This paper presents experimental approaches for evaluating concert lighting from the viewpoints of audience members and performers in Cambridge King's College Chapel. We develop image zoning and abstraction techniques to quantify and interpret photometric data acquired under four different electric lighting conditions. Assessed by 78 participants, these lighting scenarios are compared across six different viewing positions using a set of structured questionnaires. Ordered logistic regression modelling shows that the ratios and functions describing uniformity, brightness and light patterns are common explanatory variables for predicting perceived visual clarity, visual uniformity, brightness and spatial intimacy. Uniformity-related attributes are observed to be among the strongest variables for all these perceived qualities, except for visual clarity, which is better explained by acuity-related measures. These experimental results confirm the applicability of our approaches, highlighting the importance of combining multiple methods and integrating complex architectural situations into the process of understanding luminous appearance.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
GalasiuADNewshamGRSuvagauCSanderDM. Energy saving lighting control systems for open-plan offices: a field study. Leukos2007; 4: 7–29.
2.
BelliaLMustoMSpadaG. Illuminance measurements through HDR imaging photometry in scholastic environment. Energy and Buildings2011; 43: 2843–2849.
3.
MooreTCarterDJSlaterAI. User attitudes toward occupant controlled office lighting. Lighting Research and Technology2002; 34: 207–219.
4.
FostervoldKINersveenJ. Proportions of direct and indirect indoor lighting: the effect on health, well-being and cognitive performance of office workers. Lighting Research and Technology2008; 40: 175–200.
5.
DenkEJimenezPSchulzB. The impact of light source technology and colour temperature on the well-being, mental state and concentration of shop assistants. Lighting Research and Technology2015; 47: 219–233.
6.
TonelloGHernandez de BorsettiNBorsettiHTereschukLLopez ZigaranS. Perceived well-being and light-reactive hormones: an exploratory study. Lighting Research and Technology2019; 51: 184–205.
7.
LewinIBellWB. Luminance measurement by photographic photometry. Illuminating Engineering1968, pp. 582–589.
8.
LewinIO'FarrellJ. Luminaire photometry using video camera techniques. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1999; 28: 57–63.
9.
BelliaLCesaranoAMinichielloFSibilioS. Setting up a CCD photometer for lighting research and design. Building and Environment2002; 37: 1099–1106.
10.
InaniciMN. Evaluation of high dynamic range photography as a luminance data acquisition system. Lighting Research and Technology2006; 38: 123–136.
11.
LoeDLMansfieldKPRowlandsE. A step in quantifying the appearance of a lit scene. Lighting Research and Technology2000; 32: 213–222.
12.
VeitchJAStokkermansMGMNewshamGR. Linking lighting appraisals to work behaviors. Environment and Behavior2013; 45: 198–214.
13.
ReaMSOuelletteMJ. Relative visual performance: a basis for application. Lighting Research and Technology1991; 23: 135–144.
14.
WaldramJM. Studies in interior lighting. Transactions of the Illuminating Engineering Society1954; 19: 95–133.
15.
HopkinsonRG. Assessment of brightness: what we see. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1957; 52: 211–222.
16.
Padgham CA, Saunders JE. The Perception of Light and Colour. London: G. Bell and Sons, 1975: 48–50.
17.
Weber EH. De Pulsu, Resorptione, Auditu et Tactu Annotationes Anatomicae et Physiologicae Leipsic. Leipzig: C.F. Koehle, 1834.
18.
ThurstoneLL. Attitudes can be measured. American Journal of Sociology1928; 33: 529–554.
19.
BlackwellHR. Contrast thresholds of the human eye. Journal of the Optical Society of America1946; 36: 624–643.
20.
BlackwellHR. Development and use of a quantitative method for specification of interior illumination levels. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1959; 54: 317–353.
21.
CuttleC. Lighting patterns and the flow of light. Lighting Research and Technology1971; 3: 171–189.
22.
CuttleC. Cubic illumination. Lighting Research and Technology1997; 29: 1–14.
23.
