Ok DJ, I'll bite. What is "parallax layer animation"? Sounds more like "Kid Stays in the Picture" technique than Ken Burns style.

From Wikipedia:
Parallax, or more accurately motion parallax (Greek: παραλλαγή (parallagé) = alteration) is the change of angular position of two stationary points relative to each other as seen by an observer, due to the motion of an observer. Simply put, it is the apparent shift of an object against a background due to a change in observer position.

Jerry

"From Wikipedia:
Parallax, or more accurately motion parallax (Greek: παραλλαγή (parallagé) = alteration) is the change of angular position of two stationary points relative to each other as seen by an observer, due to the motion of an observer. Simply put, it is the apparent shift of an object against a background due to a change in observer position."

And this is precisely what your doing.
I dont understand your arguement.. or your reasoning for discontention

By creating multiple layers of a photographic element (ie elements of a picture) and then recompositing them, and adding motion to each layer, you end up with an animation.
As these are runnng parralel to each other, ... we end up with the term "parallax animation... " or parallax scrolling if u want to be really REALLY specific.. but as were not just scrolling here, animation seems to be far more accurate..
Sure u can fancy it up, but in teh end, they must be parallel in one way or another, else the final image is incoherant.

In the old days, we used to watch the old snes and megadrive/genesis games and this concept is no different
Whether it be X, Y or Z axis scrolling, its still scrolling, and the layers are still within a parallel alignment to each other... else the picture wouldnt exist

Well,
a) That's not the Ken Burns style. He doesn't do the simulated 3D thing.

b) As far as what he does do in his documentaries, he's not the one who started calling it "the Ken Burns style," it was reviewers and the public. In other words, he didn't "put his name to it" as DJPadre complained. :-)

Fred

DJPardre, what you're describing is generally called the "Kid Stays in the Picture" effect. It was popularized (though probably not pioneered by) a movie of the same name.

The so-called "Ken Burns effect" is essentially just zooming in / out of and panning across photos (flat, single-layered ones). In particular, it describes when this is used in conjunction with narration that matches the current focus of the photograph.

For example, a narrater talks about the presidents of the United States while the "camera" pans across a collage of their pictures, with it reaching each president as the narrater mentions him.

Obviously, he didn't invent the concept -- it just became closely associated with him because he used it a lot and, I suppose in many people's opinions, effectively.

Rob

It sounds like an interesting series. Did you see it on TV first, then buy the discs?

great show,, it was produced by one of my fellow charlotte production companies tentmakers entertainment, for all those that think you need the latest and greatest these guys dont own a camera and at the time didn't have an edit suite , pick up crews along the way,, we use the voice talent Joe Van Riper great guy and great voice http://www.mrvo.com/

"DJPardre, what you're describing is generally called the "Kid Stays in the Picture" effect. It was popularized (though probably not pioneered by) a movie of the same name."

Didn't Disney do this with their Multiplane Camera in the '30s?

"DJPardre, what you're describing is generally called the "Kid Stays in the Picture" effect."

No, what in fact i am describing is the parallax (or parallel) animation of multiple layers. Be they video, or still, or extracts.masks of either of the two.

There is no actual official name to it, and until there is a name created to describe the effect, then i will use the accurate technical term for the technique.

In technical terms, the wording used here to describe the effect is far more accurate than just tagging it onto one particular show, or to a person who uses a technique.
Do we say "oh i'll just use the Hope and Faith technique here... " or I'll just use the discovery technique there..

As i mentioned, it does not matter whether ur cropping, panning or zooming, the fact remains that the images MUST be parallel to each other for the final image to be coherant.

I'll be frank, i dont care what people call it, i DO care how people percieve it though, and the implications of this perception.

If u were to sell a slideshow to a potential client, and say "oh we'll use the "ken burns effect" here" do u honestly believe your client will know what your talking about? Or are you namedropping to sound implressive?
To me this is just mindless namedropping and does nothign to convey the technique itself...
In other words, it doesnt MEAN anything to those who hear it...

If u use the term "well use some photographic parallax animation here" or "Parallax photographic animation there" at least they will have SOME understanding of what your envisioning

No offense to those that feel attached to this term (for whatever reason that may be) but like i said, this technique and many others like it, have been in use for many MANY years... long before ANY name was put to it...

If u were to sell a slideshow to a potential client, and say "oh we'll use the "ken burns effect" here" do u honestly believe your client will know what your talking about?

Absolutely. Because of the variety of his work (Civil War, Baseball, etc.), he's a lot better known than your preferred terms.

If u use the term "well use some photographic parallax animation here" or "Parallax photographic animation there" at least they will have SOME understanding of what your envisioning

Most clients I know would look at me and say WTF if I ever said that to them.

Mike

hey thanks for the update...

I was just looking for stuff on castles and mansions (keyword search) in amazon, and stumbled across them...

thx re mrvo.com link.. Joe Van Riper, and the charlotte reference... agree the narrator/vo talent is great, very stately, somber, and yet interesting vo work on the narration of the entire series..

anyways, main point is, whatever we call panning across still photos... it was a great series, very well crafted and edited... it's very rare for a documentary type series to hold my attention for so many hours, much less get me to pony up hundreds of bucks for it (this is the first)... exceptionally well edited, scripted and shot..


ken