Aesthetics of Simulated Soiling Patterns on Architecture

Two desk-top exercises investigated public acceptability of idealized soiling patterns on buildings, using methodologies typical of the psychology of art. The exercises used a range of simulated soiling patterns around a simple architectural element, a pedimented window. In the first experiment resp...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Environmental science & technology 2004-07, Vol.38 (14), p.3971-3976
Hauptverfasser: Grossi, Carlota M, Brimblecombe, Peter
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 3976
container_issue 14
container_start_page 3971
container_title Environmental science & technology
container_volume 38
creator Grossi, Carlota M
Brimblecombe, Peter
description Two desk-top exercises investigated public acceptability of idealized soiling patterns on buildings, using methodologies typical of the psychology of art. The exercises used a range of simulated soiling patterns around a simple architectural element, a pedimented window. In the first experiment respondents were asked to arrange the images from the “most acceptable” pattern to the “least acceptable”. Results hinted at the importance of certain soiling features in driving the ranking. The second exercise explored the characteristics of soiling patterns that most affected their acceptability. In this experiment the images were organized in pairs. People were requested to choose the pattern they found more acceptable in each pair. Uniform patterns and those which created shadowing effects proved more acceptable. Patterns with non-integer fractal dimension that obscured architectural forms were less acceptable. There was usually a preference for images showing less soiling, whereas vertical features and lumpiness were not as acceptable. Results gave an insight into spatial factors that might influence the acceptability of soiling on real buildings. Thus suggesting it is necessary to consider both the level and the distribution of soiling when trying to gauge public reaction.
doi_str_mv 10.1021/es0353762
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_14707175</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>779160971</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-a437t-739e6051c214ae1a2e810d3ea902d9105024981f29a29dc7ccc2f649b849ef433</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpl0NFKHDEUBuBQKt3t6kVfoAwFC16MniSTyeRyWWxVFlxcBfEmxMyZbuzsjCYZ0Lc3sotbLARycT4O_38I-UbhmAKjJxiACy5L9omMqWCQi0rQz2QMQHmueHk7Il9DeAAAxqH6QkYJqYpBNSbVFENcYXQ2ZH2TLd16aE3EOlv2rnXdn2xhYkTfpWmXTb1duYg2Dh73yV5j2oAH239Cbn6dXs_O8vnl7_PZdJ6bgsuYS66wBEEto4VBahhWFGqORgGrFQUBrFAVbZgyTNVWWmtZUxbqvioUNgXnE_Jzs_fR909DCqvXLlhsW9NhPwRNCwmSSpHgjw_woR98l7Lp1JqmByqhow2yvg_BY6MfvVsb_6Ip6Ldb6vdbJvt9u3C4X2O9k9vjJXC4BSZY0zbedNaFf5wSIrVNLt84FyI-v8-N_6tLyaXQ14ulZnOxvLpb3OmL3V5jw67E_wFfAc-BlAc</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>230130109</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Aesthetics of Simulated Soiling Patterns on Architecture</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>ACS Publications</source><creator>Grossi, Carlota M ; Brimblecombe, Peter</creator><creatorcontrib>Grossi, Carlota M ; Brimblecombe, Peter</creatorcontrib><description>Two desk-top exercises investigated public acceptability of idealized soiling patterns on buildings, using methodologies typical of the psychology of art. The exercises used a range of simulated soiling patterns around a simple architectural element, a pedimented window. In the first experiment respondents were asked to arrange the images from the “most acceptable” pattern to the “least acceptable”. Results hinted at the importance of certain soiling features in driving the ranking. The second exercise explored the characteristics of soiling patterns that most affected their acceptability. In this experiment the images were organized in pairs. People were requested to choose the pattern they found more acceptable in each pair. Uniform patterns and those which created shadowing effects proved more acceptable. Patterns with non-integer fractal dimension that obscured architectural forms were less acceptable. There was usually a preference for images showing less soiling, whereas vertical features and lumpiness were not as acceptable. Results gave an insight into spatial factors that might influence the acceptability of soiling on real buildings. Thus suggesting it is necessary to consider both the level and the distribution of soiling when trying to gauge public reaction.