- The Bartlett

U n i v e r s i t y
C o l l e g e
L o n d o n
MSc Built Environment: Advanced Architectural Studies 2004 - 2005
Entering, identifying, and moving:
The spatial experience and exploratory behaviour in entrance space
YU-HSUAN YU
CONTENTS
Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………01
Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………….....02
Spatial Transition………………………………………………………………………………………...04
Historical Museum with New Emphases…................................................................................09
Research Methods………………………..………………………………………………………….....14
Findings…………………………………………………………………………………………………..35
Discussion……………………………………………………………………………………………….46
Conclusion……………………………………………………………………………………………....50
Bibliography…………………………………………………………………………………………….52
Appendix………………………………………………………………………………………………...54
MSc Advanced Architectural Studies 2004 – 2005: the Built Environment Report
i
ILLUSTRATIONS
01 Locations of new entrance buildings………………………………………………….……………11
02 Tourist plan……………………………………………………………………………….………..….11
03 Photo: the publicity visible area from a vantage point……………………………….………..….11
04 Viewing angle of a directional isovist…………………………………………………………...….15
05 The map of isovist generated points, the Louvre Museum………………………………………16
06 Directional isovists, the Louvre Museum………………………………………………………..…16
07 The map of isovist generated points, the Museumsinsel……………………………….………..17
08 Directional isovists, the Museumsinsel………………………………………………….……...….17
09 Gate count, 09.30 – 11.30, the Lovure Museum……………………………………….………....19
10 Gate count, 11.30 – 13.30, the Louvre Museum………………………………………….…..…..20
11 Gate count, 14.00 – 16.00, the Louvre Museum………………………………………….…...….21
12 Gate count, 16.00 – 18.00, the Louvre Museum………………………………………………….22
13 Gate count, 10.00 – 12.00, the Museumsinsel…………………………………………………….23
14 Gate count, 12.00 – 14.00, the Museumsinsel…………………………………………………….24
15 Gate count, 14.00 – 16.00, the Museumsinsel…………………………………………………….25
16 Gate count, 16.00 – 18.00, the Museumsinsel…………………………………………………….26
17 The map of gates of entry number counting………………………………………………………..27
18 Charts of entry number counting………………………………………………………….…………27
19 The entrance layout, the Napoleon Hall of the Louvre Museum…………………………………29
20 VGA: connectivity measure……………………………………………………………………..……29
21 VGA: integration (HH) measure…………………………………………………………………..….29
22 VGA: control measure………………………………………………………………………….……..30
23 VGA: controllability measure…………………………………………………………………………30
MSc Advanced Architectural Studies 2004 – 2005: the Built Environment Report
ii
24 Movement distributors………………………………………………..……………………………...32
25 People following with stop behaviour recording………………………………………………..…33
26 Static snapshot at 14.30………………………………………………………………………….....34
27 Potential approaching routes towards the Pyramid……………………………………………....36
28 The map of directional isovists generated points, the Louvre Museum…………………..……36
29 Directional isovists along the potential approaching routes……………………………..………37
30 Photo: towards the Pyramid via Passage Richelieu………………………………………..……38
31 Movement axes, the Museumsinsel……………………………………………………………….39
32 Museum buildings and their entrances………………………………………………………...….39
33 Directional isovists of each viewpoint, the Museumsinsel………………………………...…….40
34 Results of people following with stop behaviour recording……………………………..……….42
35 Locations of stop behaviours…………………………………………………………..…………...43
36 Scatters of visual integration measure………………………………………………………….....45
37 Scatters of connectivity-integration values………………………………………………..………45
MSc Advanced Architectural Studies 2004 – 2005: the Built Environment Report
iii
Entering, identifying, and moving:
The spatial experience and exploratory behaviour in entrance space
Abstract
This paper sets up to discuss the spatial characteristics of a new entrance construction in a
historical museum complex in terms of spatial transition experience. It brings out two central
issues. The first is the significance or non-significance of a new entrance to the existing
museum building. The contrast of appearance and how it is perceived by viewers may
contribute to visiting behaviour. The second is about the spatial experience after entering. An
entrance hall of a museum is a transitional space to receive the public and orient visitors to
their interested art works. This is a particularly explicit function of any state museum with
well-known collections, such as the Louvre Museum, to deal with considerable daily visitors.
This study is concerned with how the spatial transition results in spatial experience, and how it
is reflected in individual spatial exploration. It mainly focuses on the study of the Pyramid of
the Louvre Museum, Paris, together with part of comparative study of the New Entrance
Building of the Museumsinsel, Berlin, which is still under construction. Two projects are
studied with Space Syntax methodology coupled with on-site observations. The results
indicate an explicit sequential viewing characteristic with movement towards the Pyramid, yet
the relation between the spatial experience and exploratory behaviour inside the entrance hall
is implicit.
Keywords
Entrance hall, museum, spatial perception, exploratory behaviour
Acknowledgements
I wish to thank Dr. Ruth Conroy Dalton who has been the supervisor at this study; Rosamund
Diamond who has commented on this study in early stage; Patricia Ribeiro from the course
who has assisted at on-site observations; Nina Helten and Wolfgang Baumeister for David
Chipperfield Architects, Berlin, who have provided information and maps to conduct this study.
1
Introduction
Theories of embodied cognition and theories of perception have dictated that space is
constantly experienced by interactions between the body and the environment. Architectural
experience is an event involving the interrelation of the perception, the movement, and the
situated environment. This paper is concerned with spatial experience and how it may
contribute to movement behaviour, particularly in an entrance space of a museum.
An entrance space functions as reception for visitors; it is a place where a person first
confronts with a perhaps unfamiliar space. The act of entering is simultaneously accompanied
with the process of identifying, coupled with the act of moving. Based on this hypothesis, it
provides a ground to discuss the relation between spatial experience and exploratory
behaviour. Under this proposition, this paper is mainly concerned with an entrance space of a
museum for further discussions. A functional entrance hall is aimed at receiving the public and
guiding them to different galleries. It is almost a transitional space with mass information in
regard to what to see and where to go. The performance of perceiving and moving is therefore
essential in an entrance space. People are purposely oriented to a target place.
An entrance itself has to be identifiable because of its very nature as a first place to go and a
first place to explore the rest. To be recognised can be achieved either by supplementary
instructions, such as signage, or by architecture itself together with environmental factors. The
latter is obvious in the case of a new entrance construction to an existing museum complex,
for instance, the Pyramid of the Louvre Museum. This paper suggests that this type of
construction is aimed at being perceivable in terms of functioning. Therefore, how it is
identified by the interaction between the body and the situated environment, both exteriorly
and interiorly, has arisen as a research question.
