"Records of Simple Truth and Precision": Photography, Archives, and the Illusion of Control
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cette introduction à la littérature critique du début du XIXe siècle sur la photographie, vue comme une constellation de pratiques technologiquement, culturellement et socialement construites, amène l'auteure à une réflexion sur les origines paradigmatiques communes des pratiques photographiques et archivistiques.En éclairant le rôle des photographies dans la production de la connaissance sociale, elle fournit également des idées sur la fonction des photographies dans la société -dans les affaires de la vie ou dans la vie des affaires -et, par extension, répand une nouvelle lumière sur la nature des photographies en tant que documents et sur la place de celles-ci dans les archives.Finalement, elle invite à prendre en considération les parallèles entre les vocabulaires de la photographie et des archives, ainsi que les implications de la déstabilisation post-moderne de la vérité photographique sur les fondements intellectuels des archives.ABSTRACT This introduction to early nineteenth-century critical writing on photography as a constellation of technologically, culturally, and socially constructed practices prompts reflection upon the shared paradigmatic origins of photographic practices * Originally titled "Art, Science and the Business of Life: Photography and the Nineteenth-Century Imagination," this paper was first presented to the Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology, University of Toronto, 23 February 2000.It was subsequently used as the basis for a discussion of the politics and poetics of institutional discourse at the University of Michigan, 20 September 2000.I am grateful to Brian Baigrie and Sungook Hong for the invitation to present my research in the institute's colloquium series, to Francis X. Blouin and William Rosenberg for the opportunity to explore these ideas at the Sawyer Seminar of the Advanced Study Center at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, and to Brian Osborne for his ongoing guidance and encouragement.I am especially grateful to Terry Cook, Brien Brothman, and Nancy Bartlett, whose close reading, gentle criticism, and thoughtful suggestions helped me to transpose earlier research into an archival context, as well as to clarify and strengthen the links between photography and archives.
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 | 0.002 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.004 | 0.029 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.012 | 0.007 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.000 |
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.
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".