Documentary effect

Hi Guys,
I need to know how to make that effect that particularly documentaries use. History channel use it a lot. Where they take a photo, say an old black and white, and they make the main subject seem to be slightly seperate to the background and they pan slowly across the image revealing more background as though it was a 3d image. Perhaps this is a photoshop or illustrator job but would appreciate it if you could point me in the right direction for a tutorial.
Thanks,
Brian.

Along with the suggestions, links and descriptions above, I'd like to throw out an additional possibility. Instead of using the exact "background" image, and having to do the hand-work to replace where the subject was removed with the Clone Tool, think of picking another similar image, or perhaps another area of that background image to use on Video Track 1. You see this effect in several golf ads right now. The background images are shot separately and never had the subject in them. This allows of a lot less work needing to be done.
As an example, if one had a Civil War (US, or other) archival image of a soilder on a battlefield and you wish to separate them from the background, instead of using exactly what did appear behind them in the original photo, think of finding a similar shot with nothing needing to be cut out and Cloned in. It might just be going to one side, or the other, of the same shot, or maybe a different background all together.
This can save a ton of work, and depending on how far you wish to remove the subject from the background, can save a ton of work. Also, think about varying the focus of the background. As you zoom in on your subject, Keyframe in Gaussian Blur on the background to make it appear to receed more, behind the subject.
Good luck, and have fun,
Hunt

Similar Messages

  • 3D effect for history documentary

    Sometimes in documentaries they'll make the people in an old photo look like they're standing in front of the background. It even looks like the camera is dollying from one side to another, with the perspective changing accordingly.
    How is this done? And how do they prevent empty space from appearing in the areas behind the people?
    Thanks.

    Often they make a couple of copies of the photo, mask out the subjects, position them in front of the background in 3D space, and start panning the camera point of view.
    Here's an example done in
    Adobe After Effects.

  • Can you edit layers separately on a sphere in After Effects?

    I'm working on a history documentary about World War II and I have a map of the world divided into colonial empires. Each empire is a separate layer.
    If you apply the map to a sphere in Photoshop and then bring it into After Effects, can you animate the empire layers fading in their opacity at different times?
    Is this possible? I have no idea how to do this but I imagine that it must be relatively simple to do.
    Thank you very much in advance for any helpful suggestions.
    - Nick

    Did you choose File --> Import, picked the PSD and then actually set the dimensions to Comp - Document size? this should definitely work. Note that by default it will import as Footage, which is not what you want. If that's not the problem, you may have accidentalyl flattened/ merged the Photoshop document or done something else that forces AE into flattening the doc. For instance the document being in CMYK instead of RGB color mode would do that... I recommend you double-check in PS.
    Mylenium

  • Can After Effects CC handle this many Illustrator layers?

    I designed a world map in Adobe Illustrator with many layers for a documentary about interwar Europe (1919-1939). The Illustrator map actually has 80 layers. Would this be a map with too many layers to animate in After Effects?
    In AE I plan to add a camera to zoom in on parts of the map like Europe and the Middle East. But I'll also need to animate the opacity of individual layers to show territorial changes and invasions in Europe before and after 1919 Versailles Treaty and the 1938 Munich Agreement. The reason I have so many layers is that I thought I could use this one map in multiple different map animations for my film.
    Can AE handle this many layers? Or is it wiser to keep the layers to a minimum number?
    Also, is there no way in After Effects to group the layers other than pre-comping them? It would be great to be able to have sub-layers in AE like you can in Illustrator. I could then reduce the number of layers in my map from 80 to less than 20, by grouping all European states as sub-layers into a Europe layer, as so on for Africa, Asia, etc.
    Unless I'm mistaken, Illustrator sub-layers are not visible in After Effects, are they?

