MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408952099 · doi:10.33137/pbsc.v61i1.43638

Institutional Intermediality

2025· article· en· W4408952099 on OpenAlexaffvenueabout
Michel Hardy-Vallee

Bibliographic record

VenuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of Canada · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicMedia Studies and Communication
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Among the institutions that supported photographers after WWII, the Still Photography Division (SPD) of the National Film Board of Canada (NFB) distinguished itself by its inherently intermedial approach. Originally established as a service provider for federal government departments, the Division quickly mutated during the 1960s into a protean institution that simultaneously functioned as image bank, photo laboratory, gallery, publisher, press agency, and multimedia project incubator. The books it published thus functioned alternatively as exhibition catalogues, coffee table books, souvenirs, diplomatic gifts, artists’ books, or photobooks. This paper seeks to understand the cultural ramifications of the kind of photographic work that was championed by the SPD from the late 1960s to the early 1970s by asking the question: Why promote a specific medium, photography, based on its intermedial uses? I address this paradox through the case study of three co-temporal photographic SPD books: Normand Grégoire’s (b. 1944) Série 4 (1971), Judith Eglington’s (b. 1945) Earth Visions (1973), and John Max’s (1936–2011) Open Passport (1973). All three were produced in a period during which the SPD’s mandate was pivotally redefined away from holding a mirror to Canada and towards fostering contemporary artists. Each of these works was also produced simultaneously for multiple supports—together, they span the domains of book, magazine, portfolio, exhibition, movie, and slide show—thus de-centering and de-hierarchizing media in a manner germane to art and media schools, as well as amateur practices. The works of Grégoire, Eglington, and Max thus point at a long-term narrative of resistance to the museal division of labour between media in the Canadian context and show how photobooks constitute a field to which scholars of the book should more actively contribute.

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 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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: Not applicable
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.699
Threshold uncertainty score0.452

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.004
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.254 · 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

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePapers of The Bibliographical Society of CanadaSame topicMedia Studies and CommunicationFrench-language works237,207