V.A. Filin
VIDEOECOLOGY. GOOD AND BAD FOR
EYE
Introduction
Chapter 1. Automation of saccades as the basis of visual perception
1.1. Eyesight and eye movements
1.2. Saccadic automation concept
1.3. Functionality of saccadic automation
1.4. Nystagmus. What does it mean?
Chapter 2. Visual environment as an ecological factor
2.1. Effect of visible objects on saccadic automation
2.2. Saccades when observing complicated automation
2.3. Visual environment of people having bad vision
2.4. Miner's visual environment
2.5. "Sensory hunger"
2.6. Test data
Chapter 3. Homogeneous visual environment
3.1. Homogeneous visual environment under urban conditions
3.2. Small architectural forms
3.3. Homogeneous visual fields in interiors of living quarters and industrial premises
3.4. New-born children "do not like" to look at homogeneous visual fields
3.5. Open urban space - analogue of homogeneous environment
3.6. Homogenization of natural environment
3.7. Vision in homogeneous fields
Chapter 4. Aggressive visual environment
4.1. Psycho-physiological characteristic of aggressive visual fields
4.2. Aggressive visual environment under urban conditions
4.3. Vision in aggressive field
4.4. Criterion when forming visual environment
Chapter 5. Videoecology - problem of human being's ecology
5.1. Modern human being's visual environment
5.2. Social consequences of unnatural urban visual environment
Chapter 6. Comfortable visual environment
6.1. What comfortable visual environment is
6.2. Formation of comfort visual environment
6.3. Ways to solve problems of videoecology
Conclusion
Literature
INTRODUCTION
In
many countries of the world the problem of ecology has merged as a real matter
of economic and social importance. At present, this matter attracts close
attention of scientific, public and parliamentary circles. However, when
speaking about ecological problems it usually relates only to sufficiency of
polluted air and water, extremely high noise and radiation level but the
constant visual environment and its condition are never mentioned as an
ecological factor which is not of the least importance. Moreover, it is a common
thing to consider that all we need is fresh air, clear water and silent life and
we care nothing about what we look at. Being governed by such an attitude, one
often handles urban environment design, new labor vacancies creation, industrial
and living areas interior development. And meanwhile, as it was discovered by
the science, the constant visual environment full of visual elements exerts an
immense influence upon the human being especially affecting its organ of sight,
i.e. it acts the same way other ecological factors of inhabited environment do.
This new scientific trend developing visual perception of environment was named
videoecology by us [103]. This is a high-priority scientific trend being of
great interest for experts in ecology, psychology, physiology, medicine,
architecture and art.
The
problem of videoecology has particularly aggravated in recent 50 years due to
the total urbanization which isolated the human being from its natural visual
environment. This isolation was made possible mostly due to the use of new
materials in urban development. As a result we have a lot of cities with
drastically changed visual environment, i.e. prevailing dark-gray color,
straight lines and right angles, urban buildings being mostly static with a
great number of vast surfaces. Homogeneous and "aggressive" zones are especially
disturbing for a man. In case of homogeneity these are bare walls made of
concrete and glass, solid fences, subway crossing and asphalted surfaces,
whereas in case of "aggression" we are facing standards elements predominance,
e.g. rows of windows on the flat walls of many-storeyed buildings.
Visual
environment has been transformed for city population due to the nature of urban
labor. People work in rooms, i.e. in closed space - at plant and factory
workshops, at schools and colleges. The interior is full of new materials of
artificial nature, such as polished furniture, plastics, linoleum, tiles, films,
glass, corrugated aluminum, net screens, grills and bars, design structures,
etc. Visual environment in private apartments is made up with same kind of
materials.
Television
rushed into our life to aggravate the problem of videoecology. One watches TV up
to 4 hours a day, which reasonably makes one call a television set a
"vision-chewing gum". Video level of TV broadcasting hardly meets standards of
vision. Apart from frame and line frequency and unnatural range of colors, the
same straight lines, right angles and displayed bars attack us from the screen.20
Dangerous visual effects are also produced by massive use of computers in
everyday life - in fact, every tenth person operates PC during working
hours.
