COSTANZA CARAFFA, ed., Photo Archives and the Photographic Memory of Art History
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This collection of papers challenges archivists and art historians to re-examine the use of photographic sources for the study of art history, and brings to the foreground the role of photography as a mediator in art history.While the title of the book will interpellate photo archivists, art historians, and visual resource librarians, the extensive analyses, case studies, and theoretical discussions could provoke parallel examinations in other fields of study that rely heavily on photographs -or even other types of records.The approach taken might also contribute to examinations of the interrelationship between media and discipline in ethnography, musicology, architectural history, and film studies.Be they field notes, audio recordings, photographs, or DVDs, what are the impacts of recordings or study surrogates on the disciplines that use them?For archivists, the readings in this book should lead to new considerations for archival appraisal, scholarly access, and digitization initiatives.The editor, Costanza Caraffa, is the head of the Photothek at the Kunsthistoriches Institut in Florenz -Max-Planck-Institut.In 2009, her institution and the Courtauld Institute of Art in London organized two conferences titled Photo Archives and the Photographic Memory of Art History; this volume is a compilation of the papers from these events.Twenty-nine authors, including art historians, photographic historians, museologists, and curators, have contributed.They are based at universities and collecting institutions in Europe
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 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".