Bibliographic record
Abstract
The term �documentary� to describe a particular class of non-fiction film comes into general use in English by the early 1930s, but films having the characteristics of what would come to be regarded as documentaries pre-existed the application of the word.The concept of the photograph as a document � in the sense of the image being accurate and faithful evidence of what is before the camera�s lens � dates from the outset of the introduction of the technology in the 1840s.With the coming of cinematography, the camera�s capacity to capture the �real� was its initial selling point and, although, the cinema was soon captured for fiction, coverage of news events, actualities (as the French termed them), continued.Films of travel � �travelogues� (from 1908) or �documentaires romanc�s� � and the first ethnographic film appeared (1911), as did scientific movies both popular (Cheese Mites, 1903, Charles Urban) and scholarly (Mechanics of the Brain, 1926, Vesvolod Pudovkin�s footage shot in Pavlov�s lab).Governments were quick to see film�s value as propaganda (Urban�s Battle of the Somme, 1916); so were charities (Save the Children�s Russian Famine, 1921).European artists, such as the painter Fernand L�ger, experimented with the manipulation of images of the everyday often in a non-narrative form (Ballet mechanique, 1924).Overall, though, non-fiction film was resistant to the growing sophistication of the fictional cinema�s narrative techniques.�Documentary� came to describe a specific non-fiction cinema that melded the camera�s ability to document the world with fiction�s compelling narratives, but without so manipulating the original material that its claim on the real would become attenuate.Edward Curtis� In the Land of the Headhunters (1914), for instance, combined non-actors (aka �real� people), authentic settings and costumes (albeit in Curtis� established still-photographic style of recreations of the immediate past) with a fictional story that had no relationship with the Kwakiutl culture he was supposedly recording.He saw the work, nevertheless, as �documenting�, in some sense or another, Native American reality (Holm and Quimby, 1980).Robert Flaherty, a prospector filming in the Canadian Artic, failed in his earliest attempts to move beyond what he described as �a scene of this and a a scene of that�.no story� (Christopher, 2005:322); but Headhunters showed him how.In 1920/21, with specialised technology (hand-cranked Akeley cameras specifically designed for use in the wild), Flaherty filmed a dramatic 20 year-old true Inuit story of survival.He cast a trapper, Allakarialuk, renamed for the film �Nanook�, as the hero of his reconstruction of this tale.Leaving Curtis� fictional story-telling behind, Flaherty�s breakthrough was to
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.006 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.282 | 0.069 |
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".