2
In the following chapters, a body of literature related to theories of spatial perception,
embodiment, and movement is reviewed. It is suggested that this trinity arises the architectural
experience and contributes to the space navigation.
This paper further reviews the transformation of historical museums concerned with new
emphases to serve an increasing population. It also gives an introduction of the specified
study subjects. This research mainly focuses on the study of the Pyramid, coupled with partial
comparative discussions with the New Entrance Building of the Museumsinsel, Berlin.
The research method describes the methodology used in two sub-studies. Space Syntax
methodology, mainly isovsits and visual graph analysis, is applied to describe the spatial
characteristic of seeing. It is paired with empirical data from on-site observations. First, the
movement pattern within the whole museum area is studied to pick out any possible journey of
spatial experience towards the entrance building. Second, the individual exploratory behaviour
inside the entrance space is observed to give a picture of movement pattern, stop behaviour,
and spatial experience.
The findings indicate that a sequential viewing property towards the Pyramid may contribute to
the visiting pattern of the area, and vice versa. In the case of the Museumsinsel, the spatial
characteristic of seeing is fragmented that the New Entrance Building will only be perceived at
specified locations. As for the entrance space, the spatial experience and its relation to the
exploratory behaveiour are rather implicit because of other spatial or aspatial factors. A further
comparative study of the entrance space may be required to investigate in detail in terms of
perceiving and moving, cognitive mapping, and physical setting.
3
Spatial Transition
This chapter reviews a body of literature relating to spatial perception, embodiment experience,
and movement in space, which together contribute to the theories of spatial transition. It is
further followed by a chapter of a general review of how historical museums adapted to
current trends in museology. Both lay the groundwork for the following study.
Architecture is composed of a series of spaces accommodating a set of events. The
continuous unfolding of spaces, accompanying the revealing of new objects and events,
shapes a consecutive spatial experience. Experiencing space therefore is a dynamic process
on account of its “verb essence” as Pallasmaa (1996, p.45) describes. Space is actively or
passively experienced with running interactions and the close interrelationship among body,
imagination, and environment. Body action, spatial perception, and living environment
comprise spatial transition and its experience.
This paper sets up to discuss the potential spatial transition experience towards and within an
entrance place. An entrance implies a spatial transition of traversing a boundary between two
spaces. Passing through a door or gate makes up an evident experience of spatial transition,
going from one space to another. A door or gate is a rather simple and necessary element of
the built environment. It is a portal of the next place beyond the boundary. It links spaces
sequentially, from outside to inside or among interior space units. Yet the door or entrance
should not be considered only as a control device of boundaries. Architecturally the entrance
is not merely a defined physical form, but can refer to the passage by which a place may be,
as well as the area beyond, the threshold. It is the first and foremost interface between the
body and a built complex. It is the mostly start to look out the overall spatial configuration in
buildings. In other words, the entrance is the place one starts to explore a situated
4
environment, both mentally and physically. Cook (1996, p.41), in his essay “Entering and
Identifying”, describes this spatial property by speaking of the interior of the entrance area as
“a catapult and lookout toward the rest of the building”. Being in an entrance ensemble
therefore is a beginning of human-environment interaction within a specified space. The act of
entering is a ceremony of unfolding space. The spatial experience of entering a place should
be considered not merely at the moment of crossing, but also of exploring the entrance space.
Spatial transition involves a perceptual process. It is about how a body experiences and
familiarises with a situated space by any adequate information from space itself and other
physical settings. Gibson (1986, p.147) considers spatial perception as “direct perception”,
and a process of “information pickup” by exploratory activities, such as looking around, moving
around and looking at things. Information, defined by Gibson (1986, p.242), refers to
“specifications of the observer’s environment,” which includes the space, objects, and together
with events. It refers to things contributing to place-leaning in the perceptual process. Gibson
(1986, p.149) further recognises the “active” interactions between human and the environment
by speaking of perceiving as “an act not a response, an act of attention not a triggered
impression.” In other words, what to be perceived are things the environment affords, relating
to environmental survey and familiarity instead of those of aesthetic impression. By implication,
the perceptual process involves the act and meaning of detecting rather than of having
sensations. Gibson’s perspective of spatial perception is particular essential to this study. It is
because that an entrance space of a museum theoretically functions as spatial or aspatial
information delivering space of a building complex to comers.
Perceiving is literally a “here-and-now” mind-body act. Gibson (1986, p.240) describes it as “a
psychosomatic act of a living observer.” In other words, perceiving a space is a mental
process with body actions in a situated environment. Bloomer and Moore (1977, p.ix)
5
introduce architecture as a body-centred art rather than an abstract visual art. Their viewpoint
of architecture also points out the mind-body relationship in experiencing space. They
recognise the inseparable mutual relations among the human body, the body’s inhabitation,
and experience of place. The French philosopher, Maurice-Ponty, considered the human body
as the centre of the experiential world. To quote Merleau-Ponty (2004, p.56) from “The world
of perception”: “…man is a mind with a body, a being who can only get to the truth of things
because its body is, as it were, embedded in those thing.” He described architectural
experience as an embodied one. The cognition of the environment is based on a fact of a
body in space, a mind-body located in time and place. Architecture strengthens not only the
existential experience of being in the world, but also the experience of self. As Arnard said, “I
am the space, where I am.” (Quoted by Pallasmma, 1996, p.46) With the spatial experience
the observer identifies the environment and the self is re-identified within the place. The
body-centred experience and the inextricable relationship of the body and the space complete
the spatial perception.
To repeat, spatial transition involves spatial perception. Spatial perception is about information
detecting by a mind-body located in time and place. In order to perceive an asynchronous
representation of a spatial system, movement in space is essential and it further constructs an
exploratory behaviour. Spatial experience is almost obtained during spatial exploration.