    Rick and Mylenium,
    Thank you both for your feedback. Much appreciated. Mylenium, I'm sure you're right. I probably was trying to do too much in one map. I'll follow your suggestion and use the minimum number of layers for each scenario. I'm spending too much time as it is looking for particular layers among the 80.
    I do wish it were possible in AE to simply group layers without pre-comping them though. Or that Illustrator sub-layers could be visible. It would really help to streamline the workflow. I suppose I could precomp all layers and then simply add a camera to the pre-comp.
    Rick I'll try the expression controls and parenting, but can you elaborate a little further regarding your suggestion of pre-planning in Illustrator?
    Thank you both again for your helpful suggestions.

  • Problems with Dinamic Link between Premiere pro CC and After Effects CC

    I'm having serious problems with dinamic link between premiere pro and after effects, really serious problems that have 2 big projects in trouble (a documentary and a video clip) and I had to redo all the work pipeline to the consumer.
    The documentary for a spanish TV was made on CC 2014 and a video clip was made on CC. Both of them with a lot of after effects composition in the premiere pro timeline. Render freeze, a lot of playback issues, and many more problems... Until I decided to remove these links between premiere and after effects and render out all the after effects compositions one by one and insert as clips in premiere pro. 1 week working away with back and fourth.
    I've got a huge workstation:
    i7 4990
    32Gb ram
    GTX780 3gb
    256 gb system ssd
    2 Tb project storage
    *All my hardware and software are update.
    I know that a lot of folks are on the same huge problem and I want to ask everyone:
    How do you save this?
    What is your pipeline?
    Are there any solution?
    Best practice to use dinamic link in a huge project?
    Thanks,
    Ruben Gimenez.
    R&D iceblink.es
    www.rambot.es

    Thank You, Jim -
    Unfortunately that specifically did not work.
    Based on another comment sent to me, here is what did.
    In PProCC
    File > Adobe Dynamic Link > New After Effects Composition
    In AECC
    From that composition created from PPro, I imported the project (aep) initially created in AECC from another team member. Saved the file.
    Back in PProCC
    File > Adobe Dynamic Link > Import After Effects Composition
    Magic.

  • Use Color or Magic Bullet Looks for complete grade and effects?

    I am a long time MB Looks user - not heavy dosages but I do find it easy and fast as it keeps you inside FCP and along with the 3-Way CC it was efficient.
    I am nearing an edit on a 80 minute documentary which involves going from color to clips converted to black & white and sepia tone for effect. I am thinking to use Color workflow for the entire color grade and effects.
    Does Color dispense the need for Looks altogether? I have used color a few times now but not on a complete feature length, so I would need to sharpen my knowledge.

    Jon Braeley wrote:
    Does Color dispense the need for Looks altogether? I have used color a few times now but not on a complete feature length, so I would need to sharpen my knowledge.
    Color, MB Looks, FCP's 3WCC are all arrows in our quiver. We don't need to give one up to use another.
    I'm working on a doc now (it's rendering out in Color as I type this) that has "Hero" shots being treated in MB Looks. But I use Color to even out all those Hero shots so the MBL settings I'm using will be applied consistently. But even then I find it useful to to precede MBL with a 3WCC so I can easily adjust the tonality, saturation, and color palette of the shot without having to step back into the MBL interface.
    I can definitely guarantee that I couldn't have graded this show in 2.5 days if I just kept myself to using only the FCP interface. Even with the prep time for the Color round-trip - I get better results faster...
    - pi

  • Premiere Pro CC 2014 Crashing and Bogging Down on Documentary Film Project

    We have been working in Premiere on this documentary film for months.
    As we reach completion it is beginning to really bog down and crash a lot.
    Equipment is
    iMac 27 inch 3.5 GHz Intel Core i7 Late 2013 Model
    Apple Cinema HD Display
    32 GB 1600 Mhz DDR3 RAM
    NVIDIA GeForce GTX 780M 4096 MB Graphics Card
    1TB internal SSD Drive
    We are running Premiere Pro CC 2014.0.1 and have remained there because we don't want to upgrade the software in the middle of the project.
    The media is all on the external drive. It's a USB 3.0 connection. There is quite a lot of footage that we are working with.
    We do have some After Effects comps that are linked in the project and we have exported the ones that are complete as QuickTimes to try to stop that from bogging us down.
    Any advice on how we can manage this crashing and freezing problem would be much appreciated.
    We don't have the cash to upgrade the computer and it has been working pretty well for us so far.
    Here are things we have done:
    Made a smaller timeline because we were working on one that was the entire movie.
    Turned off the secondary monitor and unplugged it.
    We are looking at moving the render cache off the external drive to a thunderbolt drive, but I'm concerned that this may take a long time.
    Any recommendations would be greatly appreciated.