New
lighting technologies, i.e. fluorescent lamps, flash tubes, lasers should be
considered as other visual
environment transforming factors. Illumination devices of theaters and concert
halls are more expensive and sophisticated compared with sound engineering.
Lighting is controlled by a complex of PCs and advanced software. The similar
lighting technologies are everywhere in urban areas full of advertising boards
with running text and fast frame shifting.
Massive
implementation of various transport facilities into man's life has enormously
transformed the modern visual environment of people. A car driver gets extra
visual stress while watching objects in movement, highway that runs ahead,
trees, poles and buildings appearing for a moment, cars rushing in the opposite
direction, traffic lights. Same view is experienced by a passenger traveling by
bus, trolley-bus, train, ship or aircraft. People have become more dynamic thus
catching more moving objects in their field of vision.
Objects
in movement are often faced by a man dealing with manufacture process, e.g.
assembly lines, escalators, running wheels, packing, grinding, weaving and
printing machines, etc. Besides, during a working day a man is being surrounded
by monotonous things, such as newspapers, books, fabrics of the same color, milk
and eggs packs, bottles, machinery parts and components, electronic chips,
decorative tiles, etc.
Dwelling
upon importance of the problem of videoecology, we should mention man's
progressing exploration of extraordinary areas, such as the North Polar region,
the Arctic and the Antarctic as well as sea depths and underground spaces.
Population of the Norilsk city, for instance, always remain within unusual
visual environment with a short daylight period in winter and a long one in
summer. Not always favorable visual environment exists in the newly settled
areas, e.g. the Navoi city in arid deserts, oil fields in the Caspian Sea,
etc.
The
problem of videoecology is still urging due to the lack of scientifically
invented basic laws on visual environment formation and requirements as per
permissible allowances, particularly for reasonable size limits of homogeneous and aggressive zones in
urban architecture. Visual environment swift transformation contradicts the
capabilities of vision. The human being still remains the same with its amount
of needs and so do the basics of vision methods while the visual environment in
populated areas is getting worse.
According
to the World Health Organization, urbanization process leads to steady rise of
mental diseases. Unnatural visual environment totally surrounds us and together
with other factors also adds to the problems mentioned, and as we see, it really
does. The spontaneous scientific and technical progress nowadays has
demonstrated its contradictions in a mighty and inevitable way. Thus, if human
survival process goes in a wrong way, it is immediately followed by negative
consequences at the global level.
In
1992 the First World Ecology Conference was held in Rio de Janeiro. The Rio
forum of 179 delegated nations stated the most important aspects of the world's
mankind harmonious development. The Rio summit resulted in adopting the
following five documents: the declaration on environment and development; the
21st century's agenda - steady development program from social ecological and
economic points of view; the declaration on principles of woods preservation;
the United Nations convention on climate transformation and on biological
variety. The Rio forum demonstrated
the mankind's concept of the global ecological problems which are a
threat to all living on the Earth. But in spite of the human factor considered
to be important by the forum, no one touched upon the problem of visual
environment which concerns practically everyone. This might lead to fatal
results as it is well known that every ecological correction needs enormous
expenditures.
There
are a lot of problems accumulated in the field of videoecology, not a bit fewer
than in other fields of ecology, and many of them demand for urgent solution.
While water and air condition as well as radiation level are monitored and
studied by quite a number of research institutes and big departments, the problem of
videoecology is just a few people's concern so far. That is why this problem is
unknown for both city folk and experts in architecture, design, art, modeling,
medicine. This book, as it seems to us, will be of use for specialists and every
interested reader. Its purpose is to provide architects, artists and designers
with information for a motivated solution of the problems of videoecology in the
course of designing buildings, installations, machinery, instruments, consumer
goods and clothes.
I am bound to appreciate the efforts by reviewers - V.B. Valtsev, and A.V. Stepanov for their valuable remarks, and also by the scientific workers of the Moscow Videoecology Center - Ye.V. Sartakova and I.A. Kanidiyeva for their invaluable assistance in the manuscript preparation.
CONCLUSION
Visual
environment is one of the principal components of life-support of a human being.
Up to the moment a human being stayed in natural environment for a greater part
of his time, there were practically no problems in the field of videoecology.