Gibson (1986, p.197) suggests people not only seeing the environment in the pauses between
movement, but also during locomotion. Movement is crucial to the spatial perceiving process
because people hardly do place-learning just from one single vantage point in space. It is
difficult to cognise an environment completely while stationary because of the limitation of
visual field, distance, physical boundaries, such as walls or objects above eye-level on the
ground, and so forth. The body moves in order to understand where it is, what the place is like,
and decide to where it goes. Gibson (1986, p.223) describes the inseparable relation between
6
locomotion and spatial perception. It is a complementary relation that people perceive to move,
and move to perceive. It is a mutual cause-and-effect that the perception guides the
movement, and moving around allows for adequate acquaintance with the place. This paper
suggests that the inextricably-bounded relation is explicit while shifting between places. The
crossing implies a difference in space, actions of entering and leaving, and body-centred
experience. Entering is an act involving a spatial transition from place to place, usually from
the known to the unknown. The act of passing through a boundary consists of information
changing between what to be seen and unseen. Spatial information pickup is accompanied by
gradually approaching the door to the next place. Peponis et al. (2003, p.4) describe a similar
idea by speaking of “approaching towards the threshold as a gradual movement from areas
providing less visual information to areas providing more information.” Yet this is not saying
moving as information gain and loss process. What is lost is the perceiving of things out of the
visual field that one can easily turn the head back to see again if necessary.
People move around in order to gain any adequate acquaintance of the environment. As
described above, one perceives in order to move, and moves in order to perceive. In addition,
some theories suggest that architectural elements function as stimulus to movement. A door
may imply the act of entering; an end implies turning back. Pallasmaa (1996, p.37) proposes
the inseparable relation between bodily reaction and architectural experience. He considers a
bodily reaction as a consequence of an implied action. Bergson (Quoted by Pallasmaa, 1996,
p.44) also suggests the body reaction to the objects in the surrounding. The body movement
therefore may depict the way of perceiving the place and objects. Based on this concept, this
paper applies the study of movement pattern, both collective and individual, to exam the
potential spatial experience in an entrance space.
In summary, perceiving is a dynamic process, a constant interaction and interrelation between
7
the body and the environment. The process of perceiving is implicit, yet it may result in the
exploratory behaviour. This paper is concerned with spatial transition which involves spatial
perception and movement towards the entrance and within the entrance place of a museum.
Further, to some extent, an entrance space in a museum is a relatively structured environment
with intentional physical settings for receiving and guiding the public. How it is perceived and
used may further result in its functioning.
In the following chapter, it reviews the transformation of museums in terms of functioning in
modern era. This paper suggests that the modern emphases, to some degree, give a different
view about the entrance and may further form a different spatial characteristic. A general
introduction of the study subjects is also given to lay the groundwork of the research.
8
Historical Museum with New Emphases
Based on the theories of perception and theories of embodied cognition, this paper sets up to
understand the relation of perceiving and moving in the entrance space of a museum complex,
especially about the new entrance to an existing historical museum. In the following, a general
review of modern development of museology is given in order to fully build up the study
intention. The study subjects are also introduced.
A museum intends to fulfil cultural and educational functions. It is to some extent on behalf of
cultural industry of any states. Yet museums today have confronted with different aspects of
conflicts, including social, political, cultural and economic ones. Steiner (1995, p.274) points
out what role the museum as an institution should play is a modern issue for museology.
Museums today are inextricably bounded with societal values, such as market requirements of
the cultural industry and the mechanisms of utilization. A museum is “a place for everyone” to
have information and events relating to a special field. The conception of a museum as a
public space inevitably brings about the issue of the public success in the political aspect. In
consequence, museums, as well as leisure parks, compete for visitors. Steiner (1995, p.279)
argues that the cultural industry of the museum shall adopt the reception behaviour of the
leisure and theme parks. This current trend is presented explicitly in modern museums
coupled with leisure infrastructures, for instances, bookstores, artistic shops, restaurants, and
cafes. The cultural industry of the museum is commercialised. To quote Bouman (1994, p.70),
“Culture is exploited with the help of commerce, and commerce thrives as a result of support
from culture.” The museum today is a result of the commodification of culture as Diamond
(2004) proposes.
This brings out a new development of museology. As Steiner (1995, p.281) describes, modern
9
museums have become “enterprises” providing events for the cultural industry. Museums
today inevitably confront with issues of redefining themselves, and of recognising their
economic value. This raises the question that how the historical museums adapt themselves
to new emphases. Historical museums refer to both purpose-built buildings, for example, the
Museumsinsel in Berlin, and those transformed from other types of space, such as the Louvre
Museum in Paris, which used to be a palace. A common feature of the historical museum is
the lack of space to accommodate the infrastructure. In addition, they might suffer from an
inefficient access system to circulate the increasing numbers of visitors.
Biasini et al. (1989, p.20) have reviewed the Louvre Museum before the Grand Louvre project.
It was indicated that the inadequacies of access of the Louvre Museum hampered the public.
Since the nature of the public has changed that numbers of visitors grew rapidly with
multiplicity, the museum must meet the requirements of different visitors. An official report of
the Louvre Museum before the new constructions pointed out main inadequacies which
included access difficulties, inadequacies of the spaces for receiving the public, inadequate
internal circulation with complex and poorly signposted routes for visitors. Therefore, the aim
of the Grand Louvre project was to facilitate the reorganisation of the collection and also to
restore the building. It also set up to provide the future museum with the means of functioning
and of receiving the public. The architect, I. M. Pei sorted out the solution of a sunken
entrance hall with glass pyramidal cover above the ground level. The centred-located main
entrance allows for reductions in walking distances between galleries and also for an
increasing capacity to house basic facilities. (Fig.1) With vertical and horizontal circulation
systems toward each gallery, the entrance hall is almost directly connected to each exhibition
wing. In addition, with signage or information boards, visitors are quickly informed where their
interested art works locate. (Fig.2; Fig.3)
10
Fig.1
Locations of new entrance
buildings in two museum
complex. The Pyramid of the
Louvre is central-located,
while the New Entrance
Building of the Museumsinsel is situated by the
riverside
among
three
museum buildings.
Fig.2 Tourist plan. A part of official information from the Louvre Museum. S: the viewpoint of Fig. 3
Fig.3 The visible publicity area while standing at S with 180 degrees viewing angle. Each gallery is indicated with signage and posters of gallery collections.
11
The Museumsinsel, Berlin, has been confronted with issues similar to the Louvre Museum.
Four existing museums, including Altes Museum, Neues Museum, Bode Museum, and
Pergamon Museum, were all purpose-built during 1825 to 1930 for housing archaeological
collections. The architect, David Chipperfield, who is in charge of the renovation, describes
them as “solitary buildings” because each individual building is turned away from others with
the entrance facing different directions. They are all individual in terms of functioning and of
receiving the public.
An intention to internally link these buildings is based on the idea of reuniting the dispersed
collections in different museums. An exhibition corridor, namely the “archaeological
promenade”, is buried below the ground to connect four museum buildings and a new
entrance building. On the other hand, although these historical museums are all purpose-built,
they still lack the infrastructure to fulfil the functional requirements of modern museology.
