Geography Reference
In-Depth Information
Non-photorealistic 3D Visualization in City
Maps: An Eye-Tracking Study
Stanislav Popelka and Jitka Doleˇalov
´
Introduction
There are several perspectives on the term “3D” in cartography. Kraak (
1988
)in
one of the first articles focused on 3D maps states that image will be considered 3D
if it contains those stimuli or depth cues which make it being perceived as 3D.
Wood et al. (
2005
) described the role of three dimensionality used in both
process of visualization and representation of 3D objects and space. To clarify
the term “3D”, they considered the model of a general visualization pipeline.
According to Upson et al. (
1989
) and Haber and McNabb (
1990
) it is possible to
distinguish five levels of dimensionality, which correspond to the various stages
within a visualization process (data management, data assembly, visual mapping,
rendering, display). Wood et al. (
2005
) associates the term 3D with the phase of
“visual representations of data”, but it can also be part of the outputs from all other
stages of the process.
Non-photorealistic Models of the Cities
According to Cartwright et al. (
2007
), two basic concepts of 3D cartography exist—
photorealistic and non-photorealistic. Durand (
2002
) emphasizes that
non-photorealistic visualization provides “extensive control over expressivity, clar-
ity and aesthetics”, but Jedlicka et al. (
2013
) mentions also the limits (generalisa-
tion, simplification, non-perspective projections, distortions etc.)
This general fact could be applied also for the visualization of cities.
Photorealistic visualization of cities became popular due to the ubiquity of Google
