MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W184990665

Cinema Cities, Media Cities: The Contemporary International Studio Complex

2003· book· en· W184990665 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

aboutThe title or abstract carries a Canadian signal from the geographic lexicon.
no affNo Canadian affiliation: this work is invisible to an affiliation-only frame.
No Canadian affiliation. An affiliation-only frame, the usual design, would never have seen this work. It is one of the works that make the case for inverting the frame.

Bibliographic record

VenueSwinburne Research Bank (Swinburne University of Technology) · 2003
Typebook
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicCultural Industries and Urban Development
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsStudioPrecinctMovie theaterVisual artsCommissionProduction (economics)Media studiesGeographySociologyArtPolitical scienceArchaeologyLaw
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Advances in information and communication technologies have enabled elements of film and television production to be perhaps more widely dispersed than at any previous time in the history of the media. A single project's financing, pre-production, production, post-production and marketing each can and do take place in different parts of the world. And while historically it is not unusual for elements of a single project's production and post-production to be undertaken in different locations, in recent years the amount of internationally mobile production and post-production has grown to unprecedented levels. Statistical data on the volume and total production spend of runaway production indicate that such production has become an integral part of many film economies. Looking at the pre-production, production and post-production parts of that chain, the tendency until recently has perhaps been most remarkable in animation, but location production and dispersed post-production have both become increasingly common. But at the same time as this growing dispersal which appears to free audiovisual production as never before, there is a movement towards concentration of production and post-production in a number of particular locations. Some of these have been historically significant filmmaking centres. Others have developed capacity in more recent times. A key common feature of these centres is the existence of a studio complex and/or a cluster of related production and service companies. For a time it seemed as though large cities and aspirant players could meet the spatial needs of producers with sound stages fashioned from converted warehouses, factories or bus depots (such as the provincial government-owned The Bridge Studios in Vancouver, Canada). Many if not all production services could be obtained in the city or region around the sound stage. But in recent times it seems that in order to maintain or grow their share of the increasing volume of mobile, international production, these centres have needed to develop integrated production spaces allowing for the co-location of a variety of services. There has been something of a recent vogue internationally for large-scale studio complexes comprising sound stages, construction workshops, production offices, perhaps a watertank and backlot, and a number of tenant or related service companies enabling considerable amounts of work on a project to be conducted on a single site. Studio complexes with multiple sound stages capable of meeting the production needs of high-budget and blockbuster production while simultaneously servicing telemovie, television series or advertising production are springing up or being talked up around the globe. Existing facilities are undergoing extensive and often extremely costly refurbishments to remain technologically competent and internationally competitive. In many cases such developments have obtained substantial public support in the form of loans and tax concessions, as well as indirect benefits from the promotional work of film agencies. Some are even part publicly owned or managed as state-owned enterprises. Increasingly, it seems, they require ongoing support, needing periodic injections of public funds or largesse to remain competitive and on the technological cutting edge. Along with tax and investment incentive schemes, favourable foreign currency exchange rates and a pool of highly skilled personnel, studio complexes are core components of the production infrastructure necessary to attract and generate ongoing work. And they 'play a structuring role' as a focal point and key indicator of the health of national production. To date little attention has been paid either to the nature, character and variety of studio complexes or to the production ecologies comprising domestic and international activity that make up the production work of particular places. This study will map the variety of studio complexes internationally, situate Australia's current and projected complexes within this international framework, and discuss the contemporary character of the relations between studio complexes and international production. The studio complexes examined in this report are all outside the United States, both to indicate the international aspect of principally English-language production and to make the study manageable.

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.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.003
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Science and technology studies, Research integrity, Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesScience and technology studies, Research integrity
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Other · Consensus signal: Other
Teacher disagreement score0.066
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0030.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0020.008
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0040.001
Research integrity0.0010.003
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0100.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.149
GPT teacher head0.331
Teacher spread0.181 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it