Therefore, a new entrance building is planned to house these facilities, and also provide a
direct link to the promenade. Unlike the Pyramid of the Louvre Museum situated in the centre
of the museum complex, the new entrance building of the Museumsinsel is located in a less
significant site among three other museums. (Fig.1) This paper suggests that the architectural
intention of this additional construction seems to be slightly different from the Pyramid.
This paper makes an intention to study the spatial perception and movement pattern in the
entrance space. It is because that an entrance hall is a structured place with signage and
other environmental factors, explicitly or implicitly, to guide visitors to their target places. In the
previous chapter, it is proposed that people pick up information both from the physical
environment and from objects in the environment to be oriented to the goal. Ideally spatial
information can be derived from several environmental factors, such as light, lightings, floor
surface, texture, or signage. The body movement is implied to be subconsciously affected by
12
those environmental factors. For example, a place with strong light and lightings may imply its
significance as a place for gathering, such as a hall or lobby. Light and lightings can also be
an indication of where to go next. Furthermore, changing texture or floor surface is usually a
sign of a different area or situation. Bloomer and Moore (1977, p.71) consider changing of
texture as a signal to special events and as a trigger to slow or quicken one’s pace. In addition,
in a museum entrance, signage is heavily used to instruct the direction explicitly. This paper
suggests that an entrance space of a museum is well-structured with other environmental
factors for its fundamental function of receiving and guiding the public. This spatial property is
even explicit in a new entrance building of an existing historical museum. It is a purpose-built
entrance as a start of spatial navigation to the rest of the museum. This study mainly focuses
on the Pyramid of the Louvre Museum, combined with a part of comparative discussion of the
New Entrance Building of the Museumsinsel, which is now still under construction.
In the following chapter, it describes how the research was conducted. Spatial syntactical
analysis and observation method are applied to study the relation of perceiving and moving
specified on the two subjects.
13
Research Methods
This chapter describes the research methodology used in the study. This study sets up to
understand how visitors potentially perceive an entrance building situated in a museum
complex coupled with the study of movement pattern and exploration behaviours within the
entrance space. On-site observations and spatial syntactic analyses based on Space Syntax1
methodology are applied to conduct the study.
This study is divided into two sub-studies relating to the issue of perceiving and moving in
different context scales, including outside of the whole museum area and inside of the
entrance space. The new entrance of the Louvre Museum, the Pyramid, is an actually
perceivable object in the museum complex. This characteristic enhances its impression as a
portal to the mass art collections. An entrance, by implication, is a connection between the
exterior and the interior. Since receiving the public is one of the main architectural purposes of
the entrance space in the museum complex, the spatial perceptual characteristic of the
entrance in the environment has to be considered first. Directional isovists and the gate
method2 are applied to study the relationship of the visual characteristic and the potential
movement pattern within the area. The purpose is to understand how the entrance and its
environment are explored with any specific viewing property.
Directional isovists are applied to study the seeing characteristics while approaching the new
entrance within the museum districts. An isovist is a two-dimensional polygonal representation
of visible space generated from a viewpoint. It represents the potential visual field in a situated
Space Syntax is a series of computer tools, that is, a set of techniques of describing and analysing spatial
configurations, which is used to understand how buildings and cities work. The generic idea behind all the tools is
to look at space as patterns of simultaneous relations.
2 The gate method is used for recording observations of the amount of moving people. It allows researchers to
collect a great deal of data which may depict a general image of movement pattern within a specific area.
1
14
space. An isovist area simply refers to the area one can see from where he or she is standing.
Based on the hypothesis of the interrelation between perceiving and moving, directional
isovists are used to illustrate the seeing properties along the path toward the target place,
namely the entrance hall in this study. Each directional isovist represents the frontally visible
area within 60 degrees viewing angle3 at a single viewpoint. (Fig.4) Using directional isovists
instead of path isovists, which are generated with 360 degrees viewing angle, is based on the
nature of the research question. Approaching the entrance building is a one-directional act
coupled with the central visual perception. This study is concerned with the spatial perception
and movement towards the entrance but not any potential spatial navigation in all directions
within the area. In this study, direction isovists are generated at each junction between the
museum complex and its urban context, and each potential turning point towards the target
place, namely the entrance building, in the environment. (Fig.5; Fig.7) Together they represent
the possible visual experience of a journey to the entrance building with any approaching
routes. (Fig.6; Fig.8)
Fig. 4 Viewing angle of a directional isovist.
The arrow points to the gaze direction.
Each isovist represents a frontally 60
degrees viewing angle, with 30 degrees
each side.
The gate method, as described above, was used to observe the movement pattern in the
exterior area of the museum complex. Each gate was located along any possible route
In general, each eye has 90 degrees viewing angle to its own side and 30-45 degrees to the opposite. There is
a frontally visual overlapping area with 60-90 degrees viewing angle. This study applies this concept to define a
frontally central visual field with 60 degrees for generating each directional isovist. With this central vision one
should be able to detect the environment with minimum errors.
3
15
Fig. 5 A direction isovist (a frontally visual field with 60 degrees viewing angle) is generated at each location.
From that, sequential isovists properties are constructed along the route, from the surroundings
Fig 6 Directional isovists along a route
towards the Pyramid. P10-N5-N7.
(P1-P12) towards the Pyramid. For example, the route from P1 will be P1-N1-N2-N3-N5-N7.
16
Fig. 7 the Museumsinsel, Berlin. Directional isovist generated points
Fig. 8 Directional isovists along a route towards
the New Entrance Building. P8-P5
17
approaching the entrance within the area. Different categorisations of moving people, such as
woman or man, adult or elder, were not taken into consideration. This was because that this
study was mainly aimed at having the idea of the collective movement pattern within the area.
The study sites were used by considerable numbers of visitors, therefore, each gate was
observing for 3 minutes in both directions, and four rounds a day. The observation periods
were set up according to the open hours4 of the museums in each case. Both were done on
Wednesdays.5 (Fig. 9-16) With this data, further statistic calculations of entry numbers into the
museum area from different street junctions were done to indicate potentially movement
distributors for entering and exploring the sites. A similar concept was applied to the building
entrances to depict the use pattern specified on entering the buildings. It was used to indicate
the journey end. (Fig. 17; Fig. 18) Yet this idea was not applicable to the study of the
Museumsinsel due to the fact that some museums were closed for the refurbishment and
some areas were not accessible at the time. The data collected by the gate method
observation of the Museumsinsel might not correctly depict the flow of people within the
museum district. However this paper suggests that a general idea of movement pattern and its
relation to the surrounding urban context could still be picked out.