Moreover, using the words of poet A. Beliy, "around the soul is drinking a
diamond current from the eyes". Urbanization processes completely ruled out the
possibility to enjoy surrounding environment, and instead of "diamond current
around" a human being has got homogeneous and aggressive environment which,
being unnatural one, not only fails to afford aesthetic delight but brings forth
a great number of social problems. Videoecology which studies interaction of a
human being with surrounding environment constitutes an actual problem among the
problems of human ecology.
From
our point of view, creation of unnatural visual environment was caused by the
following reasons: revolutionary approach in solving urban development issues,
erroneous aesthetic positions of specialists whose viewpoints were based on
industrial methods and necessity of fighting against extravagances, rapid growth
of cities when there was a practical lack of creative potential from the part of
architects, rapid growth of construction industry with its automated production
lines of similar construction materials, separation of a human being from the
nature, and finally, a lag of videoecology as a science. We would like to speak
in detail about the latter one. That is associated with the fact that if
architects had been guided by the laws of visual perception in their creative
work, we may say for sure that such serious blunders in forming urban visual
environment could have been avoided.
We
can hear objections that there have been reproaches against modern architecture
before as well. Yes, it is true. However, in general these reproaches were
subjective: "faceless boxes", "monstrous geometry", "technocracy", "environment
is injured with inexplicable and alien forms" [24,37], etc. With little
exception [16], there were practically no attempts to analyze visual
environment, where townsmen found themselves, in its integrative form. On the
other hand, those researchers who touched the mechanism of visual perception of
modern architecture had grounds based on dated conceptions. They did not take
into account the fact that the eye is working in the active mode, it is
searching for what it can "seize" in urban environment, what "to catch", what
"to go at". Speaking scientific language, the eye is scanning surrounding
environment. Such activity of the eye is achieved owing to the nature of its
rapid movements - saccades. Saccades are performed constantly and involuntarily,
both with open and closed eyes, when we are awake, and when we sleep [100, 104,
108]. The total number of saccades under different conditions have comparable
values. On the basis of these data we have laid down a concept about saccadic
automation [100]. It means that in most cases a saccade is primary. And that
fact that the eye will see after the saccade is secondary. In this case, after
saccade the eye must "catch" something. As soon as that happens, the eye calms
down, and the amplitude of its saccades is decreased up to minimum values, the
number of saccades, in this case, remains the same. In 2-3 seconds the eye scans
surrounding environment another time by several saccades and again stops on a
detail minimizing saccadic amplitude.
There
are individual cases when a saccade is secondary, for instance, as a response to
light flash. In order to fix a look on an object which appears in the vision
field, saccadic center selects a saccade of corresponding amplitude and
orientation, that is their modulation is performed, and the interval is given in
a previous form.
The
concept on saccadic automation is a new idea on visual perception of surrounding
environment. That is what allowed us to study the problem of videoecology. From
the position of new experience we have analyzed urban visual environment: we
have found fields not complying with saccadic automation and other vision
mechanisms.
Thus,
we may say that videoecology is based not only on subjective statements but on
regularities of visual perception. That is the principal difference of our
analysis of modern architecture from previous reproaches to its address.
Homogeneous
and aggressive fields bring a lot of trouble s to townsmen. A homogeneous field
is a surface with visible elements, or their number is minimum. Blind fences,
plain doors, large size panels, one-piece glass, underground passages, asphalt
coat and roofs of houses are examples of homogeneous fields in urban
environment. In apartments homogeneous fields begin from the entrance door,
continue with polished furniture sections and cabinets, and finish with plain
plastic items in the kitchen.
Aggressive
visible field is a field with concentration of a great number of similar
elements. Such environment is created by multistory buildings with a great
number of windows on the wall, attached vertical rustics, panels of houses
coated with glass "toffees", walls coated with tiles, brickwork with concealed
joint, doors padded with "lining" as well as various bars, meshes, perforated
boards, corrugated aluminum, asbestos-cement board, etc. Under urban conditions
one aggressive field is often applied over the another one, for instance, a
house wall with attached rustics behind a metallic bar.