    Splitting up the read/write items is rather a key to getting smoother operation out of PrPro. Either that or putting things on a large RAID-0/5, this sort of thing is covered over on the
    Tweaker's Page ...
    http://ppbm7.com/index.php/tweakers-page
    And I highly recommend you take a look. Their info isn't just "we think ... " ... but the results of many many carefully crafted test sequences run on many machines with all sorts of hardware bits & pieces. You can also register, download the PBM test and run it on your own machine. It takes only a little while to do so, and with the logger app that's included and posting the results back to them, you can get a very good breakdown on where your machine is doing ok ... and where any choke points are occurring.
    I think this would be good for you right now ... you need to get stuff done, not guess & try things.
    Neil

  • Quite urgent Ken Burns effect problem

    I am working on a documentary (due tomorrow afternoon). This is a fulll length piece and has hundreds of photographs in it. The trouble is; all the photographs when they where imported automatically got the Ken Burns effect... I want to de-effect them. So I got to Media--Show photo settings and de-select the Ken Burns effect.
    One some photographs, it works fine. But on others, I click on Show photo settings and it simply turns the screen to black, even if I select the photograph again.
    This is a bit distressing as all the photographs have intense Ken Burns effect which cannot be for the final product. If I should be more detailed about what I am trying to say, please tell me. It actually is pretty urgent that I figure this out.
    Thank you very much.

    Have you emptied iMovie's trash? If so, you may experience a 'bug' in iMovie that will not allow you to change the settings of a clip that was imported with the KB effect. That is why you see the black screen. iMovie can no longer access the original photo's clip because it sent it to the trash. This is not a problem so long as you do not empty the trash. But, once emptied, the only way to fix it is to reimport the photo.
    Here is a link to more discussion about it: http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=4289801&#4289801
    and this link describes a better fix in case you are worried that you will inadvertently empty the trash:
    http://discussions.apple.com/thread.jspa?messageID=1912675&#1912675
    Hope this helps in time!

  • Vector Images in After Effects

    I'm trying to figure out the workflow on some motion info graphics for a documentary film.
    In Flash I created a 2D animation using a layered Illustrator file. It looks very crisp and sharp when I exported it to quicktime to put into Premiere.
    Then I created the same thing in After Effects to see what the process was like comparatively for this type of graphic.
    The thing that strikes me is the After Effects video doesn't look as crisp as the Flash animation even though they are both HD 1080p. The lines are more pixelated in the After Effects. I just looks blurrier.
    Is that because After Effects rasterizes those graphics and Flash does not?
    The main reason I am considering using After Effects is it is obviously a more robust program and I might need some its features. It also might be easier for the editor, who is more versed in AE to adjust the animations and because it roundtrips easier from Premiere, but I don't want to use it if the animations are not going to look at crisp.
    I'd appreciate hearing suggestions or thoughts on this.

    Thank you Rick. I turned on CR for all the layers. I'm going to post a screen grab of what I'm talking about. I exported both videos in the same compression and both were made for HD 1080p in their settings. I exported the AE in animation codec to get the best quality. Here are the screen grabs from the exported videos in Quicktime. I would love to be able to have as crisp a picture in AE because I think I may be able to do more with it in the long run and it's more of a film industry standard.
    If anyone can direct me as to what I'm doing wrong it would be greatly appreciated, but I think you can see the difference I'm talking about and why the Flash image is more desirable.
    After Effects
    Flash

  • What is the best way to zoom in and out of pictures, documentary style?

