To follow up the Gestalt view, I think head/tail breaks creates less
ambiguous pattern unlike this one
http://www.moillusions.com/2006/04/people-trapped-inside-wall.html
The problem with the "People trapped inside the wall" is that
figure/ground is around 50-50 (i.e., 50% versus 50%), while the less
ambiguous head/tail breaks lies on the unbalanced minority-majority
contrast. This way with head/tail breaks, figure is easily distinguished
from the ground with less ambiguity.
On 12/21/2012 8:07 AM, Bin Jiang wrote:
> Stephen, yes, I fully agree with on the bit "Gestalt" view.
>
> In one of my talks on head/tail breaks, I summarized its advantages,
> one of which (see slide 22
> http://www.dagstuhl.de/mat/Files/12/12512/12512.JiangBin.Slides.pdf)
> is figure/ground perception. Thanks for the interesting link, and I
> will read it.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Bin
> On 12/21/2012 7:37 AM, Stephen Read - BK wrote:
>> David, Bin Jiang
>>
>> The 'large artefacts' stand out from a background of 'small artefacts'.
>> What Bin Jiang is talking about is a condition of perception. There is
>> something a bit 'Gestalt' about what he is saying or starting to say and
>> something a bit "Structure of Behaviour' about what David is saying to
>> him. I recommend for a possible quick fix the Stanford entry on
>> Merleau-Ponty http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/merleau-ponty/
>>
>> Stephen
>>
>>
>> On 20/12/2012 20:41, "Bin Jiang" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>
>>> David,
>>>
>>> See my comments below:
>>> On 12/20/2012 8:20 PM, David Seamon wrote:
>>>> Bin,
>>>>
>>>> From what I understand, you describe the heart of your argument as
>>>> follows:
>>>>
>>>> I am arguing the scaling, or the city itself, is the first and
>>>> foremost
>>>> effect for generating the image of the city.
>>>>
>>>> What I don't understand (nor can I find a description of in your
>>>> paper)
>>>> is what experientially and practically you mean by this "scaling."
>>> Scaling refers to the pattern of far more small city artifacts than
>>> large one, or more precisely, the recurring structure of far more small
>>> things than large ones.
>>>> From what I can gather, you claim this scaling on the basis of
>>>> quantitative pattern, but what I want to know is what this scaling
>>>> means
>>>> FOR YOU AS YOU EXPERIENCE A PARTICULAR CITY?
>>> There are far more short streets than long ones, far less-connected
>>> streets than well-connected ones, far more low buildings than high
>>> buildings, ..... These are what I experienced a particular city.
>>>> Why not start there: How does this scaling work FOR YOU as you
>>>> experience the Swedish city where you are living? Have you been
>>>> able to
>>>> find this process in your own urban experiences?
>>> Yes, indeed, I sense it in my own experiences. Besides what I said
>>> above, there are far more less-familiar locations than well-familiar
>>> ones in the city I am living.
>>>> I may be just thick headed here, and perhaps someone else on the list
>>>> serve has a clearer picture of what you're doing and can offer more
>>>> useful help.
>>> Do my comments make sense to you? Can anyone in the list help out?
>>>
>>> Cheers.
>>>
>>> Bin
>>>> David Seamon
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Bin Jiang" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 12:36:14 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [SPACESYNTAX] The image of the city
>>>>
>>>> Hi, David,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your advice. Herewith my feedback on your comments. Other
>>>> readers may have the same concerns, so I put the feedback publicly.
>>>> On 12/20/2012 6:23 PM, David Seamon wrote:
>>>>> Bin,
>>>>>
>>>>> I looked at this new link but, from what I can tell, the article is
>>>>> the same as the one at the earlier link.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have to say I don't understand what you're arguing.
>>>> The central argument is the image of the city out of the scaling of
>>>> city
>>>> artifacts or locations, as the title indicated.
>>>>> You really don't offer a convincing justification for why this scalar
>>>>> focus is so important (note your justification is a brief two
>>>>> sentences
>>>>> that really aren't clear in what they mean!).
