Introducing GEOBIA to Landscape Imageability Assessment: A Multi-Temporal Case Study of the Nature Reserve “Kózki”, Poland

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Manuscript “Introducing GEOBIA to landscape imageability assessment: a multi-temporal case study of grassland landscape” present to put the theoretical concept of using viewpoint as landscape imageability indicator. Its topic is very interesting and its content is of high scientific quality.
The manuscript is the methodical study illustrated with a case study. A small number of weaknesses do not affect the value of the manuscript. I recommend publishing it.

The title partly corresponds to the content. I would change the indication of  "study of grassland landscape" to indicate the location of the studied space. It seems that the study of grassland landscape was not the main intention of the authors. Change of title in this regard should be considered.

The keywords have been chosen properly.

The abstract reflects the content of the article. Contains the description of methods and the main results.

The literature review is very good. It demonstrates the author’s knowledge of the issue. The literature selection is correct.

The course of the methodical procedure is quite complicated but described correctly and precisely.
However, the results are too comprehensive and to a large extent contain their discussion. For example, the beginnings of subsections 4.3, 4.4 are a discussion of the results, not a presentation of the results.
The main attention of the reviewer is to analyze the content of the results, discussion, and summary. The results should include the results themselves. A significant part of them in the presented article should be moved to the discussion. However, the Discussion in its current form is rather a summary. Its content should expand the summary. In its present form, it is laconic and detracts from the great work of the authors.
Figures containing maps should be supplemented with geographic grid coordinates. These are the editor's guidelines (read temple). However, taking into account their size, it seems that such a supplement should be introduced at least in Figure 5.
You should also work on the legibility of the figures. Figure 8 in particular is not legible (invisible grid and points - change colors at least).
The conclusion from the review – the manuscript requires minor changes recommended by the reviewer.

Author Response

Please find our responses to the Reviewer 1 comments in attached PDF document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf

Reviewer 2 Report

An interesting study that potentially could bring us closer to realistic visual landscape analysis with remote sensing tools, in a more automated way, i.e. making possible the advancement in environmental research on many, so far unexplored, levels. 

[line 130] - how is the "high depth of field" defined?

[line 133] - in the visual landscape assessment the long-distance views, or visibility of fore- middle- and back-ground is very important not only because it creates a sense of infinity and mystery, as authors indicated, but also because it creates the psychological comfort and distance from banality of everyday life, sense of freedom, reorientation of one-self within a larger order, and, according to recent neuroscience findings the restorative effect in the brain. Authors may consider elaborating on this using the following references: 

Skalski, J. (2007). Komfort dalekiego patrzenia jako czynnik wartościujący przestrzeń publiczną miasta. Czasopismo Techniczne. Architektura, 104(1-A), 163-167.

Olszewska, A. A., Marques, P. F., Ryan, R. L., & Barbosa, F. (2018). What makes a landscape contemplative?. Environment and Planning B: Urban Analytics and City Science, 45(1), 7-25.

Smardon, R. C., & Felleman, J. P. (1986). DECISION-MAKING MODEL, FOR VISUAL, RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AND PROJECT REVIEW. titi, 1, 2.

In the Discussion section, more attempts could be mentioned about overcoming the software limitations to mimic the actual human eye viewing experience: 

• view exposures and moving through the landscape tracking devices: Helbich, M. (2018). Toward dynamic urban environmental exposure assessments in mental health research. Environ Res, 161, 129-135. doi:10.1016/j.envres.2017.11.006
• input from artificial expert evaluation tool: Navickas, L., Olszewska, A., & Mantadelis, T. (2016, June). Class: Contemplative landscape automated scoring system. In 2016 24th Mediterranean Conference on Control and Automation (MED) (pp. 1180-1185). IEEE.

Additionally, more emphasis could be put on the possible practical implications of the developed tool. Authors seem to emphasize the understanding of the land cover change over time, however, more benefits of having that tools could be recognized. For example, imageability may be an important predictor of the quality of the landscape, which could be used for regional planning and resource management, tourism, real estate market, health and well-being promotion, among others.

Some English language errors were detected, it is recommended to revise again for English grammar and punctuation.

Author Response

Please find our responses to the Reviewer 2 comments in attached PDF document.

Author Response File: Author Response.pdf