2013 [45]; Paar, 2006 [46]; Silvestri, Motro,
Maurin, and Dresp-Langley, 2010 [47]). This problem might be related to the fact that the definition
of VR has not been properly established or the issue of not knowing which part of the visualization
technique should be focused on (i.e., Visuality or Reality).
Simpson (2001) [48] searched for cases involving the application of simulation technologies (visual
simulations) in urban planning tasks and introduced an urban landscape simulation methodology,
which has been used by one of the regional development and planning labs as an example of adopting
a computer-aided and GIS-supported technology. However, he pointed out that such cases requiring
interdisciplinary collaboration are still rare and difficult to achieve, due to the costs involved.
Meanwhile, Pietsch (2000) [48] also claimed that most urban planning authorities or research
institutions at the time did not have sufficient knowledge about such technologies; however, as they are
continuously evolving and becoming more easily available, more effort should be put into researching
them. In other words, interdisciplinary research is essential for the development of visual simulation
techniques/technologies, which needs to be performed in parallel with the other types of research tasks
associated with visual communication technology.
Following the rapid development of the VR-based visualization technologies, a question pertaining
to the level of the reality that can be provided by VR has emerged. The level may vary, depending on
its application range but, in most cases, users expect it to be as real as possible. The VRs used in the
medical and science fields must especially be highly realistic.
One of the examples of requiring such a high level of visualization can be found in the field of
telemedicine, which includes real-time medical consultations or on-line remote surgery (Millesi et al.,
1997 [49]); such an application can be found in the cases of treating the PTSD of overseas combat
veterans or performing brain surgery remotely (Rizzo, Reger, Gahm, Difede, and Rothbaum, 2009 [50]),
during which high-resolution or highly ’realistic’ VR can play a vital role. On the other hand, the use
of low-grade (i.e., unrealistic) VR can lead to a misdiagnosis or malpractice, as practitioners are not be
able to make a proper judgment on a patient’s condition and respond accordingly. Unrealistic VR or
a low-performance VR system serves little purpose when evaluating a landscape, as the level of its
representation will not be as satisfactory as it should be (Daniel and Meitner, 2001 [51]). In the end,
however, determining an agreeable level of abstraction for each application is what really matters
(Lange, 2002 [52]; Portman et al, 2015 [53]).
3. Research Plan
The research flow followed the process described in Figure 1. For on-site investigation, test samples
were selected from landscape pictures containing outdoor advertising signs [54], which were subjected
to a status analysis to perform the impression evaluation. The relationship between Japanese and
foreign nationals was then checked; if there were any correlations, then the factor analysis would be
performed by considering them to be identical populations, and it would be performed separately if
there was no correlation. The relationship between the oppressive feeling and factors or oppressive
feeling and the proportion (area ratio) of advertising signs was then calculated, followed by the final
comprehensive considerations.
Land 2020, 9, 141 6 of 23
Land 2020, x, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6 of 23
Figure
Figure 1. 1. Researchflow.
Research flow.
4. Taking Landscape Pictures and Selecting Experimental Samples

4. Taking Landscape Pictures and Selecting Experimental Samples
Pictures of 27 urban landscapes including typical walls, rooftops, and protruded advertising signs
Pictures of 27 urban landscapes including typical walls, rooftops, and protruded advertising
were taken from the viewpoint of the pedestrians walking on a sidewalk to conduct an impression
signs were taken from the viewpoint of the pedestrians walking on a sidewalk to conduct an
evaluation for outdoor advertising signs. The pictures were then reproduced in the 3D cyberdome and
impression evaluation for outdoor advertising signs. The pictures were then reproduced in the 3D
the resulting urban landscapes were quite similar to the real ones, as the images were recreated in
cyberdome and the resulting urban landscapes were quite similar to the real ones, as the images were
three dimensions.
recreated in three dimensions.
The landscape samples are shown in Figure 2, wherein a number of urban districts were selected
for The landscape
taking picturessamples
with a are shown
digital in Figure
camera (Nikon2, wherein a number
D100) during theof urbanJune,
period districts wereThe
19–21. selected
image
for
data was input by using the Adobe Photoshop 7.0.1J software while capturing 72 ppi (pixels perdata
taking pictures with a digital camera (Nikon D100) during the period June, 19–21. The image inch)
was input by
landscape usingwith
images the Adobe
size of Photoshop
1024 × 10247.0.1J
pixels.software while
Individual capturing
landscape 72 ppi
images are(pixels
shownper inch) 2.
in Figure
landscape images with size of 1024 × 1024 pixels. Individual landscape images are shown in Figure 2.
Land 2020, 9, x141
2020, x, FOR PEER REVIEW 7 of 237 of 23
Figure 2. Urban outdoor advertisement sample. The images used in this study were taken in Fukuoka
Figure 2. Urban outdoor advertisement sample. The images used in this study were taken in
town.
Fukuoka town.
A tripod was used, and the level and vertical alignment were adjusted at a height of 130 cm. In
A tripod was used, and the level and vertical alignment were adjusted at a height of 130 cm.
the landscapes to be presented to the subjects, 15 images containing wall advertisements, 6 images
In the landscapes to be presented to the subjects, 15 images containing wall advertisements, 6 images
containing rooftop advertisements, and 6 images containing projection signboards were selected (for
containing
a total of 27rooftop
images).advertisements,
The pictures were and 6 images
taken in such containing
a way thatprojection signboards
the surrounding were selected
conditions could be(for a
total of 27 images). The pictures were taken in
recognized sufficiently, with a central focus on the road. such a way that the surrounding conditions could be
recognized sufficiently, with a central focus on the road.
The reason for setting the height at 130 cm by using a tripod when shooting the landscapes was
Thespeculated
that we reason for setting
that the height
the average camera at view
130 cm by using
of East a tripodwould
Asian subjects whenbe shooting
about 130thecm,landscapes
even
was that we speculated that the average camera view of East Asian subjects would
though their respective physical heights may be different. Furthermore, the reason for choosing more be about 130 cm,
even though their
wall advertising respective
sign pictures physical
(wall 15, heights
rooftop may beoutdoor
6, and different.
6) Furthermore,
was that they the reason forinchoosing
are included the
more wallofadvertising
majority sign pictures
urban landscapes. (wall 15,
Meanwhile, rooftop
it was 6, andto
important outdoor
set the 6) was thatatthey
resolution are (pixels
72 ppi included perin the
inch) withofa urban
majority size at landscapes.
1024 × 1024 in order to make
Meanwhile, the important
it was result seemto real
setwhen creating a at
the resolution 3D72cyberdome.
ppi (pixels per
Photoshop was used to edit the pictures, even though other graphic programs could
inch) with a size at 1024 × 1024 in order to make the result seem real when creating a 3D cyberdome.have been used
as well.
Photoshop was used to edit the pictures, even though other graphic programs could have been used
as well.
5. Situational Analysis of Outdoor Advertising Signs in Sample Pictures
5. Situational Analysis
A situational of was
analysis Outdoor Advertising
conducted using the Signs in Sample
sample Pictures
pictures taken in a downtown area.
Information regarding
A situational the distance,
analysis proportion,using
was conducted number,
theand color pictures
sample of individual outdoor
taken advertising area.
in a downtown
signs was collected,
Information which
regarding theplays an important
distance, rolenumber,
proportion, in understanding
and colorthe
of visual oppressiveness
individual level.
outdoor advertising
signs was collected, which plays an important role in understanding the visual oppressiveness level.
Land 2020, 9, 141 8 of 23
The outdoor advertising signs in the selected sample pictures were analyzed based on their
Distance, Proportion, and Color (base and medium). Distance refers to the distance from a wall
or a rooftop advertising sign to the building where it is installed. For a projection signboard,
the measurement was taken between the buildings at both ends of the road where the signs were
installed. In other words, calculations were performed based on either a traffic lane (3.5 m), a sidewalk
(3 m), or a step length. Proportion refers to the proportion between the area of advertisement sign(s)
and the picture view. Due to limitations in the experiment, however, the proportion was calculated
based on the ratio between the area of outdoor advertising sign(s) and the viewable range that the
3D cyber dome was able to present, regarding it as being 100%. Meanwhile, for the colors, the basic
colors of red, yellow, green, blue, and purple of the Munsell color system were used, along with
white and black, to analyze the base and medium colors of advertising signs. Table 1 shows the
analysis of landscape samples of wall advertising signs; Table 2 presents the analysis of landscape
samples of rooftop advertising signs; and Table 3 shows the analysis of landscape samples of projection
advertising signs.
The Munsell color system was devised by Albert Henry Munsell in the early 20th century, which
adopts shade, brightness, and chroma to represent a color space. After being adopted as an official
color system for the study of soils in the 1930s, it has been widely used for the evaluation of Asian
urban landscapes.
The Ground Color refers to the base color of an outdoor advertising sign, whereas Medium refers
to the color(s) of letters or characters.
In Table 1, the distance between the wall advertising signs and camera ranged from 5 to 25 m,
whereas the proportion and the number of wall advertising signs were from 0.5%–12% and 1–50,
respectively. For wall advertising signs, a variety of ground colors, such as red, blue, yellow, green,
white, and black, were used as the base color; but the color white was mainly used. For the same types
of signs, the colors for the letters also varied but the major color was either black or white.
Table 1. Analysis of landscape samples of wall advertising signs.
Color of Advertising
Wall Surface Distance (m) Proportion (%) No. of Signs Base Color
Medium
Sample 1 14 4.8% 2 Red White
Sample 2 14 0.5% 2 White White
Sample 3 6 12% 1 Blue White
Sample 4 6 4% 5 Black Black
Sample 5 5 3.9% 3 Yellow Black, Green
Sample 6 8 4% 2 White Yellow
Sample 7 8 6.4% 7 Red, Black White
Red, White
Sample 8 17 5.3% 7 White, Red
Yellow, Blue
Red, White,
Sample 9 21 4.6% 21 White, Green
Yellow, Green
Sample 10 19 1.4% 5 White, Green White, Black
Sample 11 17 1% 2 Black, Blue White
Sample 12 6 8.3% 2 White Black, Blue
Sample 13 14 3% 4 Black White
Red, White White, Black,
Sample 14 25 7% 50
Yellow, Blue Red
Red, White,
White, Red,
Sample 15 17 9.5% 8 Yellow, Blue,
Blue, Yellow
Black
Land 2020, 9, 141 9 of 23
Meanwhile, in Table 2, the distance between the rooftop advertising signs and camera ranged
from 10 to 21 m, whereas the proportion and the number of wall advertising signs were from 1.5%–6%
and 1–3, respectively. Similar to the wall advertisement signs, a variety of ground colors were used as
the base color, but white was mainly used. Also, many colors were used for the letters, but the major
color was either black or white.
Table 2. Analysis of landscape samples of rooftop advertising signs.
Rooftop Color of Advertising