In summary, in the first part of this study, the gate method was used to understand the
movement pattern within the area. Directional isovists were applied to present the viewing
property along a journey to the entrance building. By superimposing both data, it is aimed to
explain the relation of perceiving and moving at this urban-architectural scale.
The time period was set up from 9.30-13.30 and 14.00-18.00 for the Louvre Museum; as for the Museumsinsel,
it was from 10.00-18.00.
5 This study supposes that though it would be expected a difference in absolute data value of visitor numbers
between weekdays and the weekend, it is expected no difference in the movement pattern. To repeat, this study
is mainly concerned with the collective pattern of movement within the museum area and how it relates to the
spatial-visual experience of approaching the entrance building.
4
18
Fig. 9 Gate count: the Louvre Museum, 9.30-11.30.
19
Fig. 10 Gate count: the Louvre Museum, 11.30-13.30.
20
Fig. 11 Gate count: the Louvre Museum, 14.00-16.00
21
Fig. 12 Gate count: the Louvre Museum, 16.00-18.00
22
Fig. 13 Gate count: the
Museumsinsel,
10.00-12.00
23
Fig. 14 Gate count: the
Museumsinsel,
12.00-14.00
24
Fig. 15 Gate count: the
Museumsinsel,
14.00-16.00
25
Fig. 16 Gate count: the
Museumsinsel,
16.00-18.00
26
Fig 17 Gate locations of entry number counting. It has to be noted that gate E3 provides
Fig. 18 Charts of entry number counting. The upper has shown that entrances
a direct access to the building from the street without entering into the museum area.
into the museum area were more evenly used though with three dominant
It is one of the entrance to the shopping centre, Galerie du Carrousel, which is also
gates (A, L, K). The lower indicated the main entrance, the Pyramid (E1),
connected to the entrance hall.
was relatively heavily used than others.
27
The second part of the study is to understand the spatial-visual experience, its relation to the
exploratory behaviour and pattern of use inside the entrance building. It mainly focuses on the
entrance hall, the Napoleon Hall, under the Pyramid. (Fig. 19)
The method used for visual property study is based on Visibility Graphs constructed for all
locations on evenly space grids6, covering the public visible areas in the entrance hall. Isovists
of visibility field are generated from each location to produce a visual graph of all direct
connections between them. From that, further analyses are processed to describe the visual
properties of the space, including global and local measures7. The syntactic measures used
for this analysis include connectivity, integration, control, and controllability.
Connectivity of each node is the number of all other nodes directly linked to it. It indicates the
filed of direct visibility from each node. (Fig. 20) Integration is a global measure derived from
mean depth8. It indicates the mean number of changes of direction required to get to or see all
other nodes in the system. (Hillier and Hanson, 1984) (Fig. 21) The integration measure can be
used to describe the global property of seeing specified in a space. Both control and
controllability are local measures. The control measure (Fig. 22) picks out visually dominant
areas, and the controllability measure (Fig. 23) picks out the area that may be visually
dominated. (Turner, 2004)
This paper suggests these syntactical measures of visibility are related to the spatial
exploration behaviour in a space. As mentioned in the previous chapter, it is suggested that
people move in order to perceive, and perceive in order to move. The ideas of what is seen
The grid size was set up as 0.8 m.
Global measures are syntactic measures based on preparing shortest paths from each node to all other nodes
within the visibility graph. Local measures are based on the relationships between each node and the nodes
directly connected to it. (Turner, 2004)
8
Mean depth of each node is the average of the shortest path with the fewest number of turns to every other
node within the graph.
6
7
28
Fig. 19 The layout of the entrance hall (Napoleon Hall), the Pyramid. I for Information desk.
Fig. 20 Visibility Graph: Connectivity measure
Fig. 21 Visibility Graph Analysis: Integration (HH) measure
29
Fig. 22 Visibility Graph Analysis: Control measure
Fig. 23 Visibility Graph Analysis: Controllability measure
30
and where to go are bounded together. Visual graph analysis is applied to describe the
viewing property of the study space, and is further coupled with observations to exam the
relation of seeing and moving.
The methods of people following 9 and static snapshot 10 were applied to observe the
exploration behaviour and use pattern within the entrance hall. For people following, each
subject was followed from the moment they entered the entrance space till he or she was
oriented to any gallery. There were two entrances considered to be the movement distributors.
(Fig. 24) One was the junction between the shopping centre, Galerie du Carrousel, and the
horizontal corridor, which links to the entrance hall; the other was the grounded escalator
which carried visitors directly from the ground level to the sunken space. Individual movement
was traced with stop behaviour recording. The categories of stop behaviour included looking
for directions, asking for direction, consulting map or signage, and so forth which are all
considered as exploratory behaviours. (Fig. 25) The sample size was 70 with a mix of types of
people. This study further picked out all locations of movement pause specified on direction
looking and map and signage consulting to study the relative visual property.
The method of static snapshot was applied to observe the use pattern in the entrance space,
including stationary and moving activities. It was done one round per hour during the open
hours of the museum. Eight rounds were done in a working day. Static snapshot was used to
depict the use pattern of the entrance area that to some extend it might also indicate the
potential locations for spatial exploration. The behaviour categories were similar to those in
people following, coupled with some other behaviours such as moving, sitting, ticket
People following is the method used to observe the pattern of movement from a specific movement distributor
in the building. It indicates the pattern of movement from a specific location. In this study it is useful for
understanding how people are using and exploring the entrance space.
10 Static snapshot is relevant to recording the use pattern of spaces within buildings. It is used for recording both
stationary and moving activities. Observers will have to walk through the space at a constant rate, in the
meanwhile, noting people on the plan as they pass them.
9
31
purchasing, standing and talking, and so forth. (Fig. 26)
In summary, the study of perceiving and moving within the entrance hall was carried out by
observational data of people following and static snapshot with visual property study of Visual
Graph Analysis. Superimposing these data, this paper is aimed at discussing the potential
interrelation between spatial perception and movement behaviour specified in the Napoleon
Hall, the Pyramid. In the following chapter, further discussions about the findings are
presented, coupled with the analytical and observational data.
Fig. 24
Movement distributors. In this study people were followed from either S1, the grounded
escalator which carries visitors directly from the ground level to the sunken space, or S2
the junction which links to the shopping centre. Visitors enter the museum via the shopping
centre has to pass security check at S2.
32
Fig. 25 People following with stop behaviour
recording. Stop behaviours were recorded to
indicate the actual locations that people
paused for direction looking, map consulting,
or others.
