[TEPaul]

Jeff Mingay mentioned on the Kingsley thread the effects of the large scale of the 1st hole (Kingsley) to distance determination and perception saying it makes the drive landing area seem longer than it is.

I've never really understood what the effects of "scale" do to a golfer's distance perception. Can someone talk about the various effects of scale that way?

Maybe I should get my eyes checked anyway--they aren't that good any more.

[bodgeblack]

The scale of the Golf Course surrounds has a great effect on distorting one's perception of distance.

I immiediately think of Loch Lomond GC where surrounding mountains on a grand scale foreshorten what is a really big golf course.

On the other hand, at Prestwick for example, a lack of trees distorts our perspective yet again. There is so much open space it makes a 380 yard hole look 5 miles long!

I think these are examples of depth perception being distorted on a large scale.

Does anyone believe our distance perception can be altered by small scale design features more readily available for the architects use?

cheers

jamie

[Patrick_Mucci]

TEPaul,

I have bad eyesight, but one example that I noticed at ANGC was the effect large bunkers had on my distance judgement.

On holes # 1 and # 8 the fairway bunkers are rather large, and as such, they appeared to be much closer to me than they actually were, causing me to attempt to carry them.

Today, with yardage booklets, range finders, etc.,etc., that's less likely to happen, but when you play with your eye, it's a deceptive feature, and one that I like.

[Rick_Noyes]

TEPaul,

This is something I've played around with for a while.  We just did a fairway bunker in the 2nd landing area of a par 5.  the bunker is "huge'.  The size alone makes it appear closer than it actually is.  And appears as if it would come into play from the tee.  The same would probably hold true for green size and how much of the putting surface is visibile from the landing area.

Another perception example would be some of the bunkers at Pinehurst #2.  Where the bunker looks as if it green side, but actually about 20 yards short of the green.  My own feeling on these is that they are now deceptive bunkers.  But in the day of the ground game, they were meant as an obstacle to deter approach from that side of the green.

I've also seen holes where the treeline angles out and away from the tee.  Which would give the impression that the landing area is closer than it looks.  The inverse would be true if say the tee were in more of an open area and the treeline angles back in toward the landing area.  This would give the impression that it is farther away than it measures.  Sort of like the old example of train tracks converging on the horizon.

It is an interesting aspect of design.  And it will make a player think about the yardage they are reading.

[Lou Duran]

This is a good topic for Jeff Brauer to address, as a number of his courses give the impression of large scale.  Open spaces and large features like at Sand Hills give the course an expansive feel, yet I doubt that the maintained areas are much larger than average.  This is the type of course that inspires Mike Cirba and others off the deep-end into spirituality.  The public course at Jackson Hole with the Tetons as a background elicit similar emotions, though I believe that that course is not in the top 500.

At the other end, high-density residential development such as that surrounding Crown Colony in Texas diminishes scale, and takes away from the experience of a very good course (on the cusp of the top 100?).  Perhaps the large specimen oaks and pecans at Colonial does the same thing.

One of Jeff's most successful courses, Ridgeview Ranch in Plano, Texas gave me the impression of huge scale when it first opened.  Though it is still a big course, after several years of fast residential development. the course no longer gives me that feeling.  The architecture has not changed, but my view of the golf experience is appreciably different.  (This is something that raters should carefully analyze when looking at the golf course, i.e. how external factors affect their judgement).  

[Michael Dugger]

TEPaul...

I might not make sense, but here goes anyways.  Have you ever taken in a nice, clear full moon when it was on the horizon?  Does it not look like it have grown?  Perhaps not, but I have certainly experience this before.  

There are people who swear that it is bigger.  But is it really?  It's not like it has moved closer to earth.  The answer lies in reference points.  When the moon is on the horizon you have mountains and buildings, for example, to compare it to.

Consider when the moon is in in the middle of the sky....directly above you.  There is nothing to compare it to, no frame of reference except for more clear blue sky.  If one was to measure the size of it they would find it never changes, but it undoubtedly appears larger to the eye when you have something to compare it to.  

I don't know if this makes sense, but I think it simply has to do with optical illusions.  Our favorite trick of golf course designers!  

[RJ_Daley]

The course where I was most disoriented by scale was the back 9 at Bayside in Ogallala NE.  The carries across barrancas or ravines off the tees seem impossible, yet are comfortable drives.  The backdrop of the very large lake and rather treeless scrub areas of the surrounds on very rugged terrain just throws your perception off.  The Sand Hill look is similar, and some of the carries there like #1 and 16 tee look ominous.  

