Cameras in the Countryside: Recreational Photography in Rural Ontario, 1851-1920
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The introduction and subsequent refinement of glass plate negative technology facilitated photography’s appropriation within rural Ontario. As a recreational consumer technology, the camera became easier to use, financially accessible, and portable, thus better suiting the needs of rural consumers. While technological advancements allowed the camera to be adopted as a leisure pursuit, its use was directed by the countryside’s cultural values and social norms. These interests influenced who used cameras, how photo-supplies were purchased, the camera’s place within household income diversification strategies, and the photographer’s gaze, all of which suggest that when photo-technology was used in the countryside, it was as an extension of, not a challenge to, rural cultural values. At the same time, as the first photography system that was accessible to the middle and labouring classes, glass plates cannot help but reveal the visual priorities this new group of consumers, thus contributing to current discussions on cultural aspects of rural society. Consequently, glass plate cameras in Ontario’s countryside functioned as both a documentary medium as well as a form of cultural expression.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.019 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".