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0013-936X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1520-5851</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1021/es0353762</identifier><identifier>PMID: 15298208</identifier><identifier>CODEN: ESTHAG</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Washington, DC: American Chemical Society</publisher><subject>Aesthetics ; Applied sciences ; Architecture ; Architecture - methods ; Building failures (cracks, physical changes, etc.) ; Buildings ; Buildings. Public works ; Computer Simulation ; Computer-Aided Design ; Durability. Pathology. Repairing. Maintenance ; Environmental Pollutants ; Esthetics ; Exact sciences and technology ; Simulation</subject><ispartof>Environmental science &amp; technology, 2004-07, Vol.38 (14), p.3971-3976</ispartof><rights>Copyright © 2004 American Chemical Society</rights><rights>2004 INIST-CNRS</rights><rights>Copyright American Chemical Society Jul 15, 2004</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-a437t-739e6051c214ae1a2e810d3ea902d9105024981f29a29dc7ccc2f649b849ef433</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-a437t-739e6051c214ae1a2e810d3ea902d9105024981f29a29dc7ccc2f649b849ef433</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/es0353762$$EPDF$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/es0353762$$EHTML$$P50$$Gacs$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,2765,27076,27924,27925,56738,56788</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=15955810$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15298208$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Grossi, Carlota M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brimblecombe, Peter</creatorcontrib><title>Aesthetics of Simulated Soiling Patterns on Architecture</title><title>Environmental science &amp; technology</title><addtitle>Environ. Sci. Technol</addtitle><description>Two desk-top exercises investigated public acceptability of idealized soiling patterns on buildings, using methodologies typical of the psychology of art. The exercises used a range of simulated soiling patterns around a simple architectural element, a pedimented window. In the first experiment respondents were asked to arrange the images from the “most acceptable” pattern to the “least acceptable”. Results hinted at the importance of certain soiling features in driving the ranking. The second exercise explored the characteristics of soiling patterns that most affected their acceptability. In this experiment the images were organized in pairs. People were requested to choose the pattern they found more acceptable in each pair. Uniform patterns and those which created shadowing effects proved more acceptable. Patterns with non-integer fractal dimension that obscured architectural forms were less acceptable. There was usually a preference for images showing less soiling, whereas vertical features and lumpiness were not as acceptable. Results gave an insight into spatial factors that might influence the acceptability of soiling on real buildings. Thus suggesting it is necessary to consider both the level and the distribution of soiling when trying to gauge public reaction.</description><subject>Aesthetics</subject><subject>Applied sciences</subject><subject>Architecture</subject><subject>Architecture - methods</subject><subject>Building failures (cracks, physical changes, etc.)</subject><subject>Buildings</subject><subject>Buildings. Public works</subject><subject>Computer Simulation</subject><subject>Computer-Aided Design</subject><subject>Durability. Pathology. Repairing. Maintenance</subject><subject>Environmental Pollutants</subject><subject>Esthetics</subject><subject>Exact sciences and technology</subject><subject>Simulation</subject><issn>0013-936X</issn><issn>1520-5851</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2004</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpl0NFKHDEUBuBQKt3t6kVfoAwFC16MniSTyeRyWWxVFlxcBfEmxMyZbuzsjCYZ0Lc3sotbLARycT4O_38I-UbhmAKjJxiACy5L9omMqWCQi0rQz2QMQHmueHk7Il9DeAAAxqH6QkYJqYpBNSbVFENcYXQ2ZH2TLd16aE3EOlv2rnXdn2xhYkTfpWmXTb1duYg2Dh73yV5j2oAH239Cbn6dXs_O8vnl7_PZdJ6bgsuYS66wBEEto4VBahhWFGqORgGrFQUBrFAVbZgyTNVWWmtZUxbqvioUNgXnE_Jzs_fR909DCqvXLlhsW9NhPwRNCwmSSpHgjw_woR98l7Lp1JqmByqhow2yvg_BY6MfvVsb_6Ip6Ldb6vdbJvt9u3C4X2O9k9vjJXC4BSZY0zbedNaFf5wSIrVNLt84FyI-v8-N_6tLyaXQ14ulZnOxvLpb3OmL3V5jw67E_wFfAc-BlAc</recordid><startdate>20040715</startdate><enddate>20040715</enddate><creator>Grossi, Carlota M</creator><creator>Brimblecombe, Peter</creator><general>American Chemical Society</general><scope>BSCLL</scope><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QO</scope><scope>7ST</scope><scope>7T7</scope><scope>7U7</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>C1K</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>SOI</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20040715</creationdate><title>Aesthetics of Simulated Soiling Patterns on Architecture</title><author>Grossi, Carlota M ; Brimblecombe, Peter</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-a437t-739e6051c214ae1a2e810d3ea902d9105024981f29a29dc7ccc2f649b849ef433</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2004</creationdate><topic>Aesthetics</topic><topic>Applied sciences</topic><topic>Architecture</topic><topic>Architecture - methods</topic><topic>Building failures (cracks, physical changes, etc.)