33
Fig. 26 Static snapshot: 14.30 pm, Wednesday. It is
used to depict the pattern of use within the
entrance hall.
34
Findings
This chapter discusses the results of applied analyses together with the empirical data from
on-site observations. It presents the potential relations among spatial-visual experience,
movement pattern, and exploratory behaviours specified on the study cases.
To depict the potential spatial-visual experience within the museum area, the collective
movement pattern was used to pick out the most possible routes towards the entrance
building. In the case of the Louvre Museum, the data11 has shown several gates with strong
tendency of being movement distributors. It also picked out the fact that the main entrance,
the Pyramid, was relatively heavily used by visitors. Based on this statistic, potential
approaching routes were drawn with the movement tendency in the area. (Fig. 27) Directional
isovists were further generated along each path to present isovists properties, which were
about what to perceive in the journey towards the entrance. (Fig. 28; Fig. 29)
The directional isovists properties have shown that the Pyramid was not immediately
perceived, but was revealed gradually with implications. (Fig. 29) For example, if visitors take
the route starting from the front garden (route 1), they first see the similar but smaller geometric
form, the transparent light shade located right above the underground shopping centre.
Further approaching the entrance through N1 to N2, the visual field is still blocked by the
pyramidal light shade, yet the impression of the pyramidal image becomes stronger. It is
perceived as an actual object. This paper suggests that this viewing property implies the
following thing to be seen, the Pyramid located in the centre of the museum complex. By
implication, visitors confront with the entrance building in a sequential visual perception
process. They are oriented to the target with what has already been seen and imagination.
See Fig. 17 and Fig. 18 on page 27. This study has calculated the entry numbers of different junctions
between the streets and the museum area. It is used to depict potentially movement distributors for entering and
exploring the sites.
11
35
Fig. 27 Potential approaching routes towards the Pyramid. It has to be noted that visitors
Fig. 28 (the Same as Fig. 5 shown in previous chapter) Directional isovists generated
taking route 3 may come from the metro station right on the opposite street.
points. The generated sequence of each route are: (R1)P1-N1-N2-N3-N5-N7;
While they approach the Pyramid, they will pass through another entrance on the
(R2)P10-N5-N7; (R3)P2-N9; (R4)P5-N12-P6-N10.
Passage Richelieu. In addition, there are two sub-routes of route 1. Due to the fact
of the symmetric landscape property of the Louvre Museum, it is supposed that
there should have no significant difference of isovist properties between the two
sub-routes.
36
Fig. 29 The directional isovists property
along each potential approaching
routes. Left to right: route 1 to
route 4. The Pyramid was not
immediately perceived, but was
gradually revealed with hints
while one walked towards it.
37
This effect is even more explicit while taking the route 3 to approach the entrance. (Fig. 27)
When visitors enter the Passage Richelieu, the first thing catching their view is the glass
structure of the Pyramid shimmering under the sun and a smaller pyramidal light shade. (Fig.
30) This dual impression may draw them towards the Pyramid to enter the building, though on
their way there is another entrance accessible12. The observed movement pattern has
indicated this phenomenon.
Fig. 30 Towards the Pyramid via
Passage Richelieu (A→
B). The dual impression
of shimmering light and
pyramidal form (A) may
contribute to the
movement towards the
Pyramid.
Yet for the Museumsinsel, Berlin, there is no explicit sequential viewing property while moving
around the area, or towards the New Entrance Building. The movement observation has
shown that there were four main movement axes in this area. (Fig. 31) To some extend they
were rigidly intersected with others. This is probably due to the fact that the spatial
configuration of the museum complex is more grid-like. Though the New Entrance Building is
situated on one of the movement axes, its visual property of being seen is not significant.
Unlike the Pyramid located in the central core, the New Entrance Building is constrained to the
topology of the area that it is going to be built along the riverside among three other museum
buildings. Therefore, it can only be seen at specific stationary viewpoints. (Fig. 33)
See Fig. 17 on page 27 which has shown all entrances into the museum buildings. Visitors can have direct
access to Richelieu Gallery via E2 which is located on the Passage Richelieu.
12
38
Fig. 31 Movement axes. E is the location of the New Entrance Building.
The gate count data has indicated four movement axes in this area.
The upper horizontal axis is connected to the commercial area in
the east-side of the island. The lower one is the extension of the
boulevard, Unter den Linden. The left vertical line is the passage to
the Pergamon Museum.
Fig. 32 Museum buildings and their entrances
39
Fig. 33 Directional isovists generated from each viewpoint, P1–P8. The Museumsinsel, Berlin. (Isovists are generated from those points shown in Fig. 7 on page 17.) There is no explicit sequential
viewing property along the routes towards the New Entrance Building. This is probably due to the fact that the spatial configuration of the area which is more grid-like.
40
The implication for moving towards a target place is even more explicit after entering the
Pyramid. An escalator directly carries visitors down to the Napoleon Hall. One is soon situated
in a relatively well-structured environment with mass information about “where to go.” The
layout of the entrance space is an open plan that most areas are publicity visible and
accessible. Major constructions include a spiral staircase, a U-shape escalator, and the
information desk which is located at the end of the axis of the left horizontal corridor. The
central-located entrance hall of the Louvre Museum provides direct access to each gallery
with different vertical circulation systems which seem easily detectable. (Fig. 19 on page 29) By
implication, the body is constantly encouraged to move around via any horizontal or vertical
circulation.
The results of visibility graph analysis of the entrance space have depicted a few spatial
characteristics of seeing. The connectivity measure has indicated the spatial-visual nature of
this half-free layout that most areas are visually well-connected to neighbouring locations. (Fig.
20, page 29) The local measures of control and controllability have further shown that the place
is both visually controlling and controllable. Most areas can see and be seen. (Fig. 22; Fig.23,
page 30) The visual control measure is about the visual dominance value. The graph has
shown that the junction of the information desk and the corridor has higher visual dominant
value. (Fig. 22, page 30) Comparing to the observational data, it seems to explain why there was
a clustering of the stop behaviour of directional looking. (Fig. 34; Fig. 35) Yet this is a
misinterpretation. The reason of this area with a higher control value is its visual dominance of
the corridor, but not of the public area connected to the galleries. The possible explanation for
the clustering of stop behaviour might be derived from the spatial nature of a junction. A
junction implies a spatial discontinuity that it is where people confront with a new place. By
implication, it functions as a decision making point of route choices. Movement pause for
spatial information seeking at a junction is therefore predictable.