ReaMSJeffreyIG. A new luminance and image analysis system for lighting and vision: I. Equipment and calibration. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1990; 19: 64–72.
24.
FlynnJESpencerTJMartyniukOHendrickC. Interim study of procedures for investigating the effect of light on impression and behavior. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1973; 3: 87–94.
25.
FlynnJE. A study of subjective responses to low energy and non-uniform lighting systems. Lighting Design and Application1977; 7: 6–15.
26.
HawkesRJLoeDLRowlandsE. IERI: a note towards the understanding of lighting quality. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1979; 8: 111–120.
27.
LoeDLMansfieldKPRowlandsE. Appearance of lit environment and its relevance in lighting design: experimental study. Lighting Research and Technology1994; 26: 119–133.
28.
OsgoodCE. The nature and measurement of meaning. Psychological Bulletin1952; 49: 197–237.
29.
KruskalJB. Multidimensional scaling by optimizing goodness of fit to a nonmetric hypothesis. Psychometrika1964; 29: 1–27.
30.
ShakhnovichAR. The Brain and Regulation of Eye Movement, New York: Plenum Press, 1977, pp. 23–24.
31.
Agresti A. Categorical Data Analysis. 2nd Edition. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience, 2002: pp. 115–123, 269–270, 289–290.
32.
HosmerDWLemeshowSSturdivantRX. Applied Logistic Regression, 3rd ed. Hoboken, New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, 2013.
33.
StonePTParsonsKCHarkerSDP. Research note: subjective judgements of lighting in lecture rooms. Lighting Research and Technology1975; 7: 259–261.
34.
PellegrinoA. Assessment of artificial lighting parameters in a visual comfort perspective. Lighting Research and Technology1999; 31: 107–115.
35.
NewshamGRVeitchJA. Lighting quality recommendations for VDT offices: a new method of derivation. Lighting Research and Technology2001; 33: 97–116.
36.
HouserKWTillerDKBerneckerCAMistrickRG. The subjective response to linear fluorescent direct/indirect lighting systems. Lighting Research and Technology2002; 34: 243–264.
37.
CustersPJMde KortYAWIJsselsteijnWAde KruiffME. Lighting in retail environments: atmosphere perception in the real world. Lighting Research and Technology2010; 42: 331–343.
38.
SchielkeTLeudesdorffM. Impact of lighting design on brand image for fashion retail stores. Lighting Research and Technology2015; 47: 672–692.
39.
Inanici MN, Galvin J. Evaluation of high dynamic range photography as a luminance mapping technique. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, 2004: pp. 1–28.
40.
MardaljevicJPainterBAndersenM. Transmission illuminance proxy HDR imaging: a new technique to quantify luminous flux. Lighting Research and Technology2009; 41: 27–49.
41.
Fan D, Painter B and Mardaljevic J. A data collection method for long-term field studies of visual comfort in real-world daylit office environments: Proceedings of the 26th Conference on Passive and Low Energy Architecture, Quebec City, Canada, 22–24 June 2009: pp. 22–24.
42.
Tural M. On post occupancy evaluation of the luminous environment: an approach to integrate high dynamic range image analysis and simulation into the evaluation process: The 39th ASES National Solar Conference Proceedings, Phoenix, Arizona, 17–22 May 2010: pp. 1312–1317.
43.
Debevec PE, Malik J. Recovering high dynamic range radiance maps from photograph: SIGGRAPH, Los Angeles, CA, 3–8 August, 1997: 369–378.
44.
Drago F, Martens WL, Myszkowski K, Chiba N. Design of a tone mapping operator for high dynamic range images based upon psychophysical evaluation and preference mapping: Proceedings of SPIE – The International Society for Optical Engineering, Santa Clara, CA, 17 June 2003: pp. 321–331.
45.
Ward G. The RADIANCE lighting simulation and rendering system: SIGGRAPH, Orlando, CA, 24–29 July 1994: pp. 459–472.
46.
