Over the last several decades, designers have used digital screens to view images of real and simulated spaces and make critical design decisions. Screen technology has improved during this time, as technologies like OLED have replaced legacy displays (CRT, plasma, and LCD). These new screens provide a higher pixel resolution, luminous output and contrast ratio. Immersive head-mounted displays now allow designers to view immersive images, and recent developments in real-time rendering have encouraged the uptake of virtual reality (VR) head-mounted displays in mainstream practice and design education. This paper presents an experiment on lighting perception using a series of LED lighting conditions in a real space and a virtual representation of those conditions captured using a 360° high-dynamic-range camera and presented on an HTC Vive Pro HMD. Fifty-three participants were asked to rate each lighting condition by viewing it in a real space (n = 30) or via immersive HDR photographs displayed in a VR HMD (n = 23). The results show that ratings of visual comfort, pleasantness, evenness, contrast and glare are similar between the HTC Vive Pro HMD and our real space when evaluating well-lit scenes, but significant differences emerge in dim and highly contrasted scenes for a number of rating scales.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Jevard P, Mullins M. The use of VR technologies to enhance methods for lighting design practice: 7th eCAADe Regional International Symposium, Aalborg, Denmark, May 2–3: 2019: 97–102.
2.
PaesDArantesEIrazzyJ. Immersive environment for improving the understanding of architectural 3D models: comparing user spatial perception between immersive and traditional virtual reality systems. Autom Constr2017; 84: 292–303.
3.
KlerkRDDuarteAMMedeirosDPDuarteJPJoaquimJLopesDS. Usability studies on building early stage architectural models in virtual reality. Autom Constr2019; 103: 104–116.
4.
Panya D, Seo HJ, Park HJ, Lee WJ, Choo S. A study of kinetic façade modelling performance using virtual reality: 36th International Symposium on Automation and Robotics in Construction (ISARC), Banff, Canada, May 21–24: 2019: 356–359.
5.
Ozhen DS, Afacan Y, Surer E. Usability of virtual reality for basic design education: a comparative study with paper-based design. Int J Technol Design Educ 2019: 1–21.
6.
Kreutzberg A. Visualising architectural lighting concept with 360°panoramas: Proceedings of the 36th eCAADe Conference, Lodz, Poland, 19–21 September 2018, pp. 745–752.
7.
Marin-MoralesJHiguera-TrujilloJLGrecoAGuixerasJLlinaresCGentiliCScilinogEPAlcanizMValenzaG. Real vs. immersive-virtual emotional experience: analysis of psycho-physiological patterns in a free exploration of an art museum. Plos One2019; 14: e0223881–e0223881.
8.
ChamilothoriKWienoldJAndersenM. Adequacy of immersive virtual reality for the perception of daylit spaces: comparison of real and virtual environments. Leukos2018; 15: 203–226.
9.
Higuera-TrujilloJLMaldonadoJLTMillánCL. Psychological and physiological human responses to simulated and real environments: a comparison between photographs, 360 panoramas, and virtual reality. Appl Ergon2017; 65: 398–409.
10.
Abd-AlhamidFKentMBennettaCCalautitaJWuY. Developing an innovative method for visual perception evaluation in a physical-based virtual environment. Build Environ2019; 162: 106278–106278.
11.
ChenYCuiZHaoL. Virtual reality in lighting research: comparing physical and virtual lighting environments. Light Res Technol2019; 51: 820–837.
12.
Kus B. A comparative study on spatial perception in real and virtual office environments under different lighting conditions. Master’s Thesis. Ankara: Bilkent University, 2019.
WongMDuJZhangZLiuYChenSLeeS. An experience-based interactive lighting design approach using BIM and VR: a case study. IOP Conf Series: Earth Environ Sci2019; 238: 012006–012006.
15.
Cauwerts C. Influence of presentation modes on visual perceptions of daylit spaces. PhD thesis. Louvain-la-Neuve: Universite catholique de Louvain (UCL), 2003.
16.
MurdochMStokkermansMLambooijM. Towards perceptual accuracy in 3D visualizations of illuminated indoor environments. J Solid State Light2015; 2: 1–19–1–19.
17.
