What is the easiest, if not best, photo montage software?

[MattinSTL]

I've been doing photo montages in Vegas for years and now my brother wants to do them. Vegas is pretty easy, but he will probably never get into editing video... ALL he needs is the ability to add photos, zoom, move, fade, pan... through the pictures... and be able to time it to music. It would be nice if the audio track showed up like it does in Vegas, but that may not even be necessary.

Any suggestions?

[Jeremy Ordan]

PC or Mac?

[MattinSTL]

Either... both? My brother downloaded a Vegas demo and I think he's going to go with that... but I'm curious if there's something that's better for this? I guess the obvious answer would be AE... but I'm talking about a program your mom could use.

[Matt Grunau]

Then it wouldn't be AE. That's simple overkill. Vegas, as friendly as it is, would be the way to go. With Vegas, you can set up still duration as a default, and do cross disolves on a whim. Also, the still pic by default will automatically be scaled to fit the frame size, though you can go in under the Pan and Crop options and change that; and once changed, you can pan, zoom, and rotate easily.

Plus, Vegas is very audio friendly as well, so you have that at your disposal.

And, it's a hell of a lot less expensive than just about anything else, and comes bundled with DVD authoring software.

Lastly, you have effects like Levels, Curves, and Color Correction that you can apply on a global track type basis, or per clip/pic. Very, very handy

I'de go with Vegas, and I use them all.

[MattinSTL]

Thanks Matt... you know, that's what I figured also... even before I posted this thread. My brother kept asking me if he'd have to spend $150 to be able to do this and some kid at Circuit City kept telling him to get Premiere or PS Elements or something... something that was supposedly $50 (brother says... and yes I know Premiere isn't cheap, I'm just relaying the story)... so anyway... I gave him the speech about Vegas also...

It's funny how the people that are close to you don't trust your advice, but they think some guy in a circuit city shirt knows what he's talking about... man... that's so freakin' stupid... :-)

Anyway... that's what I figured from the beginning, and that's what he's playing with now... I just wanted to confirm it just in case there was something really cool that came along after Vegas.

[Jeremy Ordan]

If he is on a mac he could do it with iMovie really cheap, but I believe then he is limited to just the duration of one song.

When I did these for wedding photography montages I used Vegas, it was mindless and there were some scripts from VASST that made the pans of the photographs really nice from zooming in to panning across... Just a really nice touch adding to the professionalism of the overall product.

[egproductions]

Premiere also has the capabilities to set frame duration, fit to window, and automate to sequence with default transitions. You can even set a keyframe to one photo and copy and paste to all photos. Another benefit is that premiere pro can handle images up to 4k (your computer might not be able to handle it though.)

[MattinSTL]

Jeremy... my brother is on PC only, so he's definitely stuck in Vegas. I've got both platforms so I can go either way.

Is this what you're talking about for Vegas?

STILL MOTION (http://www.vasst.com/product.aspx?id=ec6a625b-926a-4e3b-b688-c3e3d5fc3acd)

This looks pretty good and man, the price is right. Does it greatly speed up the normal process of doing this in Vegas? I'm assuming so.

[Jeremy Ordan]

STILL MOTION (http://www.vasst.com/product.aspx?id=ec6a625b-926a-4e3b-b688-c3e3d5fc3acd)

This looks pretty good and man, the price is right. Does it greatly speed up the normal process of doing this in Vegas? I'm assuming so.

That is exactly it!

It is mindless, in 10 seconds it applies all the moves and everything else and makes creating PROFESSIONAL TOP QUALITY montages mindless.

There is no way to f* it up, it is just really simple and brilliant.

Plus it is cheap and works great.

If you already have Vegas then it's the best solution.

[triplej96]

Wow that is crazy. Wish Avid had something simple like that but I guess Avid isn't a simple tool for jobs like that. Although the option for something like that would be great!

[alwayslearning]

I watched the demo using Ultimate S. Yuck.

Maybe it is just the demo, but it seems a demo should be the best-foot-forward. It certainly looked easy to use and the price is definitely down there, but I personally do not want some software engineer somewhere deciding for me, with some pet algorithm, just what the focus of a zoom is in a photo and again, just me perhaps, I can't stand photo montages that zoom in on one photo and back out on the next, etc. The zoom in's invariably miss the subject, cut off heads, maybe pushed in when a particular photo would have been better off pulling out. A friend of mine showed me something very similar on his Mac ... I don't know what program ... and it was the same thing. Yuck.

I use Premiere Pro but I suppose any editing software will do ... but what's wrong with a couple hours training and a weeks worth of practice to take the longer route with setting keyframes for scale and especially postition? The end result is orders of magnitude more esthetic. In today's software, setting keyframes couldn't be easier.

just my opinion ..

Larry

[alwayslearning]

Oh ya ... and some titles?

Larry

[Jeremy Ordan]

I watched the demo using Ultimate S. Yuck.