    I'm new to Adobe Premiere and I was looking to a make a mock documentary in which there would be slow zoom in's of photo's while the narrator is talking. If you could imagine what I'm talking about.
    Could anyone tell me how you would accomplish that?
    Thanks

    It looks like my image has disappeared from my earlier post. I will link to it again at the end of this post. 
    Ann, I do not understand what you are disagreeing with. You posted a link to a tutorial. I watched it. I don't mean to be troublesome, but Jeff never touched the anchor point once. He pointed it out so people would know what the symbol was, but he never changed the value. If you prefer to use it, that's fine. I merely suggested that doing it the way Jeff did it in the tutorial was the easiest way for most people to begin. You are not a beginner. The fact that you have different ways to do things is not at all unusual. I would be shocked if professionals did everything the basic way that a beginner would do it.
    Yes, of course my tutorials are ancient. I don't disagree with that. However, I think I did a pretty decent job on keyframes way back then. I don't believe that anything has changed regarding keyframes between 1.5 and CS6. There are certainly more fixed effects, but the keyframes act the same way.
    Perhaps I should not have poked fun at Jeff since you seem to have taken it personally. I have never met him, and all I know is that he is a good teacher, as I said in my earlier post. I don't apologize for finding it funny that he missed something simple. We all miss things . It happens. I do apologize for poking fun at him. And if he felt offended, I am sorry. That wasn't the purpose.
    I never suggested that a new user should watch my tutorials, by the way. I know there are people who do watch them because I still get royalties even after all these years (Thank you Lynda for making that possible), and I assume that they have much earlier versions that they can't afford to upgrade. And if they are editing DV, perhaps there is no need to upgrade. I can certainly see why people would want to upgrade, but I have met some pretty poor people in my life who use some really old, donated computers, and who reuse DV tapes over and over again. Not everybody upgrades once they find something that works for them. A few years back I bought a box of new DV tapes to donate on one of my trips and you would have thought that they were made out of gold the way they were received.
    But Jeff is not a new user. I believe that as a fellow Lynda.com author, it would not be considered out of place for him to have watched all of the older Lynda.com tutorials in order to have a better grasp on what earlier authors did right, and what they did wrong. What made things easier to understand, and what just caused more confusion. I don't know that he did or didn't. I merely poked fun at his trouble finding the little white dots.
    I admit that I am not a professional videographer or photographer. In fact, I will say that I am merely a dilettante who has been lucky enough to be in the right place at the right time to make some money producing tutorials, helping revise books, and reviewing other people's books and tutorials for possible errors, and to make sure that the instructions can be followed to achieve the stated goal. I am a mere technician and a fairly decent researcher. I am not at all sure I have an artistic bone in my body. But I am a pretty good teacher and someone to whom an artist might turn for technical advise. So don't think that throwing the word "professional" around is going to hurt my feelings in any way, or make me think that someone must be technically more adept because they shoot weddings, or commercials, or even feature films. Well, maybe feature films I would hope that they are considerably more artistic and imaginative than I am, but possibly not that much more technically competant.
    Back to the little white dots. Most of the time, the image is such that the dots don't hide from you. Now and then, the image gets pretty busy and it is difficult to see. When that happens, looking at just the bounding box and the curves makes it easier. Once it a while it doesn't help to make the image bigger. So this is the workaround. Not the main way to do it. Just when the problem that Jeff was happening in the tutorial I watched comes about.
    By the way, as a side note, Lynda Weinman is a delightful person. I can't begin to tell you how thrilled I was when I got to go to lunch with her once during the week I spent in the Lynda.com soundbooth working on my tutorials. She is just as pleasant as can be. I wish I might have gotten a chance to continue to do them over the years, but the other authors have all done an excellent job. And as I mentioned before, I am a bit dry.
    The subscription to Lynda.com is worth every penny when you consider the value that Lynda.com offers over YouTube and even Creative Cow tutorials.

