3D effect with photographs

[John Knapich]

Another trick is to use a different background than what is in your photo – a lot of times people get stuck trying to recreate the photo when not necessary. Cut out the FG elements and put a new background to create the effect.

[Chris Borjis]

agreed, you end up spending more time clone stamping the cutout
than doing the creative!

Better yet if you do a still shoot, get background clean plates.

[Marcello Mazzilli]

It depends…. I’ve found out (but is my idea) that thyere is not much point to animate in this way a normal modern foto. The first question an intelligent audience member should make is .. “Why didn’t tou just go around the subjects with a steadycam ?”… The good idea of this tecnique.. to me.. resides in the ability to animate “impossible” photograps.. like famous photos from the past or even famous pictures. This I think is the best way to use this tecnique (and that’s why I called it “Stendhal Effect”)…. You are not creating a normal 2.5 effect.. What’s the point? Now there is 3D! You are giving new life to old materials…
Another nice use… but this is more complicated.. is to apply on video. Needs really a lot of work (I think I saw something good on a CNBC ad some time ago) but the effect is good (you first show the spectator the normal way.. like a steadicam or a parralax movement with a dlly.. and then suddently the picture (still moving) “breaks apart”).

Here is an example of some I’ve done (both foto or video.. but freezing the video not as I said above)
In one (the boat) I added video from another source and it works.
I like the black kid (for the result) and the playground (for the effort I put).. but to me the pictures are more poetic.
https://www.siroma.com/areariservata/ccow/stendhaleffect.mp4 (right click and save as or just click and wait)

For the rotoscoping… get an assistant ! 😀

siRoma di Marcello Mazzilli
Corporate video productions in Italy
http://www.siroma.com