Fundamental
vision mechanisms such as saccadic automation, binocular apparatus, conversion,
on- and off- systems and vision centers cannot operate in aggressive and
homogeneous environment to the full extent. In particular, in homogeneous
environment impaired is the feedback between sensor and motor systems since
after successive saccade illumination difference on eye photoreceptors is
insufficient. Accordingly, after the saccade the brain receives a minimum pulse
insufficient for reliable feedback actuation. In other words, an action has
taken place - saccade, but there is no confirmation to this action. As a result
vision centers and the nerve system as a whole are confused. That in turn causes
a perception of discomfort. Durable stay of a human being in such environment
leads to disturbance of saccadic automation.
Decor
of buildings does not mean "architectural extravagances" which our literature
has written a lot about. These are essential functional elements comprising the
basis of visual environment. Without them the eyes cannot operate to the full
extent. As in the air there must be a sufficient quantity of oxygen, in visible
environment there must be a sufficient number of elements. Abundance of same
elements in visible environment - windows on the wall of a big house, tiles or
rods - we may say, completely "switches off" such a powerful sensor channel as a
vision analyzer since the eye simply "does not know" what particular element it
is fixing. In natural environment no such things can happen. In the nature, if
the eye looks at something, it "knows" that. The vision apparatus, in this case,
correctly evaluates reality, and easily and rapidly orients in it
accordingly.
In
all big cities the number of mental diseases has recently increased. Specialists
called this disease "a syndrome of a big city" which often shows itself in human
aggressiveness. Among many factors unnatural visible environment greatly
contributes, in our opinion, to the growth of mental diseases. The statement
made by Avicenna: "All that the nature managed to accumulate invisibly enters
the nature of the body". If we intend to further build cities as we do it
nowadays, lunatic asylums in cities should be built dozen times as quicker.
The
problem of videoecology does not relate only to medical aspects. The point is
that aggressive environment makes a human being perform aggressive actions. As a
rule, in new communities with unnatural visual environment the number of
breaches of law is more as compared with a central part of a city. This means
that not only lunatic asylums should be built dozen of times as quicker, but it
is also necessary to increase the staff of militia. It is quite obvious that
errors committed in evaluation of human ecology become global every time.
Architecture
is a durable, expensive and raw material intensive layer of culture where giant
physical and intellectual efforts of the civilized society are materialized.
These efforts should not be made in vain. Above all, architectural objects
should please the eye. They should positively affect, in emotional and ethic
respect, a human being who stays under their influence all life long, and of
course, they should not damage health of townsmen.
Architecture
constantly affects a human being and mainly at the back of its mind. Right was
Victor Pelevin when he was writing: " Things you see every day for many years
gradually pass into a monument to your own... To see actually means to put your
soul on a standard copy on the retina of a standard human eye" ("Anthology of
childhood"). If an adjoining aggressive house is "put" on a human soul, "a
monument to your own" is converted into a multocular monster.
According
to Aristotle, a city should provide security for people and make them happy.
Unfortunately, this rule was broken in all times, and in recent 50 years it has
been forgotten at all. As a result, a human being has become a victim of his own
creative work surrounding himself by aggressive visual environment.
A
city is living organism and, as any other organism, is constantly renovated. The
principle of city formation form the position of comfort visual environment
could become that "idea of a city" which would unite all its inhabitants.
Everything that is designed for a human being should meet at least physiological
needs of his vision. Unless and until a designer is oriented towards a final
result of his work, his designs will be devised with evident ignorance to
saccadic automation which provides for constant scanning of surrounding
environment.
"To
embrace the space, cognize how to see it (accentuated by us) - that is the key
to correct comprehension of a task" (Bruno Dzevi [61]). In old times many
architects managed this. It was often achieved not only by embracing the space
but also by variety of forms, lines, multistory level, diversity of stories in
buildings, small sizes of surfaces and different decorative elements. In a word,
everything was done for sufficient saturation of an object with visible elements
in order "to oblige" saccadic automation. On the other hand, such saturation was
not to the detriment of aesthetic merits since diversity of details is an
objective basis for the beauty of an object. It is quite obvious that it is
impossible to create a beautiful object and , certainly, very difficult to
create comfort visual environment of a city only with right angles and straight
lines which the eye "does not like" and which prevail in modern architecture. It
would rather be a cacophony characterized by the worst combination of sensor
stimuli.