  • Creating Violent Shudder - (Artillery Blast) - WWII Documentary

    Hello all
    I've received some pretty good advice here on the forum. And in regard to a WWII documentary that I'm working on,
    I plan on using a few Cannon GL2's, a Panasonic AG-DVC80, and a Panasonic DVX100. They all seem to be somewhat equal in capability. (within reasonable comparison to each other)
    Anyway, I've assembled 20-30 WWII impressionists for a re-creation of a battle gone wrong in North West Africa 1943. In one scene, one of the veterans tells of how Rommel's 10th Panzer caught their platoon in open ground, and laid deadly artillery fire upon them.
    We cannot use explosive charges, but I can simulate shells landing nearby by their reactions, perhaps camera movement, and of course sound effects. I've tried a few settings in 'Live Type', but I can't seem to get the right effect.
    Was wondering if anyone has ever tried to shake physically shake the camera? Is this a 'controlled science'?
    Thank you
    My Web Site:
    http://ww2survivorstories.com/
    Message was edited by: ENIGMACODE
    Message was edited by: ENIGMACODE

    Camera shake can be done manually or siulated. If it's done on set, you are stuck with the baked-in effect. Do it in post.
    You probably already have Motion but you will want to get After Effects. This kind of psuedodoc usually requires tons of effects. And you must anticipate the expectations and sophistication of your audience to establish the credibility and therefore expense of your effects sequences.
    bogiesan

  • Premiere CC - No playback on HD clips with various effects applied.

    Hi,
    In Premiere CC recently i've been having trouble playing back clips in my projects with effects applied, in this specific case, FilmConvert and Magic Bullet Looks. If I apply the standard Adobe effects, everything seems to work fine.
    Now I know this doesn't sound like a premiere issue, but thousands of people use these software packages and i don't see why my setup is any different. If I disable the effects, the video plays back fine. When I enable the effects, the video doesn't play at all, it just stays on the last frame of the previous non-effected clip.
    This is in a very large project, it's for a feature length documentary so there are many types of footage, most of what I am applying the effects to are ProRes or AVCHD files.
    System:
    Windows 7 Professional 64 Bit
    Intel i7 4770k 3.5ghz
    Nvidia Geforce GTX 780
    32gb Ram
    Samsung 840 SSD as system drive
    Western digital black's as footage drives
    Mercury Playback (cuda) is enabled in premiere.
    Any ideas?
    Thank you.

    I would expect your system to handle those effects without too much difficulty.  Unfortunately, I don't have any ideas about what the hang up might be.
    You could try resetting preferences.
    https://blogs.adobe.com/genesisproject/2011/02/premiere-pro-cs5-maintenance-two-great-tips .html

  • Do I need After Effects?

    Does Final Cut Studio 5 have a great many effects, or would I need to consider getting After Effects as well to suplement it? I actually just recently discovered iMovie, and my interest in video and video editing has been piqued. I wound up buying GeeThree's Slick effects for iMovie, and I'm wondering if I'm going to need to get stuff like that for Final Cut if I go ahead and take the plunge and buy it. I would have to get 5, because it's several hundred dollars less the Studio 2 on amazon and ebay. Thanks for any advice.