WardG. Rendering with Radiance: The Art and Science of Lighting Visualization, San Francisco: Morgan Kaufmann, 1998.
47.
MoeckMAnaokarS. Validation of high dynamic range imaging to luminance measurement. Leukos2005; 2: 133–144.
48.
InaniciMNNavvabM. The virtual lighting laboratory: per-pixel luminance data analysis. Leukos2006; 3: 89–104.
49.
Painter B, Mardaljevic J, Fan D. Monitoring daylight provision and glare perception in office environments: Proceedings of W098 & W111-Special Track 18th CIB World Building Congress, Salford, UK, 10–13 May. 2010: 148–160.
50.
KonisKLeeESClearRD. Visual comfort analysis of innovative interior and exterior shading systems for commercial buildings using high resolution luminance images. Leukos2011; 7: 167–188.
51.
CaiH. Luminance gradient for evaluating lighting. Lighting Research and Technology2016; 48: 155–175.
52.
van den WymelenbergKInaniciMN. A critical investigation of common lighting design metrics for predicting human visual comfort in offices with daylight. Leukos2014; 10: 145–164.
53.
ZhaoNReinhartCFParadisoJA. Image-based perceptual analysis of lit environments. Lighting Research and Technology. First published 19 July 2018. DOI: 1477153518786768.
54.
LoVWLSteemersKA. Measuring light in field experiments using dummies and objects: a study of concert lighting. Lighting Research and Technology2018; 6: 827–841.
55.
BeranekL. Music, Acoustics and Architecture, New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1962.
56.
BarronM. Subjective study of British symphony concert halls. Acustica1988; 66: 1–14.
57.
FlynnJELighting-design decisions as interventions in human visual space. In: NasarJL (ed). Environmental Aesthetics: Theory, Research, and Applications, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988, pp. 156–170.
58.
FlynnJEHendrickCSpencerTMartyniukO. IERI: A guide to methodology procedures for measuring subjective impressions in lighting. Journal of the Illuminating Engineering Society1979; 8: 95–110.
59.
FlynnJEKremersJASegilAWSteffyGR. Architectural Interior Systems: Lighting, Acoustics, Air Conditioning, 3rd ed. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1992, pp. 11–20.
60.
ReidF. Techniques of stage lighting. Lighting Research and Technology1970; 2: 125–135.
Lo VWL and Steemers K. An occupant's role-specific approach to identifying lighting parameters for concert performances in Cambridge King's College Chapel: Proceedings of the 33rd PLEA International Conference: Design to Thrive, Edinburgh, UK, 2–5 July 2017: pp. 3261–3268.
63.
MathWorks. MATLAB: The Language of Technical Computing. Getting Started with MATLAB. Version 7, Natick, Massachusetts: MathWorks, 2005.
64.
RuchTCFultonJF. Medical Physiology and Biophysics, 18th ed. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1960, pp. : p. 453.
65.
HoganMJAlvaradoABWeddellJE. Histology of the Human Eye: An Atlas and Textbook, Philadelphia: W.B: Saunders, 1971, pp. 491–498.
66.
Spector WS. Handbook of Biological Data – The Visual Mechanism: Morphology and Physiology. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1956: pp. 316–317.
67.
FotiosSAtliD. Comparing judgments of visual clarity and spatial brightness through an analysis of studies using the category rating procedure. Leukos2012; 8: 261–281.
68.
PenacchioOWilkinsAJ. Visual discomfort and the spatial distribution of Fourier energy. Vision Research2015; 108: 1–7.
69.
LeATDPayneJClarkeCKellyMAPrudenziatiFArmsbyEPenacchioOWilkinsAJ. Discomfort from urban scenes: metabolic consequences. Landscape and Urban Planning2017; 160: 61–68.
70.
Society of Light and Lighting. The SLL Code for Lighting. London: CIBSE, 2012: pp. 17–18.
71.
WaldramJM. The lighting of Gloucester Cathedral by the ‘designed appearance’ method. Transactions of the Illuminating Engineering Society1959; 24: 85–105.