Dist. (m) Proportion (%) No. of Signs Base Color
Advertisement Medium
Sample 16 14 1.5% 1 White Black, Red
White, Black, White, Black,
Sample 17 10 5% 3
Blue, Yellow Blue
White, Black,
Sample 18 17 4.1% 3 White, Yellow
Red
White, Blue,
Sample 19 17 6% 2 White
Red
Sample 20 14 2% 1 White, Green Black, Red
Sample 21 21 3.6% 1 White Black, Red
In Table 3, the distance between protruding advertising signs and the camera ranged from 4 to
13 m, whereas the proportion and the number of wall advertising signs were from 1%–4.5% and 2–24,
respectively. A wide variety of colors (e.g., white, black, blue, red, yellow, green, and purple) were
used as the ground color or medium, but the majority were white.
Table 3. Analysis of landscape samples of projection advertising signs.
Projection No. of Signs Color of

Dist. (m) Proportion (%) Base Color
Advertising Signs Installed Medium
White, Black,
White, Black,
Sample 22 5.5 1% 9 Blue, Red,
Red, Yellow
Yellow
White, Blue, White, Red,
Sample 23 4 2.5% 4
Red Yellow
Black, Blue,
Sample 24 5.6 2.2% 17 White, Yellow
Red, Green
White, Black,
Sample 25 7 1.6% 24 White, Purple
Blue, Red
White, Black,
Sample 26 12 1.8% 2 White, Red
Yellow, Green
White, Black,
White, Blue,
Sample 27 13 4.5% 12 Blue, Red,
Red
Yellow
6. Impression Evaluation Test

An empirical test was performed for the subjects by using the realistic 3D urban landscape images,
which were quite immersive.
A test was performed for the impression evaluation at Ohashi Campus, Kyushu University
using a 3D cyber dome. The test subjects included 40 undergraduate and graduate students (Kyushu
University) consisting of 20 Japanese and 20 foreign students (from the Republic of Korea and People‘s
Republic of China).
Land 2020, 9, 141 10 of 23
6.1. Test Environment

Although it would have been desirable to conduct the test directly at the street sites for the
impression evaluation of landscapes including outdoor advertising signs, most preceding studies have
used slides, PC monitors, or printed pictures to do so. Thus, this study attempted to use a 3D cyber
dome, which we expected to provide a high sense of realism and immersion.
Research on the depth of objects in the cyberdome was first performed to find out whether it
was possible to evaluate landscapes by using a 3D cyberdome. This was an experiment to investigate
whether the distance presented in the cyberdome corresponded psychologically with the perceived
distance as much as the physical aspect. As a result, it was confirmed that the matching accuracy was
Land2020,
2020,x,x,xxFOR
FORPEER
PEERREVIEW
REVIEW 10 ofof 23
23
higher whenLand the distance was close (10–40 m). This finding was used to perform a 3D cyberdome-based 10
urban landscape
whetherthe
whether
evaluation
thedistance [23,55–58].
distancepresented
presented inthe
in thecyberdome
cyberdomecorresponded
correspondedpsychologically
psychologicallywith withthe
theperceived
perceived
A schematic
distanceas
distance drawing
as muchas
much astheofphysical
the the 3Daspect.
physical cyberdome
aspect.As testititenvironment
Asaaresult,
result, wasconfirmed
was confirmedthat is shown
that in Figure
thematching
the matching accuracy
accuracy 3. was
The
was height of
higherwhen
the cyber higher
dome when
was the thedistance
260 distance
cm and was
wasthe close (10–40m).
subject’s
close (10–40 m).This
line This findingwhile
of finding
sight wasused
was used toperform
sitting
to perform
on theaa3D3Dcyberdome-
chair cyberdome-
was set at 130 cm
basedurban
urbanlandscape
landscapeevaluation
evaluation[23,55–58].
[23,55–58].
(the centerbased
of the dome’s height). Figure 4 shows the profile of the 3D cyberdome at Kyushu University,
AAschematic
schematicdrawingdrawingof ofthe
the3D3Dcyberdome
cyberdometest testenvironment
environmentisisshown shownin inFigure
Figure3.3.The
Theheight
heightof of
Japan. Thetheexplanation
cyberdome domewas for260
was Figure and3the
cmand theis subject’s
as follows:
lineofofthe
sighttwo
while beam
sittingprojectors
onthethechair positioned
chairwas
wasset
setatat130
130cm at
cmthe top of
the cyber 260 cm subject’s line sight while sitting on
the cyberdome
(the project
(the center
center of the
of separate
the dome’s images,
dome’s height).
height). which
Figure
Figure are reflected
44 shows
shows profilein
the profile
the ofathe
of plane
the 3D mirror toatatcreate
3D cyberdome
cyberdome Kyushu
Kyushu VR images
in the dome,
University, Japan. The explanation for Figure 3 is as follows: the two beam projectors positioned at sees the
as seen
University, by
Japan. the
The subject
explanation wearing
for a
Figure pair
3 is asof polarizing
follows: the two lens.
beam In this
projectorscase, one
positioned eye
at
thetop
the
image projected topofof
by the
the onecyberdome
cyberdome project
of the project
two separateimages,
separate
projectors, images, whichthe
which
whereas arereflected
are reflected
other inaasees
in
eye planethe
plane mirror
mirror to
image tocreate
create VR
VR
projected by the
imagesin
images inthethedome,
dome,as asseen
seenbybythe
thesubject
subjectwearing
wearingaapair pairofofpolarizing
polarizinglens.lens.InInthis
thiscase,
case,one
oneeye
eyesees
sees
other projector. Furthermore, to avoid the subject’s head from interfering with the images, they keep a
theimage
the imageprojected
projectedby byone
oneof ofthe
thetwotwoprojectors,
projectors,whereas
whereasthe theother
othereyeeyesees
seesthe
theimage
imageprojected
projectedby by
distance ofthe65other
cm while maintaining
projector.Furthermore,
Furthermore,to
their
toavoid
eyethe
avoidthe
level at 130
subject’shead
cmfrom
headfrom
from the ground.
interferingwithwiththe
Picture
theimages,
(a)
images,theythey
in Figure 4
the other projector. subject’s interfering
portrays the
keep a distance of 65 cm while maintaining their eye level at 130 cm from the ground. Picture (a) in the scene
keepscene
a distancecaptured
of 65 from
cm whilethe top
maintaining of the 3D
their eyecyberdome,
level at 130 cmwhereas
from the picture
ground. (b)
Pictureshows
(a) in
from the side.
Figure44portrays
Figure portraysthe thescene
scenecaptured
capturedfrom fromthe
thetoptopofofthethe3D
3Dcyberdome,
cyberdome,whereaswhereaspicture
picture(b)(b)shows
shows
thescene
the scenefrom
fromthe
theside.
side.
Figure 3. Schematic drawing of the 3D cyber dome test environment.