ChessaMMaielloGBorsariABexP. The perceptual quality of the oculus rift for immersive virtual reality. Human-Computer Interact2019; 34: 51–82.
18.
Newsham G, Seetzen H, Veitch J, Chaudhuri A, Whitehead L. Lighting quality evaluations using images on a high-dynamic range display: Proceedings of the ARCC/EAAE Conference on Architectural Research. Montreal, Quebec, 22–25 May 2002, pp. 1–9.
19.
AkyuzAOFlemingRWRieckeBEReinhardE. Do HDR displays support LDR content?: A psychophysical evaluation. ACM Trans Graphics2007; 26: 1–7–1–7.
20.
NewshamGCetegenDVeitchJAWhiteheadL. Comparing lighting quality evaluations of real scenes with those from high dynamic range and conventional images. ACM Trans Appl Res2010; 7: 1–25.
21.
InaniciM. Evaluation of high dynamic range photography as a luminance data acquisition system. Light Res Technol2006; 38: 123–136.
22.
Cetegen D. Veitch JA, Newsham GR. View size and office luminance effects on employee satisfaction: Proceedings of Balkan Light, Ljubljana, Solvenia, Oct 7: 2008: 243–252.
23.
Heydarian A, Pantazis E, Carneiro J, Gerber D. Towards understanding end-user lighting preferences in office spaces by using immersive virtual environments: ASCE International Workshop of Computing in Civil Engineering, Austin, TX, 21–23 June 2015, pp.1–8.
24.
Rockcastle S, Chamilothori K, Andersen M. An experiment in virtual reality to measure daylight-driven interest in rendered architectural scenes: Proceedings of Building Simulation, San Francisco, USA, 2–4 September 2017, pp. 2797–2806.
25.
Sawyer A, Chamilothori K. Influence of subjective impressions of a space on brightness satisfaction: an experimental study in virtual reality: Proceedings of SimAUD, Atlanta, USA, 7–9 April 2019, pp.1–8.
26.
HeydarianACarneiroJGerberDBecerik-GerberBHayesTWoodW. Immersive virtual environments versus physical built environments: a benchmarking study for building design and user-built environment explorations. Autom Constr2015; 54: 116–126.
27.
Melo M, Bessa M, Debattista K, Chalmers A. Evaluation of tone-mapping operators for HDR video under different ambient luminance levels. Comput Graphics 2015: 38–49.
28.
Raffin M, Guarnieri G. Tone mapping and enhancement of high dynamic range images based on a model of visual perception: International Conference on Computer Graphics and Imaging, Innsbruck, Austria, Feb 13–15: 2008: 190–195.
29.
Reinhard C, Stark M, Shirley P, Ferwerda J. Photographic tone reproduction for digital images: Proceedings to SIGGRAPH ’02, San Antonio, USA, Jul 21–26: 2002: 267–276.
30.
Ward G. The RADIANCE lighting simulation and rendering system: Proceedings of SIGGRAPH Conference, Orlando, USA, Jul 24–29: 459–472.
31.
McNeil A. Rendering omni-directional stereo images with radiance: Radiance Workshop. Padova, Italy, 29 August 2016, pp. 1–58.
32.
EvansJ. Standards for Visual Acuity2006; USA, National Institute for Standard and Technology.
33.
VrabelPBerneckerCMistrickR. Visual performance and visual clarity under electric light sources: part 1 – visual perfirmance. J Illumin Eng Soc1995; 27: 69–80.
34.
Council of OpthamologyInternational. Visual acuity measurement standard. Italian J Opthalmol1988; 2: 1–15.
35.
HopkinsonR. Glare from windows. Constr Res Dev1970; 2: 98–105.
36.
CohenJ. Statistical power analysis. Curr Direct Psychol Sci1992; 1: 98–101.
37.
CohenJ. Statistical Power Analysis for the Behavioral Sciences, London: Routledge, 1988.
38.
RadiantiJMajchrzakTFrommJWohlgenanntI. A systematic review of immersive virtual reality applications for higher education: design elements lessons learned, and research agenda. Comput Educ2020; 147: 103778–103778.
39.
Chamilothori K. Perceptual effects of daylight patterns in architecture. PhD thesis. Lausanne: Ecole Polytechnique Federale de Lausanne, 2019.
