Shrouded History: The Canadian Film and Photo Unit, Records Creation, Reuse, and the Recontextualizing of "Lost" Audiovisual Heritage
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This article provides a history of the record created by the film unit of the Canadian Army during the Second World War. Through a reading of the records (photos, textual records, etc.), the author rebuilds the context of creation of the audiovisual records, their custodial history after the war, and their postcustodial experience. The contextualizing postcustodial history is relevant to understanding not only the Canadian Film and Photo Unit heritage, but also other aspects of Canada’s audiovisual history. Canada’s early audiovisual historical record is very much affected by its later custodians and archives. As such, this article is a history of the making of a historical record during the Second World War as well as a history of recordkeeping after the war. RÉSUMÉCet article présente un historique des documents d’archives créés par l’unité de film et de photographie de l’Armée canadienne pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale. En examinant les documents d’archives (photos, documents textuels, etc.), l’auteure rétablit le contexte de création des documents audio-visuels, l’historique de leur conservation après la guerre et celle de leur « post-conservation » (« postcustodial experience »). L’historique du contexte de « post-conservation » (« contextualizing postcustodial history ») est pertinent afin de comprendre non seulement le patrimoine de l’Unité de film et de photographie de l’Armée canadienne, mais aussi d’autres aspects de l’histoire audio-visuelle canadienne. Les archives des premiers documents audio-visuels du Canada ont été très affectées par leurs conservateurs et leurs centres d’archives. Ainsi, cet article se veut l’histoire de la création d’archives historiques pendant la Seconde Guerre mondiale, aussi bien que l’histoire de la tenue de documents dans l’après-guerre.
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 | 0.001 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.008 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.028 | 0.021 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.014 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.016 | 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".