FigureFigure 3. Schematic
3. Schematic drawing of
drawing of the
the3D
3Dcyber dome
cyber test environment.
dome test environment.
(a) (b)
(a) Position of beam projection from (b) Position of beam projection from side.
above;
Figure 4. 3D cyber dome profile: Kyushu University in Japan. (a) Position of beam projection from
above, (b) Position of beam projection from side.
above, (b) Position of beam projection from side.
6.2. Rating
above,Scale
(b) Position of beam projection from side.
Considering the preceding studies in the field of architecture, 15 categories considered to have a
Land 2020, 9, 141 11 of 23

6.2. Rating Scale
6.2. Rating Scale
Considering the preceding studies in the field of architecture, 15 categories considered to have a
Considering
close relationship with the
thepreceding
impression studies in the field
evaluation ofoflandscapes
architecture,tested
15 categories
in this considered
study were to have a from
selected
close relationship with the impression evaluation of landscapes tested in
the rating scales associated with “Oppressive Feeling”, which were presented to the subjects. this study were selected
from the rating scales associated with “Oppressive Feeling”, which were presented to the subjects.
Meanwhile, 15 scale items were also selected from the studies conducted for the correlations
Meanwhile, 15 scale items were also selected from the studies conducted for the correlations
between structures and psychological oppressiveness (Tae-Yon Hwang et al., (2009) [27]; Kurotaki et al.,
between structures and psychological oppressiveness (Tae-Yon Hwang et al., (2009) [27]; Kurotaki et
(2005) [28]; and Munakata
al., (2005) et al., (2008))
[28]; and Munakata et al.,focusing on the oppressiveness/openness
(2008)) focusing on the oppressiveness/openness in urban landscapes
in urban
and the landscapes
oppressiveness provided by skyscrapers [29]. These items include evaluation,
and the oppressiveness provided by skyscrapers [29]. These items include evaluation, competency, and
emotional content. As mentioned earlier, the scale items were extracted from previous
competency, and emotional content. As mentioned earlier, the scale items were extracted from studies associated
with investigating the associated
previous studies visual psychology of oppressiveness
with investigating of structures
the visual psychology and urbanoflandscapes.
of oppressiveness structures
Theand urban
scale landscapes.
items for oppressiveness (Figure 5) were selected based on the research works mentioned
above [13]. The scale items for oppressiveness (Figure 5) were selected based on the research works
mentioned above [13].
As shown in Figure 5, each rating scale had 7 stages, where “Neither” was placed in the middle,
As shown in Figure 5, each rating scale had 7 stages, where “Neither” was placed in the middle,
whereas the determiners “Slightly,” “Very,” and “Considerably” were added to both ends, to which the
whereas the determiners “Slightly,” “Very,” and “Considerably” were added to both ends, to which
corresponding points −3,points
the corresponding −2, −1, −2,+1,
−3, 0, −1, +2,
0, +1, +2, +3
and andwere given,
+3 were in order
given, in ordertotocalculate
calculatethe
the average
average values
and standard deviations.
values and standard deviations.
Figure 5. Categories for the oppressive feeling scale.

Figure 5. Categories for the oppressive feeling scale.
6.3. Test Method

The objective, contents, and method (evaluation of entire landscapes in sample pictures) of the
experiment were explained to the test subjects in advance, along with precautions. They then proceeded
to the test by being handed answer sheets after being seated at the central position, facing toward the
6.3. Test Method

