"Things You Wouldn't Know If We Didn't Blog Intermittently."
This short film was nothing less than phenomenal. It's an amazing celebration of the paintings that it includes, and it uses their overall themes to tell its own story. I found it to be very powerful and moving.
Fascinating and beautiful. Can anyone tell me the name of the technique used in the film, and frequently in PBS and other documentaries, that renders 2-D subjects as 3-D? For example, a painting or photograph is shown, then the camera pans or zooms, creating parallax, giving a 3-D effect. It's rather mind-boggling, and illustrates just how sophisticated computer and software imaging technology have become. But then, I grew up on black and white TV.
Just today I stumbled across the answer to my question. Here's a link to an explanation on PetaPixel: http://petapixel.com/2013/11/19/creating-motion-stills-animate-photo-post-parallax-effect/
Well now I feel bad, 'cause I was going to write that it was just kind of creepy...I agree with Tim, I want to look up how it was done. In some cases it was a bit like Terry Gilliam's work, but in several places it was very smooth and fairly natural.
No, no, no!! Ghastly!It's like those horrible animated pictures you can get it tat shops which rely on diffraction through gratings to make the waterfall look like it is moving. Yuk, yuk, yuk. Take this man's After Effects away for 10 years.
Glad I finally made the time to see this fascinating presentation, homage, celebration- although I can see whereas some may find it 'sacrilegious.' I would argue otherwise.PS- This however is the lighter side antithesis...https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l-7IV2qryiQ