Creative video from still images

[drummachinecomplex]

During lockdown I walked into Soho London for several weeks, documenting the spooky, empty streets. A musician I work with wants me to make a video out of the still images and he will play the sound track - as we did years ago when I didn't have a video camera. Are there any really good videos anyone on this forum knows off made entirely from stills? I didn't record video as it would have meant taken a tripod and I didn't want to attract the attention of the police; in some places people were warned if they stood still to rest or look at the scenery. Had I known I was going to be asked to do this I would certainly have tried recording video.

Many thanks for any help.

[jagabo]

Are there any really good videos anyone on this forum knows off made entirely from stills?

Like Ken Burns' Civil War series?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KlseQlnk3R8

[abolibibelot]

La Jetée by Chris Marker (which inspired 12 monkeys by Terry Gilliam and is widely considered a masterpiece of cinematography).

[johnmeyer]

Yes, if you Google "Ken Burns effect" it will give you lots of suggestions for how to pan and move images.

However, that effect only involves panning, zooming, and rotating photos. If you really want to get a great result, you need to also research the effect pioneered in the documentary about the famous producer Robert Evans called "The Kid Stays in the Picture." The effect used in that movie takes a lot more work, but the result is quite stunning. I've done it myself, and since all I had was my old photo editing program, it took about fifteen minutes a picture to achieve the result. This advanced effect requires that you separate the foreground from the background and then zoom and pan them independently. This makes the photo look very three-dimensional because it mimics what happens when you pan or zoom a scene with a video camera, and the foreground objects move around to a much greater degree than the background.

I've created over a hundred music videos from still photos. Here is the one I produced for my wedding toast to my daughter at her wedding three years ago. I've queued it up to start playing at the final section, covering their adult life.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yg3LS-61Mpg&t=5m23s

Her husband is a world-class adventure photographer, and he took over half the shots. He also hired a professional drone photographer from England to take amazing drone shots on the inaccessible northern sections of Iceland, which they got to by booking passage on an ice breaker. The final scenes are the payoff on the whole story of how they met (he couldn't catch her while jogging in Golden Gate park, but tracked her down via Strava, only to find that she is a professional runner).

The video is mostly stills, with some short video interspersed. I used the advanced "Kid" effect twice. The first happens at the 6:20 mark showing her on a rock above Capetown. Note how panning the background separately takes the photo panning to a completely different level, and makes the photo three-dimensional. I also used it for the photo of her running on top of a volcano in Hawaii at the 6:59 mark. This is actually a really complicated pan (I think I had eight different layers), but I don't think it works as well as the first one.

To do the more complicated effect you first cut out the foreground object and put it on its own layer. You then take the background layer which now has a hole in it, and use your cloning tool and artistic skills to fake in a background. You then put these two layers into your NLE, pan them separately, and composite them together.

Hope this helps.

[abolibibelot]

I also used it for the photo of her running on top of a volcano in Hawaii at the 6:59 mark. This is actually a really complicated pan (I think I had eight different layers), but I don't think it works as well as the first one.

Indeed, the first one is more compelling ; the effect at 6:59 has the runner and her shadow unrealistically "floating" relative to the road, while (obviously) completely still, which is quite unsettling. Why were 8 layers necessary even though only 3 "objects" seem to be moving relative to each other ?

wedding toast

Was the MacOS software really necessary ?

[lingyi]

@johnmeyer

Very nice work! Congratulations!

However, it's works so well because it artfully integrates stills with video. Which is what I came to recommend to the OP. Get at least some video to integrate it the video, otherwise it's just a slideshow no matter how artistically you craft it.

The Ken Burns videos are successful because stills are all they have of the era and fits the documentary well. I'm old enough to appreciate a well crafted work like johnmeyer's, which I can watch and appreciate even without the soundtrack, but younger audiences expect much faster editing, especially if they're stills.

