Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract This article provides a short history of photography and cartooning, with an eye toward elucidating their comingling in comics. Drawing from the work of several theorists and practitioners, it traces a variety of methods in which photography has been used in comics. Emphasis is placed on comics’ flexibility as a narrative form; photography’s impact on narrative practices, especially visual narrative practices; and how the use of photography in comics extends well beyond fulfilling a documentary function. Resume Cet article offre une courte histoire de la photographie et du dessin, faite en vue d’elucider leur croisement dans la bande dessinee. Il s’appuie sur les recherches de plusieurs theoriciens et praticiens et presente une serie de techniques ayant conduit a l’utilisation de photos en bande dessinee. On met l’accent sur la flexibilite de la bande dessinee comme forme narrative et sur l’impact de la photographie sur la narration, plus particulierement visuelle. Enfin, on discute aussi l’utilisation de la photographie en bande dessinee au-dela de sa seule fonction documentaire.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.006 | 0.030 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.011 | 0.013 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.013 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".