Notice bibliographique
Résumé
REVIEW DR. TUBE AND MR. SNOW I think we tend to talk interchangeably, and not very usefully, about film and cinema, as if they were the same thing. Cinema is a social institution, while film is a medium. And I think while the medium may change, the institution will be just fine. I don't see how the institution of cinema-which involves the social act of looking at moving images, and talking about them-is going to be threatened by new technology. Of course, it will be affected by it in terms of how films are made, distributed, and exhibited, but it won't be destroyed by it. I can quite easily imagine film as a medium disappearing quietly in the next ten years with scarcely a blip in terms of the practices of cinema. -Anthony McCall1 Given its overt use of computer-generated effects as well as what critics perceive to be its numerous allusions to its maker's previous films, it is tempting to view *Corpus Callosum (2002) as Michael simultaneous farewell to the and ode to the new possibilities of digital image technology. Rigorously predicated on irreducible cinematic facts, writes J. Hoberman in his review of the film, Snow's structuralist epics-Wavelength and La Region Centrale-announced the imminent passing of the film era. *Corpus Callosum heralds the advent of the next.2 Yet elsewhere in his review, Hoberman remarks that piece bridges the gap between film and video,3 reminding us that art often occupies an ambiguous position between mediums-between film and photography, for example, in One Second in Montreal (1969). Paradoxically, I argue here, in its very exploration of the new possibilities of digital image technology, *Corpus Callosum returns to and extends some of the cinema's earliest, most fundamental traditions. (Corpus callosum is, after all, the name of the connecting tissue between the brain's two hemispheres). In doing so, it suggests that, for all of their novelty, the use of digital technologies in filmmaking will be driven by some of the same basic impulses and desires that have shaped much cinematic art over the last one hundred or so years, and that the will survive even if celluloid is no longer used to make films. The film thereby offers a salutary antidote to the death of cinema rhetoric of rupture and revolution that tends to predominate-much to the delight, one suspects, of those who make and profit from the new technology-in the discourse on digital media. One contributor to this discourse who has emphasized the continuities between the and digital media is Lev Manovich. To start with, Manovich points out, digital media have borrowed many representational conventions from the cinema. For example, when data is represented three-dimensionally, access to it is often modeled on the film camera and its movements. During the 1980s and 1990s the camera model became as much of an interface convention as scrollable windows or cut-and-paste operations. It became an accepted way of interacting with any data represented in three dimensions-which in computer culture means literally anything and everything-the results of a physical simulation, an architectural site, the design of a new molecule, statistical data, the structure of a computer network, and so on. As computer culture gradually spatializes all representations and experiences, they are subjected to the camera's particular grammar of data access. Zoom, tilt, pan, and track-we now use these operations to interact with data spaces, models, objects, and bodies.4 *Corpus Callosum makes extensive use of these camera movements, especially tracking (or what Snow likes to call trucking). Once inside the office in which much of the film takes place, there begins a series of tracking shots edited together into a continuous loop, with the camera repeatedly tracking across the space of the office from left to right, beginning and ending each time in roughly the same places. …
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».