The objective, contents, and method (evaluation of entire landscapes in sample pictures) of the
Land 2020, 9, 141
experiment explained to the test subjects in advance, along with precautions. They 12then
were of 23
proceeded to the test by being handed answer sheets after being seated at the central position, facing
toward the dome. No time was set, in order to allow the subjects to evaluate their impressions
dome. No time was set, in order to allow the subjects to evaluate their impressions autonomously while
autonomously while they completed the sheet and moved to the next image. Although there were
they completed the sheet and moved to the next image. Although there were some individual time
some individual time differences in the completion of the test, the average time of completion was
differences in the completion of the test, the average time of completion was approximately 40 min.
approximately 40 minutes.
7. Comparison between Japanese and Foreigners
7. Comparison between Japanese and Foreigners
7.1. Correlations
7.1. Correlations
The correlations between Japanese and foreigners, as identified through the impression evaluation
The correlations
of landscapes, are shown between Japanese
in Tables and Figure
4 and 5 and foreigners,
6. Theas identified
correlation through of
coefficients the
theimpression
oppressive
evaluation
feeling andofrating
landscapes, are shown
scales other in Tables 4feeling
than oppressive and 5 and
wereFigure
0.918 6. The
and correlation
0.833, coefficients
respectively. of the
Such results
oppressive feeling
confirmed that theyand rating
both hadscales
a veryother
high than oppressive
positive feeling were 0.918 and 0.833, respectively.
relationship.
Such For
results
the confirmed that they both
item Oppressiveness had a4,very
in Table high positive
the correlations relationship.
were the same (0.918) between Japanese
Forforeigners,
and the item Oppressiveness
and were consideredin Table 4, quite
to be the correlations
high. Theirwere the representation
graphic same (0.918) between
showedJapanese
that they
and
were foreigners,
distributedand inwere considered
a positive to be
direction quite high.
(Figure 6). TheTheir graphic representation
correlations with the othershowed thatitems
evaluation they
were distributed
were also high (0.838) betweendirection
in a positive the parties, as shown
(Figure in Table
6). The 5.
correlations with the other evaluation items
were also high (0.838) between the parties, as shown in Table 5.
Table 4. Correlation coefficient between Japanese and foreign nationals associated with oppressive
feeling.
Table 4. (**: p < 0.01).coefficient between Japanese and foreign nationals associated with oppressive
Correlation
feeling. (** : p<0.01).
- Foreigners
- Japanese 0.918 (**)Foreigners
Japanese 0.918(**)
Table 5. Correlation coefficient between Japanese and foreign nationals associated with rating scales
Table 5. Correlation
excluding oppressivecoefficient between
feeling. (**: Japanese and foreign nationals associated with rating scales
p < 0.01).
excluding oppressive feeling. (** : p<0.01).
- Foreigners
- Foreigners
Japanese 0.838 (**)
Japanese 0.838(**)
Figure 6. Scatter diagram of the correlations between Japanese and foreign nationals associated with
oppressive
Figure feelings.
6. Scatter diagram of the correlations between Japanese and foreign nationals associated with
oppressive feelings.
7.2. Comparison Based on Factor Analysis
A factor analysis was performed, based on the data obtained from the landscape impression
evaluation test. Tables 6 and 7 show the Japanese and foreign national cases, respectively. In addition,
Land 2020, 9, 141 13 of 23
the major factor method and varimax method for Kaiser normalization were used as a factor-extraction
method and a rotation method, respectively. The comparison of rating scales contributing to individual
factors confirmed that the factors were almost identical.
The reason for separating the subjects into Japanese and foreign nationals when performing the
factor analysis was that the 27 landscapes presented in this study were from a Japanese city, such that
familiarity with such scenes could be quite different and the analysis result may have produced
varying results.
For No. 1 (Table 6), Good-Bad, Pretty-Ugly, Dislike-Like, Pleasant-Unpleasant, Appropriate-
Inappropriate, and Unfriendly-friendly were loaded, in that sequence, with a contribution ratio of
49.7%; whereas, for No. 2, the loading sequence was Weak-Strong, Conspicuous-Inconspicuous,
Colorful-Plain, Dark-Bright, Big-Small, and Dynamic-Static, and the resulting contribution ratio was
23.26%. The loading sequence for No. 3 was Warm-Cold followed by Oppressive-Cheerful, revealing a
contribution ratio of 10.81%.
Furthermore, for No. 1 (Table 7), Good-Bad, Pretty-Ugly, Dislike-Like, Pleasant-Unpleasant,
Appropriate-Inappropriate, Unfriendly-friendly, Weak-Strong, Conspicuous-Inconspicuous, and
Colorful-Plain were loaded, in that sequence, with a contribution ratio of 52.71%; whereas, for No. 2,
the loading sequence was Dark-Bright, Big-Small, and Dynamic-Static and the resulting contribution
ratio was 23.90%. The loading sequence for No. 3 was Warm-Cold and then Oppressive-Cheerful,
revealing a contribution ratio of 8.55%.
As an exploratory factor analysis was performed in this research, the most universal factor rotation
‘varimax rotation’ was used. Table 6 shows the factor analysis result for the Japanese subjects, whereas
Table 7 shows the results of the foreigners. After comparing the correlations in each items, which were
at a positively high level (Table 7), we decided to treat these groups as the same.
Table 6. Japanese factor load.
Factor Load
Impression Rating Scale
Evaluation Capacity Emotion
Good−Bad 0.986 −0.101 −0.128
Pretty−Ugly 0.970 −0.150 0.045
Dislike−Like −0.958 0.195 0.142
Pleasant−Unpleasant 0.943 −0.296 −0.080
Appropriate−Inappropriate 0.897 −0.259 0.006
Unfriendly−friendly −0.556 −0.157 0.484
Weak−Strong 0.084 −0.958 −0.160
Conspicuous−Inconspicuous −0.205 0.947 −0.061
Colorful−Plain −0.381 0.866 −0.114
Dark−Bright −0.043 −0.840 0.263
Big−Small −0.196 0.751 0.424
Dynamic−Static −0.433 0.647 −0.538
Warm−Cold −0.007 0.023 −0.771
Uncheerful−Cheerful −0.458 0.080 0.548
Contribution Ratio (%) 49.70 23.26 10.81
Cumulative Contribution Ratio (%) 83.77
Land 2020, 9, 141 14 of 23
Table 7. Factor load for foreigners.
Factor Load
Evaluation Capacity Emotion
Good−Bad 0.980 −0.071 −0.105
Pretty−Ugly 0.970 0.018 −0.164
Dislike−Like −0.967 0.089 0.191
Pleasant−Unpleasant 0.966 −0.079 −0.157
Appropriate−Inappropriate 0.927 −0.097 −0.198
Unfriendly−friendly −0.917 0.068 −0.002
Weak−Strong −0.916 0.221 −0.233
Conspicuous−Inconspicuous −0.673 −0.210 −0.418
Colorful−Plain 0.449 −0.252 0.224
Dark−Bright −0.236 0.927 0.094
Big−Small 0.173 −0.917 −0.250
Dynamic−Static 0.221 0.839 0.410
Warm−Cold −0.270 0.229 0.906
Uncheerful−Cheerful −0.013 0.298 0.735
Cumulative Contribution Ratio (%) 850.16
7.3. Comparison Result

Both Japanese and foreign nationals had high positive correlation in terms of the Oppressive
Feeling or other Rating Scales. Moreover, although the rating points for factor No. 3 were different,
it was decided that both sides would be treated as the same population, as its contribution was minimal.
8. Analysis of Characteristics of Oppressive Feeling
8.1. Factor Analysis (Considering both Japanese and Foreigners to Be the Same Population)
Table 8 presents the factor matrix obtained from the factor analysis, resulting in the dispersion of
50.87% of the No. 1 factor, 25.39% of the No. 2 factor, and 9.47% of the No. 3 factor; establishing a
cumulative contribution ratio of 85.73%.
Meanwhile, the loading sequence for No. 1 (Table 8) was as follows: Good-Bad, Pretty-Ugly,
Dislike-Like, Pleasant-Unpleasant, Appropriate-Inappropriate, Unfriendly-friendly, and Weak-Strong,
with a contribution ratio of 50.87%; whereas the sequence for No. 2 was Conspicuous-Inconspicuous,
Colorful-Plain, Dark-Bright, Big-Small, Dynamic-Static, and Warm-Cold, with resulting contribution
ratio of 25.39%. Only Oppressive-Cheerful was loaded in No. 3, with a contribution ratio of 9.47%.
Thus, we attempted to set factor names for Nos. 1, 2, and 3, which were decided as Evaluation,
Capacity, and Emotion, respectively.
The No. 1 factor was defined as an evaluation factor as its loads reflected the evaluations of the
seven scales Good-Bad, Pretty-Ugly, Dislike-Like, Pleasant-Unpleasant, Appropriate- Inappropriate,
Unfriendly-Friendly, and Weak-Strong. At the same time, the No. 2 factor was defined as a capacity
factor, as its high loads reflecting the six scales Conspicuous-Inconspicuous, Colorful-Plain, Dark-Bright,
Big-Small, Dynamic-Static, and Warm-Cold. Finally, the No. 3 factor was defined as an emotional
factor, as its load reflecting a single scale, Oppressive-Cheerful, was high.
Land2020,
Land 2020,9,x,141
x FOR PEER REVIEW 15 of 23
15 of 23
Pleasant−Unpleasant −0.970 0.167 0.114

