22|AULA cd color was the most recognized due to the characteristics of the surroundings. Here the observer relates chromatically in perspective, the grass and the lush trees, and organizes the elements that make up the illuminated space from de immediate recognition of the simplicity of the colors, thus distinguishing the objects (Arnheim 1962). Visibility results for section 2 For section 2, the results of the visibility analysis indicate that there are luminance levels of the surroundings that are lower than in section 1 and similar contrast levels, with the exception of the white object, whose contrast diminishes considerably. As can be seen in table N°8 and in graphic N°4, at a distance of 30 meters not all objects are easily recognized. White has a lower contrast C=-0,05 and better visibility according to 96% of the observers. The red object stands out again as the slightly more visible object with 76%, followed by the green with 20% and a similar contrast C=-0,9. When the observer recognizes the visible object, the green object was visualized better for 44% and the blue and red created a parity with percentages of 28% y 24%, due to the equilibrium between their contrasts. Regarding the less visible objects, the white and red objects were not recognized and the blue objects have the highest level of recognition with 64%, followed by green with 36%. Interestingly, the blue object is the only one recognized in each one of the levels of visibility. Visibility is not only a combination of the contrast of luminance between an object and its surroundings, it also depends on the contrast between the colors of each one of the objects, the levels of lighting that influence them and their materiality. This understanding and recognition of objects is transcendental to master the lighted space, offering an increased sense of security and spatial comfort to the pedestrian, enhancing the programmatic space and increasing its daily use. Esquema N°1. Estructura para la metodología de análisis. / Diagram N°1. Structure for the method of analysis. CONCLUSIONS The principal conclusion of this work is that in dynamic lighting, the language of artificial lighting and the language of urban space must be articulated, thus configuring the final composition of the perceived space, which must cover not only the need to “see” but also the breadth and complexity of the nocturnal urban landscape. This is why the dynamism proposed by these lighting systems must not be conceived as the great solution to all the lighting problems of the urban space, but should be evaluated and its use proposed as part of the architectural – landscape project. Specific conclusions Stands out the proposal of a system that would boost certain shortfalls that are characteristic of static lighting, related to the constant need for flexible, urban spaces that are not conditioned by the programmatic project, but rather complement each other as hierarchized lighting scenes. It is important to emphasize that this is not something that is resolved simply by a system of dynamic lighting, but that requires articulating different variables to solve the lighting problems and allows for an increased understanding of the urban space, Dynamic installations can perform as a complement, tackling specific problems of the urban space that, when solved, will improve the efficiency and the performance of the installation, satisfying the need for comfort at the same time. There are also components of a subjective character that have been mentioned by the park users, such as glare, perceived speed, visual accommodation and visual adaptation, which require a specialized analysis. From these conditionings, we conclude that the creation of a methodology is a priority for the analysis of the influence of dynamic lighting in understanding the urban space. The aforementioned methodology is composed of 3 stages of intervention, as can be seen in diagram N°1. Stage 1: corresponds to the background and basic parameters handed to the planner, prior to the design of the lighting project, defined by: . Orientation and general definitions. . Instructions. Stage 2: corresponds to the analysis of the lighting project that the planner hands to a specialist that will evaluate the proposal, based on criteria such as: . The analysis of the needs of the illuminated space and 5 key points. . The expected results. . The correlation of the problems