41
Fig. 34 a. Results of people following
with stop behaviour
recording. There are strong
movement flows around the
information desk and to the
Denon Gallery.
Fig. 34 b. Stop behaviour of direction
looking. There is a clustering
located at the junction of the
information desk and the left
horizontal corridor. Movement
pause is more evenly
distributed at the right side of
the plan which has higher
visibility of the whole space.
Fig. 34 c. Stop behaviour of map
consulting. Visitors tended to
make a stop around the
information desk reading the
plan.
42
Fig. 35 Locations of stop
behaviours.The area
around the information
desk was highly
occupied. The stop
behaviour of direction
looking was evenly
distributed in the highly
visual integrated area
as shown in the
integration measure.
43
Visitors tended to stop at comparatively visual integrated locations for direction looking and
map consulting. (Fig. 36) In addition, the scattergrams of connectivity-visual integration (HH)
specified on locations of movement pause have shown a positive co-relation which could be
related to the spatial syntactic characteristic of intelligibility. (Fig. 37) Intelligibility, defined by
Hillier, is measured by analysing the relation between how a complex can be seen from its
parts and what it is like in an overall pattern. (1996, p.313) Based on this idea, it seems that
movement pause tend to happen on locations which may have potential visual property for
perceiving the whole area. The integration measure has picked out a relatively visual
integrated area among the Sully gallery, the entrance escalator, and the spiral staircase. It is
also partly extended towards the Richelieu gallery. (Fig. 21 on page 29) Superimposing the
observational data, there was a tendency of movement pause for directional looking within this
integrated area. (Fig. 35) Results of snapshot observation also picked out the similar
phenomena though implicitly. (Fig. 26 on page 34; also see appendix) This paper suggests that this
area is potentially a decision-making point ensemble where one can get adequate spatial
information about the environment.
The results of people following have depicted that subjects tended to chose Denon gallery as
the start to explore the museums. (Fig. 34) The Denon gallery, which houses one of the famous
paintings, the Mona Lisa, is actually located in a slightly less visually integrated area. It is, to
some extend, hidden by the entrance escalator. In addition, an explicit phenomenon was
observed that people tended to seek for paper information, such as the map or signage,
immediately after they entered the space. This phenomenon can be picked out from the
clustering of map consulting behaviours around the information desk. (Fig. 35) This implies that
the spatial experience within the entrance hall seems to be not merely a direct perception
process between the body and the environment. The exploratory behaviour within the
entrance space is carried out with an intentional viewing property of the place.
44
Fig. 36 Scatter of visual integration (HH) measure. Scattergrams have shown that most stop behaviours are located at relatively visually integrated locations.
Fig. 37 Scatter of connectivity-integration value. These scattergrams have shown a positive co-relation between two measures which could be related to the syntactical
property of intelligibility. Intelligibility is about how a complex can be seen from its parts and what it is like in an overall pattern. Movement pause tends to happen
at locations which may have potential visual property of perceiving the whole area.
45
Discussion
In the literature review, it is suggested that spatial transition involves spatial perception,
embodied experience, and movement in space. This study focuses on the transitional spatial
experience towards and in an entrance space. It is based on the idea of entering, an act of
moving from one space to another which forms the experience of spatial transition. Entering
implies a body action in time and place between two spaces.
The act of entering accompanies information seeking, especially into an unfamiliar place or a
place serving for specific functions, such as museums. Information detecting of the situated
environment contributes to architectural experience and exploratory behaviour. As Gibson
describes that people move in order to perceive and perceive in order to move. This paper
uses a new entrance building of an existing historical museum as a subject to study the issue
of spatial transition and the relation between perceiving and moving. The reason for studying
this type of space is based on the perceivable contrast of old and new architectural
constructions. In addition, it is based on the body action of approaching and entering which an
entrance may imply. This paper suggests that an entrance space itself is a transitional space
that people perceive it, move around it, leave it, and move towards the purpose place. The
spatial experience in an entrance hall is almost transient with intentional movement. Visitors
enter the hall and look out where to go. The relation of perceiving and moving seems to be
explicit within this architectural unit.
This study consists of two sub-studies in different context scale. First, the entrance building is
considered as an object to trigger any spatial experience while approaching it. In this stage it
focuses on the issue of how the entrance itself is perceived and how the spatial perception
may contribute to or be contributed by movement. The findings have indicated that, in the
46
case of the Pyramid, people approach the entrance with sequential characteristics of seeing.
The Pyramid may not be directly perceived, but its appearance is implied along the path to it.
The experience of spatial transition, the trinity of the body, imagination, and the environment is
implicitly depicted while moving towards the building. The data have also indicated that the
Pyramid was relatively heavily used as a portal into the building complex. By implication, this
phenomenon shows the significance of the Pyramid as a main entrance and as a symbol of
the Louvre Museum. This paper suggests that there is a positive relation between the viewing
property and movement pattern towards the Pyramid within the museum area.
Yet there is no explicit relation of perceiving and moving while one approaches the New
Entrance Building of the Musuemsinsel. The new entrance can only be seen from a few
specific vantage points. This paper suggests that this characteristic of viewing is due to the
fact of the grid-like spatial layout of the area. Viewing properties are inevitably restricted by the
environment. Architecturally, the Pyramid is a significant setting that it locates in the centre of
the museum complex. It is said to be at a dominant position. On the contrary, the New
Entrance Building of the Museumsinsel is located at the edge of the area by the riverside, and
is also hidden by its surroundings. It is relatively less significant as a new entrance.
The characteristic of seeing may be further discussed with the functional intentions of a new
entrance building. For the Louvre Museum, the Pyramid is aimed at being the main entrance
to the rest space complex. Coupled with the distinguishable form and structure, it is to some
extent an object triggering the act of approaching. As for the Museumsinsel, the New Entrance
Building is aimed at housing infrastructure and only serving as another entrance to the whole
museum complex. It may act as a connection to the rest of the buildings, but not as a
dominator. Due to the fact that the Museumsinsel project is still under construction, it is rather
difficult to interpret the potential relation between the viewing characteristic and movement
47
pattern within the museum area. This further constraints the scope of the discussion.
Second, this study focuses on the spatial transition inside the entrance place. It mainly
focuses on the Napoleon Hall under the Pyramid. Entering into the entrance space is followed
by a set of spatial information pick-up and way-finding behaviour. A museum entrance space is
relatively well-structured with spatial and aspatial information because of its very nature. The
experience of spatial transition in such a place has to be considered with different factors,
including layout, signage, and so forth.