As
it was stated in the enactment of the CPSU CC issued in November 1955 ("On
elimination of extravagances in designing and construction"), decorative details
in architecture are not extravagances. They are necessary elements for formation
of visual environment. It is not by accident architects have used them for many
centuries. They have functional meaning, they are needed for manifestation of
saccadic automation as the air for breath automation. He who was the first to
say about "architectural extravagances" hurt us all; suffered was not only
aesthetic part but fundamental vision mechanisms and lives of townsmen were also
threatened. A human was living in natural visible environment for millions
years. 90 per cent of his history he spent in harmony with the nature. Now in XX
century he found himself in quite unusual environment - in stone and asphalt
jungles.
Until
now problems of theoretical investigations have borne a stamp of traditional
approach to architecture as three-dimensional designing. Ignored are general
issues of urban development including issues of visual environment. The lack of
valuable theory enables to get effective and justified practical
recommendations. Many architects are aware of this reason. Here what A. Gutnov
writes in this regard: "It is necessary to direct all efforts in order to
develop a new type architectural theory based on the knowledge of general
regularities of artificial environment created by a human being, of mechanisms
of its formation and development" [37].
It
is, probably, worth to remind what the source is to create artificial
environment and urban environment in particular. Such components as air, water,
temperature, noise and radiation level, homogeneous fields are known to
be a
basis of human environment. However, all these components, though very
important, are indirectly related to the theory of architecture since
architecture, as it may be directly comprehended, means an external appearance
of buildings. This an object we look at with our eyes, or, speaking by architect
Melnikov's words "architecture is a game for eyes". Thus, "development of new
type architectural theory" should be carried out taking into account requirements of
visible environment. And it should base on general regularities of visual
perception.
We
are glad to remind that architect N. Ladovskiy related this issue with
understanding yet in 20-s. "Architect, - he wrote - should, though just a
little, be familiar with perception laws and means of influence in order to use
in his work everything that modern science can give. Among sciences contributing
to architecture a serious place should be taken by rather young science
"psycotechnics" (accentuated by us). We won't argue with terminology of those
years, the main thing is the backbone which in many ways coincides with our
point of view since both videoecology and psycotechnics are based on the laws 0f
visual perception. It is fair to say that nowadays we know more about these laws
than in 20-s. In particular, we know that saccadic automation is the basis of
visual perception [52]. However, the approach of N. Ladovskiy was correct. And
if it was further developed, many errors in formation of urban environment could
have been avoided.
In
places where laws of visual perception were followed to the full extent,
architecture has no reproaches. Let us take, for instance, Novodevichiy
monastery on the territory of which a man feels comfortable though as per the
state of air, water as well noise and radiation level this territory does not
differ from other Moscow areas. Replace mentally monastery temples with modern
"box-houses" and you will feel horror of a modern city and understand the main
problem of architecture based on satisfying physiological needs of visual
perceptions and aesthetic norms. And we learn to follow these requirements, we
will decide many problems of the architectural theory. In the most common form
the theory of architecture goes easily with the triad of Vitruvius: reliable,
comfortable, lovely. We can say with confidence that we have learned to make
everything reliable. In many cases engineering issues of urban development are
solved successfully. We can build houses with amenities: elevator, gas, cold and
hot running water, bathroom, lavatory, chute have become a norm of our life.
But, unfortunately, we have unlearned to make lovely. Everywhere we violate
requirements on visual environment. In fact, in this regard the era of
spontaneity has recently come. Abundance of aggressive and homogeneous visual
environment makes a modern city practically unfit for human habitation. Modern
urban development is often given the credit of elaboration of sanitary and
hygienic aspects and insolation standards. We can say that transport and
engineering mains are also built rather well. We are sure that soon we will
learn to take into account geopathogen areas as well. Unfortunately, we are not
sure that we will learn to solve as quickly the problems of videoecology. That
is connected with the fact that textbooks, articles, sanitary norms and
regulations have created "blinders" which limit professional conscience of
architects. "It is difficult to puzzle out in a boodle of words and symbols, -
writes Yacub Vuec, - which today mean something new than when they were declared
for the first time, it needs a lot of time" [24]. On the other hand, it is
difficult to dispute the advance of the construction industry which dictated its
approaches in urban development. That is why elaboration of issues of
videoecology is quite relevant. Videoecology may be a theoretical basis capable of solving many key issues in
the development of the architectural science. As any theoretical development,
this is a painstaking job but that is this job which seems far form today needs
is the only reliable way to effective practical recommendations.
