| 摘要: | 過去LED照明著重於發光效率的提升與價格成本的降低，伴隨著科技的進步與價格甜蜜點的來臨，重視情境營造、個人化需求及節能環保的LED智慧照明為新的發展趨勢。室內最普遍的休閒活動為觀看電視，對於著重使用者體驗與需求的現今，使用者的觀賞舒適度為照明觀賞環境的設計要點。本論文探討室內照明顯示觀賞活動下使用者的視覺生理狀況，經由心理學實驗法設計人因實驗，以問卷的方式獲得主觀評估，以閃光融合儀與睫狀肌視調節微動儀獲得客觀評估，並以統計軟體SPSS進行數據分析。本研究共有兩個實驗，實驗ㄧ的自變項為顯示輝度(50 nit、100 nit、200 nit)及其與背景輝度之間的對比度(10:1、20:1、50:1、217:1)，其中217:1為暗室；實驗二的自變項為顯示輝度(50 nit、100 nit、200 nit)與對比度(2:1、3:1、4:1、6:1、10:1、50:1、217:1)。
人因實驗結果，實驗一的客觀指標無法提出適當的對比度操作範圍，主觀指標僅能初步判斷室內觀賞活動不建議於暗室中進行。實驗二的主觀生理感受評估建議以顯示輝度100 nit進行室內觀賞活動，且不建議於暗室中觀賞；螢幕亮暗感受評估建議以顯示輝度50 nit、對比度範圍2:1至50:1進行室內觀賞活動；背景亮暗感受與整體滿意度評估在不同的顯示輝度水準下有不同的對比度建議範圍。針對螢幕亮暗感受、背景亮暗感受、整體滿意度評估三個主觀評比，建立各自的擬合方程式，模型預測值與實驗各情境的平均評分均高度相關，相關係數分別為0.96、0.97、0.96。綜合三個評比建立室內顯示觀賞活動下燈具的舒適度操作模型，並可調配彼此的權重來改變各評比的重要性。此模型分數越高代表越滿意，並繪出距離最高分位置一個標準誤的範圍，定義為燈具的舒適操作區域，可作為未來調控顯示器亮度與環境照明的依據。;Along with the advancement of relevant technologies, light-emitting diode (LED) lighting has gained attention recently due to LED’s high luminous efficacy and reducing price. LED lighting is now being applied in various indoor and outdoor applications, and its development has moved forward to emphasize users’ demand and environmental protection. Watching television is like the most general leisure activity indoor; thus, user’s comfort under the display condition can be the main concern in designing indoor lighting.
This study investigates the visual comfort and visual fatigue of the user under different combinations of display luminance and contrast, which is the ratio of display luminance to background luminance. Psychophysical experiments were performed to obtain subjective ratings through questionnaires while objective ratings were acquired on visual fatigue from the critical flicker fusion and autorefractor keratometer measurements. The experiments were implemented in two rounds. ExperimentⅠhas two independent variables being the display luminance (50 nit, 100 nit, 200 nit) and the contrast (10:1, 20:1, 50:1, 217:1), where contrast 217:1 implies a darkroom condition. The levels of independent variables in ExperimentⅡare the display luminance (50 nit, 100 nit, 200 nit) and the contrast (2:1, 3:1, 4:1, 6:1, 10:1, 50:1, 217:1).
The results of ExperimentⅠshowed that the contrast is not a significant factor for the objective visual fatigue. This is probably due to the contrast levels in the experiment, and thus more contrast levels are tested in ExperimentⅡ. In the subjective assessments, there is a trend that participants felt more uncomfortable physiologically in the darkroom.
The results of ExperimentalⅡshowed that both the display luminance and the contrast are significant factors for the subjective assessments of physiological responses. Post hoc comparisons show that the display luminance of 100 nit is better than the display luminance of 200 nit and the contrast from 2:1 to 50:1 is better than the darkroom. In the subjective rating of display brightness perception, post hoc comparisons show that the display luminance of 50 nit and the contrast from 2:1 to 50:1 are preferable. In the subjective ratings of background brightness perception and environment satisfaction, post hoc comparisons show that different display luminance levels would suggest different contrast ranges.
The experimental data were used to model the ratings of display brightness perception, background brightness perception and environment satisfaction. A luminaire control model for the indoor display activities was then established based on the three fitted models with adjustable weighting factors. A higher rating from the model implies a more satisfactory lighting and display combination. The suggested luminaire operating range is defined as the region within one standard error from the highest rating of the model. |
