ASBR ICEIPI 2022, 03 March 2023
* Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Architects are unsatisfied with current ways of presenting their works in the schematic design phase to clients because the effects of the design presentation obtained nowadays are relatively weak and not self-explanatory. Based on this fact, we proposed a design solution using the concept of an innovative VR interactive film. This kind of VR film provides the clients with highly immersive and interactive VR experiences through virtual simulations in multiple human senses. In this essay, we explained the problem current architects encountered in the phase of architectural design presentation, evaluated the current state of VR in the field of film and architecture, and completed a system design designed with various technical details. Some of the technologies in this solution already exist, while others remain at the conceptual stage. It is possible to create an actual sample of such VR interactive films by prototyping all hardware.
Architecture, Technologies., Design solution, Films, Virtual Reality, Design presentation
1. Archisoup. (n.d.) Architecture Narratives – The Storytelling of Design. Retrieved from archisoup: https://www.archisoup.com/studio-guide/architecture-narratives
2. Zhen, J. (2018). ARCHITECTURAL NARRATIVE DESIGN ——INTERPRETATION OF BERNARD TSCHUMI’S DESIGN WORKS. Design works. (09)
3. Portman, M.E.(2015). To go where no man has gone before: Virtual reality in architecture, landscape architecture and environmental planning. Retrieved 30 June 2022, from https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S019897151500054X
4. Fonseca, D., & Kraus, M. (2016, October). A comparison of head-mounted and hand-held displays for 360 videos with focus on attitude and behavior change. In Proceedings of the 20th International Academic Mindtrek Conference (pp. 287-296). https://doi.org/10.1145/2994310.2994334
5. Marques, T., Vairinhos, M., & Almeida, P. (2021). VR 360º and its impact on the immersion of viewers of suspense AV content. Multimedia Tools and Applications, 80(20), 31021-31038. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11042-021-11067-9
6. Kim, A., Chang, M., Choi, Y., Jeon, S., & Lee, K. (2018, March). The effect of immersion on emotional responses to film viewing in a virtual environment. In 2018 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR)(pp. 601-602). IEEE.https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2018.8446046
7. Stenger, N. (1992). Angels. Retrieved from Archive of Digital Art: https://www.digitalartarchive.at/database/general/work/angels.html
8. Dedehayir, O., & Steinert, M. (2016). The hype cycle model: A review and future directions. Technological Forecasting and Social Change, 108, 28-41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.techfore.2016.04.005
9. Dan, X. & Li, X. (2020) The Body and Its Theoretical Problems in Virtual Art Experience: An Investigation Based on Physical Practice in VR Films. Theoretical Studies of Literature and Art, (05), 66-77.
10. Arango, B. (2022). Virtual Reality: Current State and Future Challenges. Retrieved 30 June 2022, from https://filmora.wondershare.com/virtual-reality/virtual-reality-technology-current-state-and-future-challenges.html
11. Claypool, M. (2022). The Digital in Architecture: Then, Now and in the Future | SPACE10. Retrieved 30 June 2022, from https://space10.com/project/digital-in-architecture/
12. Kishishita, Y., Das, S., Ramirez, A. V., Thakur, C., Tadayon, R., & Kurita, Y. (2019, March). Muscleblazer: force-feedback suit for immersive experience. In 2019 IEEE Conference on Virtual Reality and 3D User Interfaces (VR) (pp. 1813-1818). IEEE. https://doi.org/10.1109/VR.2019.8797962
13. Kourtesis, P., Argelaguet, F., & Vizcay, S. (2021). Electrotactile feedback applications for hand and arm interactions: A systematic review, meta-analysis, and future directions. arXiv e-prints, arXiv-2105.
14. Solomonow, M., Lyman, J., & Freedy, A. (1977). Electrotactile two-point discrimination as a function of frequency, body site, laterality, and stimulation codes. Annals of biomedical engineering, 5(1), 47-60. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02409338.
15. See, A. R., Choco, J. A. G., & Chandramohan, K. (2022). Touch, Texture and Haptic Feedback: A Review on How We Feel the World around Us. Applied Sciences, 12(9), 4686. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12094686
16. Keil, J., Edler, D., O’Meara, D., Korte, A., & Dickmann, F. (2021). Effects of virtual reality locomotion techniques on distance estimations. ISPRS International Journal of Geo-Information, 10(3), 150. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijgi10030150.
17. Demaine, E. D., Fekete, S. P., & Lang, R. J. (2010). Circle packing for origami design is hard. arXiv preprint arXiv:1008.1224. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.1008.1224.
18. Nagao, R., Matsumoto, K., Narumi, T., Tanikawa, T., & Hirose, M. (2017). Walking up virtual stairs based on visuo-haptic interaction. In ACM SIGGRAPH 2017 Posters (pp. 1-2). https://doi.org/10.1145/3102163.3102231.
The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study will be available from the authors upon reasonable request.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License. Authors who publish this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See Open Access Instruction).