    Really? "Not a total pro app"?
    No sorry,
    it lacks many crucial features, and just isn't yet a able to be an Avid or Smoke killer.
    That's not to say it isn't a great app.
    If you can pay your mortgage with it that's great!
    Hey if you can shoot on HDV and cut on FCP and broadcast that and get away with it then good on you too.
    Often it isn't the tools it's the worker who creates fantastic work.
    I have seen lots of good stuff come out of FCP, but it is a flawed program and is far from the "first choice of editors" Apple would have us believe.
    If you did your work on smoke, maybe finished in Inferno or flame then I imagine your work would look so hot it would blow away your clients; not to mention their wallets!
    Please don't tell that to the clients who have allowed me to support my family and pay a mortgage for the past five years
    Well if they can't see it then good for you.
    Obviously you can make it sing for your quality of work, and it is much cheaper then other NLE's so you must easily make a good salary from it.
    or the documentary I just helped finish.
    I to am cutting a doco on FCP, as docos tend to be cheaper then standard productions and commercials.
    And often we have more time to deal with the slow and annoying aspects of FCP.
    But in a true production, fast turnaround, or high end Professional commercial world FCP would flop.
    Maybe I should tell the buddy of mine who is onlining low-budget features, color correcting and going to tape for major distributors
    The answer is in the question here! Low Budget.
    If he had the money, and it was a professional film it might be rough cut in FCP, but it certainly would not be finished in it!
    I love that FCP is so cheap,
    I love that you CAN edit on a MacbookPro on the go,
    heck I could even use it to finish a music video or similar small, low budget job on MacbookPro.
    But it is what it is, value for money, Cheap.
    Maybe pro-sumer is a little rough, but 'Final Cut Pro' is a name that sounds bigger then the actual product delivers.
    I feel Apple does not dedicate enough resources, or development into some quite glaring flaws in FCP; I think it should just be called 'Final Cut', intil it actually is a rounder, more finished app.
    I am amused they have given us 'color', another "unfinished" application that doesn't quite gel with the suite and adds more frustration with it's promises.

  • Scaling - Premiere or After Effects CS4?

    I'm working on a documentary with several still images.  When changing the scale and position to add a little motion, is there any difference in quality between using Premiere CS4 or After Effects CS4?  I'm using PSD files in Premiere, but should I be doing this in After Effects?  If so, how well does the Dynamic Link feature work for this?
    Does it make any difference if I'm upscaling video instead of stills?
    This project is HDV 720p 30fps.  I have the latest Adobe updates.
    Thanks,
    JB

    Absolutely, and "precise" is the right way to describe it. After Effects works with subpixel precision, meaning that it can subdivide a pixel into even smaller increments--specifically, 1/65,536th of a pixel. Any spatial properties, like position or scale, use subpixel precision when transformations are applied. As a result, effects such as scaling a video or a photo will look sharper, and motion will look smoother if animation is created. I'm not positive--as I've found no evidence supporting or to the contrary--but I don't believe that Premiere's scaling and motion "engine" uses subpixel precision. Technically, then, After Effects is more capable, but practically, I'm not sure it always makes a big difference.
    Read about subpixel rendering in After Effects here...

  • Learn After Effects and Photoshop for FCP7

    I would like to learn After Effects and Photoshop without attending an expensive Film course.  By learning online for instance.  I work on FCP 7 and have a documentary project which will involve lots of old stills.  Can anybody recommend a website?  It looks like everybody is requiring those skills nowadays.
    Thank you very much for any tip.

    Ruth
    I am going to leap to the conclusion that you already own  these outstanding products. Adobe helped build Apple in the early days.
    In ANY Adobe product, look in the [MENU] > [Help] pulldown menu.
    You will see many "How Tos" as well as [Photoshope help...]
    All of these lead to Browser-based Help files (located on your computer by the install(s) so you need not be on-line)
    Adobe's help system is the best I have ever seen for any software product.
    It seems that you could familiarize yourself with each product (let's use PShop as an example) by choosing [Photoshop help...] and then choose Learning Photoshop link in the TOC on the left. It's as easy as clicking next and back to navigate and you can follow the illustrated lessons by switching to PShop then back again.
    After getting to know the GUI, all you need do is say to yourself "I wanna do this to that" and translate that to PSHop terms (that may be the most daunting part). People who use PShop all-day every-day don't know everything that it will do until they ask themselves the right question.
    Years ago, as a new computer user (as we all were back then), I taught myself every piece of Pro Software I needed just in this fashion - some VERY much more complicated than PShop, etc.
    You CAN DO IT ! Be sure to give us a link to your finished project.
    CCC

Maybe you are looking for