Table 8. Factor loads when treating both Japanese persons0.937
Appropriate−Inappropriate and foreigners −0.216
as being part of the
−0.027
Unfriendly−Friendly
same population. −0.757 −0.083 0.359
Weak−Strong −0.714 0.011 0.584
Conspicuous−Inconspicuous Factor Load
−0.053 0.962 0.028
Colorful−Plain Evaluation 0.151
Capacity −0.921
Emotion −0.297
Dark−Bright
Good−Bad 0.983
−0.313
−0.087
0.815−0.130 −0.197
Big−Small
Pretty−Ugly 0.983 −0.205
−0.164 0.758−0.048 0.470
Dynamic−Static
Dislike−Like 0.980 −0.320
−0.117 −0.718−0.031 0.316
Warm−Cold
Pleasant−Unpleasant −0.970 −0.4730.167 0.664 0.114 −0.502
Uncheerful−Cheerful
Appropriate−Inappropriate 0.937 0.142
−0.216 −0.027−0.027 −0.625
Unfriendly−Friendly
Contribution Ratio（％） −0.757 −0.083
50.87 250.39 0.359 90.47
Weak−Strong
Cumulative Contribution Ratio (％） −0.714 0.011 0.584 850.73
Conspicuous−Inconspicuous −0.053 0.962 0.028
Colorful−Plain 0.151 −0.921 −0.297
8.2. Relationship between Oppressive Feeling and Each Factor
Dark−Bright −0.313 0.815 −0.197
Big−Small −0.205 0.758 0.470analysis using
The relationships between oppressive feeling and each factor, based on the factor
Dynamic−Static −0.320 −0.718 0.316
the data obtained from the impression evaluation, are shown in Table 9 and Figures 7 and 8.
Warm−Cold −0.473 0.664 −0.502
Figure 7 shows the distribution of correlations
Uncheerful−Cheerful 0.142 according−0.027
to the individual scores obtained
−0.625
between oppressiveness and evaluation factor, which was the first factor. Meanwhile, Figure 8 shows
the distribution of correlations according to the individual scores obtained between oppressiveness
and theCumulative
competency Contribution Ratio (%)
factor, which was the second factor. Meanwhile, 850.73
Table 9 represents the
correlations between oppressiveness and each factor. The resulting values for the evaluation factor,
8.2. Relationship
competency between
factor, andOppressive
emotional Feeling and Each
factor (third Factor
factor) were −0.736, 0.562, and 0.302, respectively.
As the third factor (involving Feeling) showed
The relationships between oppressive feeling and each a low level
factor, of relationship,
based on the factor the correlation
analysis using
coefficients were calculated based on the evaluations made on the first factor
the data obtained from the impression evaluation, are shown in Table 9 and Figures 7 and 8. and the capacity of the
second factor. In this case, the correlation coefficients between oppressive feeling and the factor point
obtained for each
Tablelandscape sample
9. Correlations couldoppressive
between be identified. Additionally,
feelings by observing
and each factor. their positions, it
(**: p < 0.01).
is possible to check the relational tendency between the evaluation and capacity factors against
oppressive feelingFeelings Evaluation
in each landscape FactorThe value
sample. Capacity
of theFactor
No. 1 (No. Emotional Factor
2) factor (capacity factor)
Oppressive
became lower (higher) as the value−0.736 of the(**) 0.562increased.
oppressive feeling (**) 0.302
Figure7.7. Scatter
Figure Scatter diagram
diagram of
of correlations
correlationsbased
basedon
onthe
the oppressive
oppressivefeeling
feelingand
andevaluation
evaluationfactor
factorvalues.
values.
Land 2020, 9, 141 16 of 23
Figure
Figure 8. Scatter diagram
8. Scatter diagram of
of correlations
correlations based
based on
on the
the oppressive
oppressive feeling
feeling and
and capacity
capacity factor
factor values.
values.
Figure 7 shows the distribution of correlations according to the individual scores obtained between
Table 9. Correlations between oppressive feelings and each factor. (** : p<0.01).
oppressiveness and evaluation factor, which was the first factor. Meanwhile, Figure 8 shows the
distribution of correlations Evaluation Factor Capacity Factor Emotional Factor
Oppressive Feelings according to the individual scores obtained between oppressiveness and
the competency factor, which was the second factor. Meanwhile, Table 9 represents0.302
−0.736(**) 0.562(**) the correlations
between oppressiveness and each factor. The resulting values for the evaluation factor, competency
8.3. Relationship
factor, and emotionalbetween Oppressive
factor Feelings
(third factor) and −0.736,
were Each Factor
0.562, and 0.302, respectively.
As the third factor (involving Feeling) showed
The correlations between oppressive feelings and a low level of relationship,
proportions in thethe27correlation
kinds of coefficients
landscapes
were calculated
including wall, based
rooftop,onand
the evaluations made on the
projection advertising firstsubjected
signs factor andtothe capacity of
evaluation arethe second
shown in factor.
Table
In
10.this case, the correlation coefficients between oppressive feeling and the factor point obtained for
each In
landscape
addition, sample could be identified.
the individual Additionally,
scatter diagrams by observing
are illustrated their9positions,
in Figure it is possible
(wall advertising to
signs),
check
Figurethe10 relational tendency between
(rooftop advertising the evaluation
signs), and and capacity
Figure 11 (projection factors against
advertising oppressive
signs). feeling in
Comprehensively,
each landscape
in a positive sample. The
correlation, value of thefeeling
the oppressive No. 1increased
(No. 2) factor
when(capacity factor) increased
the proportion became loweror vice(higher)
versa.
as the value
There was a of thecorrelation
high oppressivebetween
feeling increased.
oppressive feeling and proportion of rooftop advertising signs,
as well as relatively strong correlations between oppressive feelings and wall or projection
8.3. Relationship
advertising between
signs. Thus, Oppressive Feelings
it is possible and Each
to conclude Factor
that the differences in impression evaluation results
obtained
The from the sample
correlations pictures
between were closely
oppressive related
feelings andto proportions
the proportion in of outdoor
the advertising
27 kinds signs.
of landscapes
including wall, rooftop, and projection advertising signs subjected to evaluation are shown in Table 10.
Table 10. Correlation between proportion and oppressive feelings.
Table 10. Correlation between proportion and oppressive feelings.
Pressure (wall) Pressure (rooftop) Pressure (protruding)
Proportion
0.435
Pressure (Wall) 0.961
Pressure (Rooftop) 0.616
Pressure (Protruding)
Proportion
0.435 0.961 0.616
In addition, the individual scatter diagrams are illustrated in Figure 9 (wall advertising signs),
Figure 10 (rooftop advertising signs), and Figure 11 (projection advertising signs). Comprehensively,
in a positive correlation, the oppressive feeling increased when the proportion increased or vice versa.
There was a high correlation between oppressive feeling and proportion of rooftop advertising signs,
as well as relatively strong correlations between oppressive feelings and wall or projection advertising
Land 2020, 9, 141 17 of 23
signs. Thus, it is possible to conclude that the differences in impression evaluation results obtained
from the sample pictures were closely related to the proportion of outdoor advertising signs.
oppressive feelings
feelings (wall advertising
Figure 9. Correlation
Figure 9. Correlation between
between proportion
proportion and
and oppressive (wall advertising
oppressive feelings (wall signs).
advertising signs).
signs).
Figure 10.
10. Correlation between proportion and oppressive feelings
feelings (rooftop advertising
advertising signs).
Figure 10. Correlation between proportion and oppressive
Figure oppressive feelings (rooftop
(rooftop advertising signs).
signs).
Figure 11.
11. Correlation
Figure 11. Correlation between
between proportion and
proportion and oppressive
and oppressive feelings
oppressive feelings (projection
feelings (projection advertising
(projection advertising signs).
advertising signs).
signs).
Figure Correlation between proportion
8.4.
8.4. Relationship
Relationship between
between the
the Oppressive
Oppressive Feeling
Feeling Factor
Factor and
and Proportion
Proportion
The correlations between factors and proportions in the 27 kinds of landscapes including wall,
rooftop,
rooftop, and
and projection
projection advertising
advertising signs
signs subjected
subjected toto evaluation
evaluation are
are presented
presented in
in Table
Table 1111 and
and
Figures 12 (wall advertising signs), 13 (rooftop advertising signs), and 14 (projection advertising
Figures 12 (wall advertising signs), 13 (rooftop advertising signs), and 14 (projection advertising
signs). In these cases, it is possible to find the individual positions of each landscape sample, having
signs). In these cases, it is possible to find the individual positions of each landscape sample, having
two
two axes
axes (No.
(No. 11 factor—evaluation
factor—evaluation and and No.
No. 22 factor—capacity).
factor—capacity). Additionally,
Additionally, the
the relationship
relationship
between
between the No. 1 or No. 2 factors and their proportion can be determined by dividing
the No. 1 or No. 2 factors and their proportion can be determined by dividing the
the
LandLand
2020, 9, 141
2020, x, x FOR PEER REVIEW 18 of 23 18 of 23
proportions in the landscapes into three groups based on their area ratios, from the lowest to highest
8.4.percentage
Relationship between
(i.e., the Oppressive
Low, Medium, Feeling Factor and Proportion
and High).
Observing Figure 12, which considers wall advertising signs, the Low (Medium) Proportion
Group included “Low Evaluation” and “High Capacity.” The High Proportion Group included “Low
rooftop, and projection
Evaluation” and bothadvertising signsand
“Low Capacity” subjected
“High to evaluation
Capacity.” Forare presented
rooftop in Table
advertising 11 and
signs Figure 12
(Figure
(wall advertising
13), signs), 13
the Low Proportion (rooftop
Group advertising
included signs),
both “High and 14 (projection
Evaluation” advertisingwith
and “Low Evaluation” signs).
“LowIn these
cases, it is possible
Capacity.” to find the
Meanwhile, the individual positions of
Medium Proportion each included
Group landscapebothsample,
high having two axes
evaluations and (No. 1
factor—evaluation
proportions, whereasandthe
No.High
2 factor—capacity). Additionally,
Proportion Group included the relationship
“Low Evaluation” between
and “High the No. 1 or
Capacity.”
No. 2 factors and their proportion can be determined by dividing the proportions in the“Low
On the other hand, for projection advertising sings (Figure 14), the Low Proportion Group had landscapes
intoEvaluation”
three groups andbased
“LowonCapacity”;