[drummachinecomplex]

Thank you for all your replies, they are really useful. The Ken Burns effect is easy to do in FCP X of course but I had not heard of the The 'Kid Stays in the Picture' effect, which is worth the extra work involved. I also thought it worked well in the @johnmeyer section at 6:20. It seems that stills are sometimes used in music videos such as this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIaUTR3YsGo

There is fast cutting in this video but you need to sign in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brJozYDT0Ts

@lingyi I agree video needs to be integrated but lockdown is now basically finished in Soho. As a substitute I was thinking that maybe I should record some video of Soho getting back to normal and mix the videos in with the stills of the deserted street. This would be a good contrast and hence maybe justified. Even videos of landscapes in documentaries, the very slight swaying of vegetation does give the basically still image a more interesting quality.

Sometime ago I made a video using fast cutting for a contemporary piano work using abstracted images. However now I have done it once I'm not sure if it is a good basis for a style: any opinions good or negative are, of course, welcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVp4pp-GTJM

[johnmeyer]

Indeed, the first one is more compelling ; the effect at 6:59 has the runner and her shadow unrealistically "floating" relative to the road, while (obviously) completely still, which is quite unsettling. Why were 8 layers necessary even though only 3 "objects" seem to be moving relative to each other ?

More layers were needed because I was trying to animate the shadow separately. I obviously didn't succeed

I also had issues (which I now don't entirely remember) with the centerline and also the transition with the background fog.

Was the MacOS software really necessary ?

No. That came courtesy of videohelp.com. I knew it was there but couldn't figure out how to get rid of the stupid link.

Which is what I came to recommend to the OP. Get at least some video to integrate it the video, otherwise it's just a slideshow no matter how artistically you craft it.

It's interesting you should mention that because I had meant to say the same thing in my previous post. Having a little video interspersed with the animated stills makes the movement of the still photos have a more powerful effect. The best example is where I have video of her finishing a race, and then follow that with a still shot taken at almost that same moment looking back at the finish line. That photo animation feels much more like video because of the shot which preceded it.

[lingyi]

Thank you for all your replies, they are really useful. The Ken Burns effect is easy to do in FCP X of course but I had not heard of the The 'Kid Stays in the Picture' effect, which is worth the extra work involved. I also thought it worked well in the @johnmeyer section at 6:20. It seems that stills are sometimes used in music videos such as this one:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIaUTR3YsGo

There is fast cutting in this video but you need to sign in:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=brJozYDT0Ts

@lingyi I agree video needs to be integrated but lockdown is now basically finished in Soho. As a substitute I was thinking that maybe I should record some video of Soho getting back to normal and mix the videos in with the stills of the deserted street. This would be a good contrast and hence maybe justified. Even videos of landscapes in documentaries, the very slight swaying of vegetation does give the basically still image a more interesting quality.

Sometime ago I made a video using fast cutting for a contemporary piano work using abstracted images. However now I have done it once I'm not sure if it is a good basis for a style: any opinions good or negative are, of course, welcome.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vVp4pp-GTJM

To be honest, I couldn't watch [of the second two linked] either video for more than 10 seconds. The first video's cuts are way too fast, though in the spirit of the original. The second video didn't have fast cuts, just slow transitions that IMO didn't suit the music at all. In either case, I didn't get the story the videos were trying to portray. But to be fair, art is very subjective. BTW, I didn't vote up or down on either video.

I did find this video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KIaUTR3YsGo that followed your second link, interesting and entertaining. It really fits the music and tells the story. According it to the uploader, it was inspired by La Jetée that abolibibelot recommended.

[drummachinecomplex]

I went into Soho yesterday and took some video of the area coming back to life to add contrast to the stills. My tentative idea is to use video to show the area now thriving again, with the depressing, spooky deserted streets as stills. Originally I just tried out ideas handheld but some of the footage is good so I am hoping to get these sections stabilised.

Thanks again for all your help and comments.