The results have shown that stop behaviours of directional looking or information seeking tend
to distribute at the junction between spaces, and in the area with adequate visual information
of the situated space. The former has to do with the nature of a junction in architecture. A
junction implies a spatial discontinuity or a turn, a transition between spaces. It can also be a
threshold to trigger or cease the moving. In this study, followed subjects tended to have
movement pause for direction looking at the junction between the corridor and the main
entrance hall. One possible explanation could be that they stop for spatial information seeking.
Passing through the boundary therefore is a moment for identifying a space. Yet the spatial
transition of entering the hall via the Pyramid can not be depicted with any explicit movement
behaviour. The escalator has a strong role guiding the people flow down to the sunken area.
There is a structured movement pattern at the moment of entering.
The results have also picked out that most stop behaviours were distributed at locations with
higher visual integration value. These are locations where one can relatively easily perceive
the whole environment. Yet the way people explore the space is implicit. This paper suggests
that it has to be related to the spatial cognitive mapping. People tended to rely on the map for
way-finding. This characteristic of cognitive mapping in exploratory behaviour is particularly
48
explicit in this type of space because people may visit a museum with intentions of seeing any
well-known art work.
The observation of people following has picked out a phenomenon that most people made a
stop to the information desk getting and reading the map when they first arrived. This is
because that the information desk is immediately perceivable; it is right situated in front of the
entrance escalator and the junction with the corridor. This paper suggests that exploratory
behaviour and spatial experience in such a structured environment have to be considered with
other factors, such as the layout with intentional functions. How the place is planned with
functional settings has to be further studied with observed exploratory behaviours.
The main limitation of this study is the lack of a full comparative study. The two chosen
projects, with similar scale and background, can be further studied in the future. As discussed
above, the New Entrance Building of the Museumsinsel has no explicit relation between
viewing property and movement pattern. It is also not visually significant in the area. How
these characteristics can contribute to its function makes a possible research question.
Further, the study of spatial experience and exploration within the entrance space has to be
placed in a larger groundwork coupled with theories of cognitive mapping, and possibly with
intentional exploratory behaviour study. It is also helpful to carry out a comparative study
between two entrance spaces which examine the potential effects of spatial layout on the
experience of spatial transition.
49
Conclusion
This study sets up to understand the experience of spatial transition, including the issues of
spatial perception and exploratory behaviour. The idea is developed from the act of entering,
which accompanies the spatial transition from one space to another. Based on the theories of
perception and theories of embodiment cognition, this paper used the Pyramid, Louvre
Museum, and the New Entrance Building, the Museumsinsel, to examine the relation of body
action, spatial perception, and the environment.
The results have shown that the potential movement pattern towards the Pyramid is
accompanied by a sequential viewing property for perceiving the Pyramid itself. It seems to
have a co-relation of perceiving and moving while one visit the museum complex. Yet in the
case of the New Entrance Building, it is more visually segregated in the situated area without
a significant viewing property. This is due to the grid-like spatial layout of the surroundings and
also its location. The lack of data, due to the fact that the latter is still under construction,
constraints further discussions of the difference of two entrance buildings in terms of their
functioning and its relation to spatial experience. A further research on the relation of viewing
property, movement pattern, and functioning might be needed with a complete comparative
study.
In the study of the entrance space, it has shown that movement pause happens at the junction
which connects two spaces, and also at the locations with higher visual potentiality. Yet how
people explore the entrance space is implicit according to the given data. This paper suggests
that spatial perception and exploratory behaviour in a structured space, for example, the
entrance hall, have to be further considered with cognitive mapping and the purpose setting.
In addition, in order to understand the spatial exploration within the entrance space, it would
50
also be appropriate to conduct an intentional exploratory behaviour study.
51
Bibliography
Biasini, E., Lebrat, J., Bezombes, D., and Vincent, J.M. (1989). The Grand Louvre: A museum
transfigured 1981-1993. Paris: Electa Moniteur.
Bloomer, K. C., and Moore, C. W. (1977). Body, memory, and architecture. New Haven and
London: Yale University Press.
Bouman, O. (1994). The Louvre as emblem of French reason. (originally in German, as Het
Louvre als zinnebeeld voor Frankrijk) Archis, 4, 70-80.
Conroy, R. (2001). Spatial Navigation in Immersive Virtual Environments. PhD thesis, Bartlett
School of Graduate Studies, UCL.
Cook, P. (1996). Primer. London: Academy Editions.
Diamond, R. (2004) Architectural Phenomena Handout for Museums and Art Galleries.
Dalton, R. C. & Dalton, N. (2001). OmniVista: An application for isovist field and path analysis.
Proceedings of the 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium, 25.1-25.10. Atlanta,
Georgia Tech.
Gibson, J., J. (1986). The ecological approach to visual perception. Hillsdale, N.J.; London:
Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
Hillier, B. (1996). Space is the machine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Hillier, B., & Hanson, J. (1984). The social logic of space. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press.
Jencks, C. (1985). Symbolism and blasphemesis. Art and Design, (1)8, 42-44.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2002). Phenomenology of Perception. (originally in French, 1945 as Phé
nomènologie de la perception) London and New York: Routledge.
Merleau-Ponty, M. (2004). The world of perception. (originally in French, 1948 as Causeries)
London and New York: Routledge.
Pallasmaa, J. (1996). The eyes of the skin: Architecture and the senses. London: Academy
52
Editions.
Peponis, J., Karadima, C., & Bafna, S. (2003). On the formulation of spatial meaning in
architectural design. Proceedings of the 4th International Space Syntax Symposium,
02.1-02.20. London, UCL.
Rasmussen, S. E. (1997) Experiencing architecture. 2nd Edition. Cambridge, Mass.: The MIT
Press.
Readinger, W. O. (2002). Representing and partitioning visual space: applying isovist field
theory to human perception. Journal of Vision, (2)7, 515a.
Stavroulaki, G. & Peponis, J. (2003). The spatial construction of seeing at Castelvecchio.
Proceedings of the 4th International Space Syntax Symposium, 66.1-66.14. London, UCL.
Steiner, D. (1995). Museums today. 9H, No.9, On Continuity, 274-288.
Turner, A. (2001). Depthmap: A program to perform visibility graph analysis. Proceedings of
the 3rd International Space Syntax Symposium, 31.1-31.9. Atlanta, Georgia Tech.
Turner, A. (2004). Depthmap 4: A researcher’s handbook.
53
Appendix
This part includes images of observational data which are not presented in the paper, namely
the observational results of static snapshot in the Napoleon Hall.
54
55
56