[Tyler Kearns]

Tom,
        It is often said that Pine Valley's fairways are actually quite wide, but the scale of the surrounding vegetation makes them appear quite tight. Because there appears to be no less densely treed areas between the fairways and the unforgiving forests, there is a drastic shift in scale, and the trees suddenly appear much closer than in reality. Just theorizing!

Tyler Kearns

[TEPaul]

Thanks guys--so that's what it's called when I get thoroughly confused on a golf course. I guess I know what it is but I wasn't sure what it was called. When they had to carry me yelling and screaming very slowly along the inside of the cliff- walk back from the back tee on #18 at Old Head I thought that was the effects of "scale" but I guess they were right it was only a huge outbreak of vertigo.

[Mike_Sweeney]

Tom,

To use a basketball analogy - If you take 100 foul shots in your local grade school gym and made 65 shots, I guarantee you that if you go to the Syracuse Carrier Dome (a basketball court sitting in a football stadium), there is no way you will make 65 foul shots. Same 15 feet, however the "Scale" of the surroundings throws off your perception.

[Jeff_Brauer]

Lou,

Actually, I tried to make Ridgeview Ranch smaller in scale than Tangleridge, since they opened so close together.  The greens and bunkers are both smaller.  One reason is that the original superintendent was willing to hand rake smaller bunkers.  On most public courses, the bunkers need at least 18 feet in each lobe to accept machine raking, so they get bigger.

Actually, most people on a course, or one under construction, are amazed at scale during construction, and how much it "pulls in" after time.  I was called to another architects project (apparently they had little confidence in him) and spent a day convincing them that the bunker lines he had marked out weren't "too big" by measuring many of their existing bunkers.

As far as "pure" design, we consider scale in relation to the surroundings.  Big greens don't look right to me in small wooded settings.  Small greens dissapear in front of big mountains, or expansive sky.  When we did Mission Dorado (me, as a part of Killian and Nugent at the time) we consciously made it a big course, because you could see forever.

The general rule is bigger courses for bigger spaces.  There are exceptions, of course.  We also try to mix large and small bunkers for visual illusion related to scale.  

I'm not sure I consider scale and illusion to be the same topic.  For the most part, its just something people sense, when a room is too big, a space too small, etc.  Scale is trying to get human to relate to something a certain way.  There have been lots of studies about the size of some successful public squares, for instance.  Too big, and there is no feeling of enclosure.  To small, and people don't feel comfortable, etc.  As a city boy, I have felt a vague sense of discomfort while being in wide open spaces, like Sand Hills, but I think thats becuase I had never seen a storm actually roll in for miles (and hours)  In the city, they just appear over the rooftops!  

The best illusion I've seen is Fazio's Shadow Creek.  On 11, a short four, he placed a huge bunker in front of the green, making it look much shorter.  On 12, a series of bunkers get smaller and smaller, forcing perspective, and making the green look very far away.  the green is smaller, and the flagstick is 6 instead of 8 feet, to complete the illusion.

[Michael Moore]

To all the rules nerds out there -

That last post about a shorter flagstick has me wondering. Do the rules of golf, or the rules of USGA events, or the rules of the PGA tour, require a uniform height for flagsticks?

I have always found the gigantic flagsticks on hidden greens to be helpful. (A gigantic harvest moon is beautiful but a bit unsettling.)

[Doug Siebert]

A lot of Scottish courses (especially those that see a lot of wind, like Prestwick) tend to have shorter and thicker flagsticks as the norm, so it is a bit disorienting the first day, especially if your first day is on a course that doesn't have marked yardages!

My favorite trick of perspective that I don't see architects use very well most of the time is to very slightly, gradually and evenly pinch in the fairway through the entire length of the hole.  It makes everything appear further than it is, bunkers, ponds, trees, the green.  Of course it requires a hole that's pretty much straightaway and it has to be done just right, there have to be a lot of "parallel" lines in the fairway and it works best from a well elevated tee.  Of course it needs a few curves in it here and there to avoid looking too boring, though maybe even straight lines for the fairway of the entire hole might work if done only once where you have a particularly interesting green complex.  Its amazing how much stuff like that messes with your head when what your eyes see doesn't jibe with what you see on the sprinkler heads for the distance.

[Jim_Bick]

I notice that the less backdrop there is behind a green, the farther it appears (the Carrier dome foul shot effect mentioned earlier). If one thinks, as I do, that visual uncertainty is a key architectural tool, this is another benefit to tree removal, especially on older courses.