</topic><topic>Buildings</topic><topic>Buildings. Public works</topic><topic>Computer Simulation</topic><topic>Computer-Aided Design</topic><topic>Durability. Pathology. Repairing. Maintenance</topic><topic>Environmental Pollutants</topic><topic>Esthetics</topic><topic>Exact sciences and technology</topic><topic>Simulation</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Grossi, Carlota M</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Brimblecombe, Peter</creatorcontrib><collection>Istex</collection><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Biotechnology Research Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><collection>Industrial and Applied Microbiology Abstracts (Microbiology A)</collection><collection>Toxicology Abstracts</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>Environment Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Environmental science &amp; technology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Grossi, Carlota M</au><au>Brimblecombe, Peter</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Aesthetics of Simulated Soiling Patterns on Architecture</atitle><jtitle>Environmental science &amp; technology</jtitle><addtitle>Environ. Sci. Technol</addtitle><date>2004-07-15</date><risdate>2004</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>14</issue><spage>3971</spage><epage>3976</epage><pages>3971-3976</pages><issn>0013-936X</issn><eissn>1520-5851</eissn><coden>ESTHAG</coden><abstract>Two desk-top exercises investigated public acceptability of idealized soiling patterns on buildings, using methodologies typical of the psychology of art. The exercises used a range of simulated soiling patterns around a simple architectural element, a pedimented window. In the first experiment respondents were asked to arrange the images from the “most acceptable” pattern to the “least acceptable”. Results hinted at the importance of certain soiling features in driving the ranking. The second exercise explored the characteristics of soiling patterns that most affected their acceptability. In this experiment the images were organized in pairs. People were requested to choose the pattern they found more acceptable in each pair. Uniform patterns and those which created shadowing effects proved more acceptable. Patterns with non-integer fractal dimension that obscured architectural forms were less acceptable. There was usually a preference for images showing less soiling, whereas vertical features and lumpiness were not as acceptable. Results gave an insight into spatial factors that might influence the acceptability of soiling on real buildings. Thus suggesting it is necessary to consider both the level and the distribution of soiling when trying to gauge public reaction.</abstract><cop>Washington, DC</cop><pub>American Chemical Society</pub><pmid>15298208</pmid><doi>10.1021/es0353762</doi><tpages>6</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0013-936X
ispartof Environmental science & technology, 2004-07, Vol.38 (14), p.3971-3976
issn 0013-936X
1520-5851
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_14707175
source MEDLINE; ACS Publications
subjects Aesthetics
Applied sciences
Architecture
Architecture - methods
Building failures (cracks, physical changes, etc.)
Buildings
Buildings. Public works
Computer Simulation
Computer-Aided Design
Durability. Pathology. Repairing. Maintenance
Environmental Pollutants
Esthetics
Exact sciences and technology
Simulation
title Aesthetics of Simulated Soiling Patterns on Architecture
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-06T21%3A04%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Aesthetics%20of%20Simulated%20Soiling%20Patterns%20on%20Architecture&rft.jtitle=Environmental%20science%20&%20technology&rft.au=Grossi,%20Carlota%20M&rft.date=2004-07-15&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=14&rft.spage=3971&rft.epage=3976&rft.pages=3971-3976&rft.issn=0013-936X&rft.eissn=1520-5851&rft.coden=ESTHAG&rft_id=info:doi/10.1021/es0353762&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E779160971%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=230130109&rft_id=info:pmid/15298208&rfr_iscdi=true