>>>> In which case, you have to refer to the full paper of the preprint
>>>> (arXiv:1209.1112).
>>>>> As I said to you in the last email, I really don't think one's
>>>>> "conscious" image of a place is that crucial in knowing that place or
>>>>> traversing that place.
>>>> As indicated in the paper, I was not talking about one's "conscious"
>>>> image of a place, BUT all's "conscious" image of a place. In other
>>>> words, I was not talking about individual's image of the city that
>>>> could
>>>> vary from person to person, but collective image of the city so to
>>>> speak.
>>>>> Phenomenologically, what is needed is a thorough developmental study
>>>>> of how people, experientially, come to know a new place and how an
>>>>> unrelated set of environmental elements come to cohere in some
>>>>> organized understanding of place. But, still, below all this, is the
>>>>> power of body-subject, which you provide no context for whatsoever.
>>>>>
>>>>> I am sorry but I am really not sure what you are arguing makes sense.
>>>> I am arguing the scaling, or the city itself, is the first and
>>>> foremost
>>>> effect for generating the image of the city.
>>>>> And I especially don't see your jump to using the axial maps and the
>>>>> red "lines" as somehow the scalar mechanism.
>>>> Note that this is NOT about axial line analysis nor space syntax
>>>> research, but how scaling has important effect on the image of the
>>>> city.
>>>> Axial lines are used as proxy for the city artifacts, which
>>>> demonstrate
>>>> the scaling property.
>>>>> I agree that, in Lynch's research, paths were the dominant elements
>>>>> for most people, and the paths usually "imaged" were the most
>>>>> integrated pathways. But I still think that is "after-the-fact"
>>>>> knowledge in relation to what successful traversal of a place is
>>>>> experientially (and thus phenomenologically).
>>>> The concepts behind the image of the city are imageability and
>>>> legibility, while paths and other city elements are those with high
>>>> imageability and legibility.
>>>>> I hope you'll read my GEOGRAPHY OF THE LIFEWORLD, because it was my
>>>>> first effort to point out the considerable weaknesses of any
>>>>> cognitive
>>>>> approach to spatial behavior and environmental conception. The
>>>>> book is
>>>>> available in its entirety at my university website. The link is:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.arch.ksu.edu/seamon/books_intro.htm
>>>> Surely I will read your work with great interest.
>>>>> Sorry not to be more positive about your work. I just think you
>>>>> should
>>>>> be careful and not spend a lot of time on a "theory" that may not be
>>>>> accurate.
>>>> I welcome comments in particular negative comments on my work.
>>>>
>>>> Cheers.
>>>>
>>>> Bin
>>>>> David Seamon
>>>>>
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: "Bin Jiang" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>> To: [log in to unmask]
>>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 9:56:17 AM
>>>>> Subject: [SPACESYNTAX] The image of the city
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi, I thought this paper might be of interest to some of you:
>>>>> http://arxiv.org/abs/1212.3703
>>>>>
>>>>> With this, I am humbly looking forward to your comments and
>>>>> criticisms
>>>>> in particular.
>>>>>
>>>>> Happy holidays to you all!
>>>>>
>>>>> Bin
>>>>>
>>>>
>
--
--------------------------------------------------------
Bin Jiang
Division of Geomatics, KTH Research School
Department of Technology and Built Environment
University of Gävle, SE-801 76 Gävle, Sweden
Phone: +46-26-64 8901 Fax: +46-26-64 8758
Email: [log in to unmask] Web: http://fromto.hig.se/~bjg/
--------------------------------------------------------
European Associate Editor
Computers, Environment and Urban Systems: An International Journal
ICA Commission: https://sites.google.com/site/commissionofica/
Geomatics Program: https://sites.google.com/site/geomaticsprogram/
ICA Workshop: https://sites.google.com/site/icaworkshop2013/
SENSORCITY: https://sites.google.com/site/sensorcityproject/
|