their areawhereas the Medium
ratios, from Proportion
the lowest Group
to highest included(i.e.,
percentage bothLow,
“High
Medium,
andEvaluation”
High). and “Low Evaluation”, as well as both “High Capacity” and “Low Capacity.” Finally,
the High Proportion Group included “Low Evaluation” with neither capacity, for the most part.
Table 11. Grouping based on proportion levels (outdoor advertising signs).
Table 11. Grouping based on proportion levels (outdoor advertising signs).
Low Low Medium
Medium High High
Wall Wall 4% 4% 8% 8%12% 12%
Rooftop 2% 4% 6%
Rooftop 2%
Projection 1.5% 3%
4%4.5% 6%
Projection 1.5% 3% 4.5%
Figure 12. Scatter diagram based on the proportion levels (wall advertising signs).
Figure 12. Scatter diagram based on the proportion levels (wall advertising signs).
Observing Figure 12, which considers wall advertising signs, the Low (Medium) Proportion
Group included “Low Evaluation” and “High Capacity.” The High Proportion Group included
“Low Evaluation” and both “Low Capacity” and “High Capacity.” For rooftop advertising signs
(Figure 13), the Low Proportion Group included both “High Evaluation” and “Low Evaluation” with
“Low Capacity.” Meanwhile, the Medium Proportion Group included both high evaluations and
proportions, whereas the High Proportion Group included “Low Evaluation” and “High Capacity.”
On the other hand, for projection advertising sings (Figure 14), the Low Proportion Group had
“Low Evaluation” and “Low Capacity”; whereas the Medium Proportion Group included both
“High Evaluation” and “Low Evaluation”, as well as both “High Capacity” and “Low Capacity.”
Finally, the High Proportion Group included “Low Evaluation” with neither capacity, for the most part.
Land 2020,
Land 9, 141x, x FOR PEER REVIEW
2020, 19 of 23
19 of 23
Figure 13. Scatter diagram based on the proportion levels (rooftop advertising signs).
Figure
Figure 13. Scatter
13. Scatter diagram
diagram basedon
based onthe
the proportion
proportion levels
levels(rooftop advertising
(rooftop signs).
advertising signs).
Figure 14. Scatter diagram based on the proportion levels (projection advertising signs).
In this section, the interpretation of the factor analysis performed in this study is discussed. The
In this
No. 1 In
andsection,
2 factors
this the
were
section, interpretation
the ofthe
thefactor
defined as evaluation
interpretation of factor
and analysis
capacity,
analysis performed
respectively.
performed thisin
inWhen thisisstudy
re-interpreting
study is them
discussed.discussed.
The
The as
No.
No. 1 and
elements 2 factors
1 and 2associated were
factors werewith defined as
a landscape;
defined evaluation
however,
as evaluation and itand capacity,
is possible
capacity, respectively.
to consider
respectively. When
the evaluation
When re-interpreting
factor
re-interpreting as
them
them as
aselements
elementsassociated
associated with
with a landscape;
a landscape; however,
however, it is possible
it is possible to consider
to consider the evaluation
the evaluation factor asfactor
as being related to the comfort of the landscape, whereas the capacity factor is related to its impact.
In other words, a landscape with a high evaluation can be considered to be highly comfortable; whereas
a landscape with high capacity has strong impact.
Land 2020, 9, 141 20 of 23
Next, the results deviating from the tendencies identified from the analysis results should be
discussed. For example, the cases of a landscape having a high value of oppressive feeling but low
proportion of outdoor advertising signs, or a landscape having a low value of oppressive feeling but
high proportion of outdoor advertising signs should be considered and the possibility of the existence
of unidentified elements other than the present factors and proportions should be checked for.
In the case involving sample No. 7 in Figure 12, belonging to the Medium (8%) Proportion Group
yet resulting in a high evaluation with low oppressive level, the oppressive feeling was considered
to have been reduced by the trees planted on both sides of the landscape [10]. Moreover, in the case
of sample 10, belonging to a Low Proportion Group yet having a higher oppressive level and low
evaluation value, such a result was presumed to be attributable to the height of the building, as well
as the tall buildings lining both sides. Sample Nos. 6 and 11 did not provide any oppressive feeling
while attaining a high capacity value, even though they belonged to the Low (4%) Proportion Group;
this may have been due to the large proportion of building glass in the image. Sample Nos. 1 and 5
in Figure 13 belonged to the same Low Proportion Group, but the former received a high evaluation
whereas the latter got a low evaluation; this could have been the result of the rooftop advertising
sign having a long horizontal length, making it seem unstable. The landscape of sample No. 1 in
Figure 14 was considered to be oppressive and was given a low evaluation score, even though it had a
low proportion of 1.5% and the height of the building was considered to stand relatively high on a
narrow street. Finally, the landscape of sample No. 2 was the only landscape with a low evaluation in
the Medium Proportion Group (3%); the raw materials used for the road and buildings were assumed
to have affected the results.
As such, although there were no definite tendencies found against the oppressive feeling, in relation
to colors, materials, or distances, it is still possible that some impact actually does exist between them.
Therefore, this subject merits further investigation in future studies.
9. Conclusion
In this study, we attempted to identify the relationships between outdoor advertising signs and
oppressive feeling through the experimental analysis of landscapes focusing on the visual sense of
pressure provided by outdoor advertising signs in an urban landscape. In addition, the cases of both
Japanese and foreign nationals were investigated, in order to check for any cultural differences in
feeling oppressive pressure.
The results showed that there were a number of correlations between the two populations; as the
factors involved were almost identical, we treated the whole sample as a population when performing
further analyses.
For most urban landscapes, it was confirmed that the correlation between the proportion of rooftop
advertising signs and oppressiveness was positively related; this was in agreement with previous
studies, except for in special cases [29].
As for the tendency in the relationship between outdoor advertising signs and oppressive feeling,
the oppressive feeling was reduced with an increase in the value of the first factor (Evaluation) in the
factor analysis, and vice versa. In addition, the value of the same feeling increased with an increase in
the value of the second factor (Capacity), and vice versa.
It was found that there was a positive correlation between oppressiveness and proportion of
outdoor advertising signs, such that the former increased when the latter was high or vice versa.
However, as pointed out in the consideration, there were some cases that did not follow such a tendency
and, therefore, it is necessary to check for correlations between the other elements. Further validation
will be performed in future research work.
In this study, a 3D-cyberdome was used for the first time, to our knowledge, for the evaluation of
outdoor advertising signs in a downtown area, as a measure to overcome the limitations in the evaluation
by offering more scalability. This study makes it possible to move one step closer to identifying
the relationships between the proportion of outdoor advertising signs and visual psychological
Land 2020, 9, 141 21 of 23
“oppressiveness” in urban landscapes. We intend to further this effort through continuous research
from this point. It may be possible to use the visual psychological element referred to as “oppressiveness”
felt by humans when witnessing outdoor advertising signs when rigorously defining an “outdoor
advertising sign”. The necessity of researching similar elements in detail is currently on the rise.
We have found that controlling the placement of outdoor advertising signs based on the idea of
visual psychological oppressiveness can heighten the level of comfort in an urban landscape. Finally,
this study presented the results obtained from Asian research subjects (Japanese, Korean, and Chinese)
using a study area in a Japanese downtown; therefore, we would like to note that these results may
vary depending on the subject’s nationality and study area.
Author Contributions: Conceptualization, Y.-W.L. and J.-H.H.; Data curation, Y.-W.L.; Formal analysis, Y.-W.L.;
Funding acquisition, J.-H.H.; Investigation, Y.-W.L.; Methodology, Y.-W.L.; Project administration, J.-H.H.;
Resources, Y.-W.L.; Software, Y.-W.L. and J.-H.H.; Supervision, J.-H.H.; Validation, Y.-W.L. and J.-H.H.; Visualization,
J.-H.H.; Writing—original draft, Y.-W.L. and J.-H.H.; Writing—review and editing, J.-H.H. All authors have read
and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.
Funding: This research was supported by the Energy Cloud R&D Program through the National Research
Foundation of Korea (NRF) funded by the Ministry of Science, ICT (NRF-2019M3F2A1073385). Also, this work
was supported by the National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF) grant funded by the Korea government
(MSIT) (No. 2017R1C1B5077157).
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.
References
1. Sato, Y. A Study on Visual Optimization and Landscape Control of Urban Signs. Ph.D. Thesis, Kyushu
University, Fukuoka, Japan, 1998; pp. 1–32.
2. Outdoor Advertisement Research Society. Knowledge—Design Edition for Outdoor Advertisement; Gyousei Co.,
Ltd.: Tokyo, Japan, 2006.
3. Takeyama, R. Sign Design Notebook; Japan Sign Design Association: Tokyo, Japan, 2005; pp. 1–23.
4. Amanuma, H. Impression Evaluation of Video Display in Hemisphere Dome Video Display Systems:
Verification of Sense of Length and Depth in Cyber Domes. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference of Japan
Virtual Reality Conference, Aizu, Japan, 6–9 September 2006; pp. 51–54.
5. Takei, M.; Ohara, M. A Study on Measurement of Oppressive Feelings 1—Meaning and Test Equipment; Research
Report Collection, No. 261; Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ): Tokyo, Japan, 1977; pp. 105–114.
6. Takei, M.; Ohara, M. A Study on Measurement of Oppressive Feelings 2—Physical Scale and Responses; Research
Report Collection, No. 262; Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ): Tokyo, Japan, 1977; pp. 103–113.
