CineScale2: a dataset of cinematic camera features in movies
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.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
, are essential features in the film-making process due to their influence on the viewer's perception of the scene. We provide a database containing camera feature annotations on camera angle and camera level, for about 25,000 image frames. Frames are sampled from a wide range of movies, freely available images, and shots from cinematographic websites, and are annotated on the following five categories - Overhead, High, Neutral, Low, and Dutch - for what concerns camera angle, and on six different classes of camera level: Aerial, Eye, Shoulder, Hip, Knee, and Ground level. This dataset is an extension of the Cinescale dataset [1], which contains movie frames and related annotations regarding shot scale. The CineScale2 database enables AI-driven interpretation of shot scale data and opens to a large set of research activities related to the automatic visual analysis of cinematic material, such as movie stylistic analysis, video recommendation, and media psychology. To these purposes, we also provide the model and the code for building a Convolutional Neural Network (CNN) architecture for automated camera feature recognition. All the material is provided on the the project website; video frames can be also provided upon requests to authors, for research purposes under fair use.
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 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 | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| 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 it