[Jim Sweeney]

mdugger- good idea, could work, but not with the moon. It appears larger due to refraction. When it is low on the horizon it appears lager because the light is refracted through  a lot of atmosphere- thousands of miles vs. about eight  when it is directly overhead. However, nearby objects can certainly change the way we interpret other objects.

At Olympic, the rows of tall trees bordering the holes make the playing lanes look absolutely tiny, though most fairways are 40-50 yds. wide. Pasatiempo has the same situation. They say the tree removal program has changed the perspectives at Oakmont considerably.

[DMoriarty]

mdugger

I think you are correct when you say that golf course scale should be considered in the context of the frame of reference.  However, most scientists reject your theory as explanation of why the moon appears bigger at the horizon.  I can't really explain their reasoning, but here are a couple of websites that might help.

http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/3d/moonillu.htm

http://facstaff.uww.edu/mccreadd/

(jesplusone, they discount your theory also.)

[To give you an idea of my level of sophistication on the subject, I can't get past this little tidbit from the first site:  "The moon illusion disappears (for most people) when they bend down and look at the moon [from] between their legs."  You can be assured I will test this out at my first possible opportunity.   Maybe we should all try it on the golf course, to test your analogy.]

Back to golf courses.  I view "scale" as being one of those subtle, intangible factors that force of golfer to think in order to find success.  For example, because the scale of everything at Bethpage is huge, a golfer may feel like he needs to be Paul Bunyan to play many of the holes.  This golfer must overcome the temptation to over-swing in order to be successful there.  In contrast,  the large, cavernous bunkers at Riviera (a relatively small site and tight layout) make the landing areas and greens appear much smaller than the really are.  This is also something the golfer must overcome in order to find success.  

In this age of hit-it-straight-and-long-on-every-hole, I love when scale and other (mis)perceptions sneak into the golfer's mind and alter decision-making, execution, and results.  Maybe architects should study at the Magic Castle to learn how to create optical illusions to unbalance the golfer.  Here is a site with a few optical illusions that might be integrated into architecture:  http://www.sandlotscience.com/Distortions/Distortions_frm.htm  The ones most relevant to Distance Perception in golf are probably the "Ponzo Illusion" and the "Pyramid Illusion."
____
When I was a kid there was a tourist trap near Kalispell, Montana called "The House of Mystery."  The Wall-Drug-style boards leading to the place billed it is a Phenomenon of the Unnatural , where the laws of physics just did not apply.   Every year, on our way to our annual family vacation to hunt brown bear, I begged and pled to stop at the House of Mystery (and at the go-cart track up the road.)  Finally, my parents got tired of my annual begging, so we stopped once at the House of Mystery.   The curio shop was a bust, but the "House" itself did not disappoint.  It was a little shack built on a very steep slope, where all the trees started in one direction then curved at an impossible angle into the sky.  Entering this shack was like entering the twilight zone.  Balls placed on a table slanting DOWN from window rolled UP the table and out the window; dropped rubber balls fell at a severe angle then bounced straight back into my hand;  when my older brother tried to knock me on the ground, I missed the floor completely and crashed against a wall!  Truly amazing stuff.  

No point really, except to say that the House of Mystery would be a tough place to putt.  I think of it whenever I see a golfer frustrated with a putt that seems to break up hill.  (A regular occurrence at Rustic.)

[Mike_Cirba]

I'm willing to predict that Gil Hanse's new course in PA, French Creek, will create a LOT of depth perception problems due to the huge scale of many of the holes, as well as the hilly site.  In fact, some holes seem almost as wide as they are long!

To top it off, there are so many "half par" holes that I believe it will take some time for members there to learn exactly where they can be aggressive and where they have to play conservatively.  That sort of thing can only generate interest and fun in the long run.    

[Forrest Richardson]

I find the aspect of scale to be interesting when it moves out of the "box" we normally regard. Whenever something on a golf hole is different from what we expect or are used to, it causes problems in the golfer's understanding. Jeff B.'s example of small greens in tall woods, and things like that are good examples.

This is intensified when we see a course where there are changes in scale across the course itself. I find it very interesting when there are variations -- as opposed to just one replicated scale.

[Steve Lang]

Architecture 101.. drawing.. Vanishing Points



a hypothetical point of reference, ..

I too am losing my eyesight so the scale of things does lend even more to the effect because details may be lost as we take in the big picture.  Framing/horizon helps or hinders the effect.

I thought the traps and other hazard features at Whispering Pines looked overly large from tee and fairway positions..  I felt intimidated first time out there seeing things.

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()