7. Takei, M.; Ohara, M. A Study on Measurement of Oppressive Feelings 3—Relationship between the Distance to
Buildings and the Building Colors; Research Report Collection, No. 263; Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ):
Tokyo, Japan, 1978; pp. 71–80.
8. Takei, M.; Ohara, M. A Study on Measurement of Oppressive Feelings 4—Comparison with Tolerance Settings
and Shadows; Research Report Collection, No. 310; Architectural Institute of Japan: Tokyo, Japan, 1981;
pp. 98–106.
9. Takei, M.; Fukushima, K. A Study on Effect of Plant Trees Alleviating Oppressive Feeling; Research Report
Collection, Architectural Institute of Japan, No. 332; Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ): Tokyo, Japan,
1983; pp. 102–110.
10. Architectural Institute of Japan. Conference Lecture Summaries; Architectural Institute of Japan (AIJ): Tokyo,
Japan, 2002; pp. 813–814.
11. Lee, Y.W.; Fuji, K.; Sato, Y. A Study on Perception of Depth in Stereoscopic Image presentations: Extraction
of Sensory Property Using 3D Cyber Dome. Art Eng. Soc. J. 2007, 44, 71–78.
12. Lee, H.-S.; Kang, C.-H. A Study on Landscape Evaluation and Impression Enhancement in City of Changwon.
J. Assoc. Korean Photo-Geographers 2017, 27, 131–146.
13. Byun, K.-H.; Kim, T.-Y. Evaluation on the Sense of Openness and Interest in Seong-An Gil, Cheongju. J. Reg.
Assoc. Archit. Inst. Korea 2013, 15, 27–36.
14. Lee, G.Y.; Kyoung, H.-B. A Study on the Urban-landscape Planning and Evaluating Framework on Urban
Level. J. Korea Inst. Spat. Design 2019, 14, 81–89.
Land 2020, 9, 141 22 of 23
15. Son, W.-P.; Jang, H.-R.; Kang, J.-Y.; Lee, J.-H. The Realization of Scenic Road Utilizing VR Evaluation System
for Road Landscape Architecture Design. J. Korea Landsc. Counc. 2012, 4, 85–101.
16. Choi, H. The Environmental Impact Assessment of at Road Design in the Light of the Sense for the Real from
the Virtual Reality. J. Korea Inst. Inf. Commun. Eng. 2006, 10, 1842–1847.
17. Dolores, H. The Power of Place: Urban Landscapes as Public History; MIT Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1997.
18. Lee, J.; Park, B.-J.; Tsunetsugu, Y.; Kagawa, T.; Miyazaki, Y. Restorative effects of viewing real forest landscapes,
based on a comparison with urban landscapes. Scand. J. For. Res. 2009, 24, 227–234. [CrossRef]
19. Hansen, A.; Machin, D. Researching visual environmental communication. Environ. Commun. 2013,
7, 151–168. [CrossRef]
20. Nilsendahl, C. A landscape engine for a new generation of open world games. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2015
Talks; ACM: New York, NY, USA, 2015; No.17.
21. Vanessa, F.-M.; Soto, V.; Hohwald, H.; Frias-Martinez, E. Characterizing urban landscapes using geolocated
tweets. In Proceedings of the 2012 International Conference on Privacy, Security, Risk and Trust and 2012
International Confernece on Social Computing, Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 3–5 September 2012; IEEE: Piscataway,
NJ, USA, 2012.
22. Kada, M.; Roettger, S.; Weiss, K.; Ertl, T.; Fritsch, D. Real-time visualisation of urban landscapes using
open-source software. In Proceedings of the ACRS, Busan, Korea, 3–7 November 2003.
23. Lee, Y.-W. Research regarding a method for controlling outdoor advertisements based on oppressiveness.
Ph.D. Thesis, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan, 2008; pp. 1–43.
24. Robertson, G.; Czerwinski, M.; Larson, K.; Robbins, D.C.; Thiel, D.; Van Dantzich, M. Data Mountain: Using
Spatial Memory for Document Management. In User Interface Software and Technology (UIST); ACM Press:
San Francisco, CA, USA, 1998; pp. 153–162.
25. Sparacino, F.; DeVaul, R.; Wren, C.; MacNeil, G.; Daveport, G.; Pentland, A. City of News. In Proceedings of the
ACM SIGGRAPH 99, Visual Proceedings, Emerging Technologies, Los Angeles, CA, USA, 8–13 August 1999.
26. Inselberg, A.; Dimsdale, B. Parallel Coordinates: A Tool for Visualizing Multi- Dimensional Geometry.
In Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Visualization, San Francisco, CA, USA, 23–26 October 1990;
pp. 361–378.
27. Derthick, M.; Christel, M.; Hauptmann, A.; Ng, D.; Stevens, S.; Wactlar, H. A Cityscape Visualization of
Video Perspectives. In Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Arthur M. Sackler Colloquium on
Mapping Knowledge Domains, Irvine, CA, USA, 9–11 May 2003; pp. 1–2.
28. Taeyon, H.; Kyeonghwa, B.; Nozomu, Y.; Jun, M.; Kotaroh, H. A Study of Allowable Value of the Sense of
Physical Oppression and the Sense of Openness by Solid Angle: A study on the sense of physical oppression
and the sense of openness created in urban spaces Part 3. J. Environ. Eng. 2013, 78, 437–444. (In Japanese)
29. Hwang, T.; Byun, K.; Yoshizawa, N.; Munakata, J.; Hirate, K. An experimental study on evaluating the
indicators of the sense of physial oppression created in urban space. J. Environ. Eng. 2009, 74, 659–666.
(In Japanese) [CrossRef]
30. Hidenori, K.; Yuusuke, I.; Yukihiro, K.; Noriyoshi, Y.; Tatuso, O. A study on the oppresive feeling by the very
high buildings. J. Environ. Eng. (Trans. AIJ) 2005, 2005, 799–800. (In Japanese)
31. Kyousei publisher. Knowledge of Outdoor Advertising; Kyousei publisher: Tokyo, Japan, 2019. (In Japanese)
32. Ball, J.; Capanni, N.; Watt, S. Virtual reality for mutual understanding in landscape planning. Int. J. Soc. Sci.
2008, 2, 78–88.
33. Bishop, I.D.; Wherrett, J.R.; Miller, D.R. Assessment of path choices on a country walk using a virtual
environment. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2001, 52, 225–237. [CrossRef]
34. Ghadirian, P.; Bishop, I.D. Integration of augmented reality and GIS: A new approach to realistic landscape
visualisation. Landsc. Urban Plan. 2008, 86, 226–232. [CrossRef]
35. Lange, E. We can visualise. Now what? Landsc. Urban Plan. 2011, 100, 403–406. [CrossRef]
36. Bretar, F.; Chehata, N. Terrain modeling from LiDAR range data in natural landscapes: A predictive and
Bayesian framework. IEEE Trans. Geosci. Remote Sens 2010, 48, 1568–1578. [CrossRef]
37. Portman, M.E. Visualization for planning and management of oceans and coasts. Ocean Coast. Manag. 2014,
98, 176–185. [CrossRef]
38. Tufte, E.R. Envisioning Information; Graphics Press: Cheshire, CT, USA, 1990.
39. Bruce, V.; Green, P.R.; Georgeson, M.A. Visual Perception: Physiology, Psychology and Ecology; Psychology Press:
Hove, UK, 1996.
Land 2020, 9, 141 23 of 23
40. Rose, G. (Ed.) Visual Methodologies: An Introduction to Researching with Visual Materials; SAGE Publications
Ltd.: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2012.
41. Yuan, Y. Paving the road for virtual and augmented reality [standards]. IEEE Consum. Electron. Mag. 2017,
7, 117–128. [CrossRef]
42. Valiela, I. Doing Science: Design, Analysis and Communication of Scientific Research; Oxford University Press:
New York, NY, USA, 2009.
43. Ware, C. Information Visualization: Perception for Design; Elsevier Inc.: Waltham, MA, USA, 2013.
44. Koutsabasis, P.; Vosinakis, S.; Malisova, K.; Paparounas, N. On the value of virtual worlds for collaborative
design. Design Stud. 2012, 33, 357–390. [CrossRef]
45. Gill, L.; Lange, E.; Morgan, E.; Romano, D. An analysis of usage of different types of visualisation media
within a collaborative planning workshop environment. Environ. Plan. B Plan. Des. 2013, 40, 742–754.
[CrossRef]
46. Paar, P. Landscape visualizations: Applications and requirements of 3D visualization software for
environmental planning. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2006, 30, 815–839. [CrossRef]
47. Silvestri, C.; Motro, R.; Maurin, B.; Dresp-Langley, B. Visual spatial learning of complex object morphologies
through the interaction with virtual and real-world data. Des. Stud. 2010, 31, 363–381. [CrossRef]
48. Pietsch, S.M. Computer visualisation in the design control of urban environments: A literature review.
Environ. Plan. B 2000, 27, 521–536. [CrossRef]
49. Millesi, W.; Truppe, M.; Watzinger, F.; Wagner, A.; Enislidis, G.; Wanschitz, F.; Schopper, C.; Ewers, R. Remote
stereotactic visualization for image-guided surgery: Technical innovation. J. Cranio-Maxillofac. Surg. 1997,
25, 136–138. [CrossRef]
50. Rizzo, A.; Reger, G.; Gahm, G.; Difede, J.; Rothbaum, B.O. Virtual reality exposure therapy for combat-related
PTSD. In Posttraumatic Stress Disorder: Basic Science and Clinical Practice; Shiromani, P., Keane, T., LeDoux, J.E.,
Eds.; Humana Press: New York, NY, USA, 2009; pp. 375–399.
51. Daniel, T.C.; Meitner, M.J. Representational validity of landscape visualizations: The effects of graphical
realism on perceived scenic beauty of forest vistas. J. Environ. Psychol. 2001, 21, 61–72. [CrossRef]
52. Lange, E. Visualization in landscape architecture and planning: Where we have been, where we are now
and where we might go from here. In Trends in GIS and Virtualization in Environmental Planning and Design;
Buhmann, E., Nothhelfer, U., Pietsch, M., Eds.; Wichmann: Heidelberg, Germany, 2002; pp. 8–18.
53. Portman, M.E.; Natapov, A.; Fisher-Gewirtzman, D. To go where no man has gone before: Virtual reality
in architecture, landscape architecture and environmental planning. Comput. Environ. Urban Syst. 2015,
54, 376–384. [CrossRef]
54. Kim, Y.-M. A Study on a Control Method for Image in landscape Environment. PhD Thesis, Kyushu
University, Fukuoka, Japan, 1997; pp. 1–45. Available online: https://catalog.lib.kyushu-u.ac.jp/opac_detail_
md/?reqCode=frombib&lang=1&amode=MD823&opkey=&bibid=2732&start= (accessed on 1 January 2020).
55. Jun, M.; Nozomu, Y.; Takaya, K.; Hiroaki, T.; Norimitsu, I.; Wataru, K.; Kotaroh, H. Factors of Oppression and
Spaciousness of Townscape Considering the Differnce of the Type of the Street. J. Environ. Eng. (Trans. AIJ)
2008, 627, 687–693. (In Japanese)
56. Available online: http://www.law.go.kr/%EB%B2%95%EB%A0%B9/%EA%B2%BD%EA%B4%80%EB%B2%
95/ (accessed on 29 March 2020). (In Korean)
57. Haruka, A.; Hiroshi, H.; Nobuyuki, S.; Kazuya, S.; Lee, Y.-W.; Masaru, S. Impression Evaluation of Virtual
Environment on Hemispherical Visual Display System-Analysis of Length and Depth Perception on CyberDome
System; The Institute of Image Electronics Engineers of Japan: Tokyo, Japan, 2006; pp. 51–54. (In Japanese)
58. Haruka, A.; Hiroshi, H.; Nobuyuki, S.; Kazuya, S.; Lee, Y.-W.; Hiroyuki, I.; Masaru, S. Impression Evaluation of
Virtual Environment on Hemispherical Visual Display System-Analysis of Interior Space Perception on CyberDome
System; The Institute of Image Electronics Engineers of Japan: Tokyo, Japan, 2007; pp. 66–69. (In Japanese)
© 2020 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