What
shall we do in this situation? First of all, specialists on ecology, architects,
artists, doctors, physiologists, psychologists as well as law-making and
executive public bodies should be aware of the problem of videoecology.
Videoecology should become a phenomenon of mass conscience. If we want that to
happen, videoecology should occupy a corresponding place in the educational
process. Videoecology as a subject should be taught in architectural institutes,
artistic colleges, schools.
Only
if we make definite efforts, we can make a progress in improving visual
environment. First of all, it is necessary to analyze and make maps of
"pollution" of visual environment of cities. Such maps can give an idea about
the nature of the disaster and will permit to develop measures in order to
change the situation to the best. Certainly, in this case, it is necessary to
preserve all valuable things we have - everything that pleases the eye. To make
maps it is necessary to work out a method and devices on evaluation of visual
environment.
A
program on population displacement should be made out on the state level. With
our vast territories it is much easier to solve this problem as compared with
other peoples. Every Russian citizen can live "inside" the nature and in full
harmony with it. By no means one should increase the number of cities and their
sizes as it has been done until now.
Sometimes
when reading lectures I have to hear reproaches saying that videoecology is no
business of Russia at present. There are a lot of other urgent problems. Indeed,
there are: decline of the production level, cost-in-living increase, inflation,
moral and ethic problems, discord between nations, and wars. It seems to us that
Yu. Koryakin was right when he wrote about the reasons which led to such
consequences: "We found ourselves on a razor-edge first of all because we have
lost love to life. W e will be saved not only by repulsion from death but by
attraction to life".
How
can preconditions to attract our fellow citizens to life be created? That is the
main question. We can a lot of food, good hospitals and good medicines, but if a
man has no "attraction to life", there cannot be a question about active
longevity. And if a man does not value his own life, he does not value all that
is living around him, and he kills forests, rivers, animals. We can go the
already known way and create another committee at President's level. For
example, "Committee on attraction of Russian citizens to life". But such a
committee will hardly be capable of fulfilling such a global task. To solve it
is necessary to attract the whole intellectual potential of the country, that is
- scientists, religious personalities, personalities of culture and art,
academics. Videoecology can make a great contribution in solving this problem.
We have owned a principally new knowledge which radically changes our conception
about the practice of urban development.
In
our opinion, comfort visual environment may contribute to attraction to life.
Cheerfulness of inhabitants of south coasts of Greece, Italy and other favorable20
corners of Earth is explained namely by comfort visible environment. Surrounding
beauty is a key to solution of many problems. It can fill the life with contents
and "attract" a man to life. Architects and other specialists responsible for
urban environment should aim at creating the beauty. F. Dostoyevskiy did not say that
abundance of foodstuffs would save the world but he said: "The beauty will save
the world". This statement may be evaluated as a large scientific discovery the
implementation of which we have not started yet. Abundance of foodstuffs can
secure physiological welfare of a human being but it cannot guarantee attraction
to life, whereas the beauty has a universal influence upon a human soul. And
that is the beauty which is able to fulfill this task.
Further
developing his expression which has become very popular, F. Dostoyevskiy wrote:
" If a people preserves the ideal of the beauty and the need for it, that means
there is a need of health, norm, and accordingly, that guarantees a superior
development of that people". It is quite obvious that it is impossible to
awake a need for the beauty with
people surrounding it by aggressive visual environment everywhere. People should
constantly stay in comfort visual environment. Only in such a way we can develop
a need for the beauty with Russian people, thus achieving its superior
development. Videoecology may serve as a methodological basis for solving this global problem. Principles and
methods of videoecology permit not spontaneously, as it has been done until now,
but consciously to form visual environment of Russian cities which completely
complies with physiological norms of vision.