Evaluation of Urban Landscape Outdoor Advertisemen

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Evaluation of Urban Landscape Outdoor Advertisemen

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

land

Keywords: landscape; outdoor advertisement signboard; pressure; image evaluation; VR;

1. Background and Objective of Research

Land 2020, 9, 141; doi:10.3390/land9050141 www.mdpi.com/journal/land

2.1. Landscape and Urban Landscapes

2.2. Outdoor Advertisement Signboards

2.3. Virtual Reality and Landscape

4. Taking Landscape Pictures and Selecting Experimental Samples

Table 1. Analysis of landscape samples of wall advertising signs.

Table 2. Analysis of landscape samples of rooftop advertising signs.

Rooftop Color of Advertising

Table 3. Analysis of landscape samples of projection advertising signs.

Projection No. of Signs Color of

6. Impression Evaluation Test

6.1. Test Environment

Figure 3. Schematic drawing of the 3D cyber dome test environment.

Land 2020, x, x FOR PEER REVIEW 11 of 23

Figure 5. Categories for the oppressive feeling scale.

6.3. Test Method

6.3. Test Method

Table 6. Japanese factor load.

Table 7. Factor load for foreigners.

7.3. Comparison Result

8. Analysis of Characteristics of Oppressive Feeling

Pleasant−Unpleasant −0.970 0.167 0.114

You might also like