Maybe it is just the demo, but it seems a demo should be the best-foot-forward. It certainly looked easy to use and the price is definitely down there, but I personally do not want some software engineer somewhere deciding for me, with some pet algorithm, just what the focus of a zoom is in a photo and again, just me perhaps, I can't stand photo montages that zoom in on one photo and back out on the next, etc. The zoom in's invariably miss the subject, cut off heads, maybe pushed in when a particular photo would have been better off pulling out. A friend of mine showed me something very similar on his Mac ... I don't know what program ... and it was the same thing. Yuck.

I use Premiere Pro but I suppose any editing software will do ... but what's wrong with a couple hours training and a weeks worth of practice to take the longer route with setting keyframes for scale and especially postition? The end result is orders of magnitude more esthetic. In today's software, setting keyframes couldn't be easier.

just my opinion ..

Larry

What's wrong with keyframing is when you are processing 2000 images from a wedding shoot you are not going to spend 100 hours keyframing every single pan or zoom. The ultimate S works great, is fast, and enables those of us who make money from these shoots to be as proficient with our time as possible.

It is like using a custom action in Photoshop to batch process thousands of images... it may not give each image the individual attention but it does 90% of the job fast.

If you are making something for yourself then fine, keyframe everything, but when it is paid work and you need it done... then this is the best solution.

[alwayslearning]

Good point Jeremy.

I do do this for income. I've never done anything like 2000 photos, but I have done 200-400. Takes a couple days from loading photos to DVD ...

It all depends on time and what a client wants I suppose.

Larry

[egproductions]

I guarantee you that if you use an automated keyframing software you are going to have complaints from your clients and It will take more time redoing that if you did it right in the first place. There is no way that every photo you have will keyframe over the areas that you want for a long enough time (such as faces). I have had complaints from clients when I would pan from the bottom of a picture to the the subjects head. People want to see the people in the picture most. What I do on premiere is automate the photos to the sequence and set a default keyframe on one of them and copy that keyframe to all of them. It takes two seconds and now I just have to go into each photo and adjust the already made keyframes. It is worth it for a professional look. In my opinion any automated keyframe program (unless it had face detection) is going to look unpro.

People hire me to do actual photo montages that are shown at events but if you are just doing something simple that you include with you still photo shoots that actually has 2000 photos, than you can either charge a real price of upwards of $1.50 and do it right (scanning, adjusting, resizing and keyframing) or use an automated process and do it virtually free because that's really what taking digital pictures to an automated process is worth.

[Beeblebrox]

Doesn't Picasa have a slideshow feature that burns right to DVD? That would be the easiest and cheapest solution. Not nearly as much control but definitely something your mother could use.

[HorseFilms]

I don't know how well this works, but it's free:
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/using/digitalphotography/photostory/default.mspx

[tmnt]

What about that Canopus Imaginate 2.0? Any good?

http://www.canopus.com/products/Imaginate/index.php

[alwayslearning]

... that actually has 2000 photos, ... I don't know if Jeremy actually meant 2000 photos to video or 2000 to sort through and maybe a couple or few hundred to video. Sorting though has to be done regardless of any software, obviously. 2000 photos to video at say ... 5 seconds per, would result in a 3+ hour movie.

I do like your "copy keyframes - adjust accordingly idea though. :) I've gotten pretty efficient at doing them in Premiere but that will make it even more so. At least, I think it will. I'll have to play with that and see. Curious; do you spend much time organizing photos before doing the automate-to-timeline thing?

Larry

[MattinSTL]

Hey the other thing about that script is that you can make it as personal as you like... or not. There's nothing that says you can't randomize zooms with a center focus, and then simply pull pictures quickly with only start and stop keyframes, so that the picture either starts or ends on the desired focal point.

Follow me? Rather then put it 100% in the "action script" you could automate whatever percentage of the process you choose.

Really... it comes down to the budget and taste of your client.


I operate in two different schools of thought... but the bottom line is what are you getting paid? Time is money. If somebody doesn't want to pay fair money then they get the commensurate time invested.

You can criticize this if you want to, but all that matters is that you are making your client happy and not killing yourself in the process.

I'm not thrilled with Still Motion, but I am going to pay for the download... what do you guys get for one of these montages anyway? Gimme' a ballpark guess.

[alwayslearning]

If somebody doesn't want to pay fair money then they get the commensurate time invested. Totally true.

You can criticize this if you want to, but all that matters is that you are making your client happy and not killing yourself in the process. Whoa ... I'm not criticizing it like I may have come across. If I did, I apologize. What works for someone is great. I was merely expressing my opinion with the word "yuck". As I explained, I don't like the way the auto things work. But that is just me. It works for some or they wouldn't be selling it.

Income? .... varies with what a person wants, but typically, ball park? It takes me about 8 hours to do about 200 photos the way I am happy with. That brings in roughly $400 ........ about 50 bucks per. 300 photos is not 50% more time as it might seem because once into it, more is faster.

Larry

[MattinSTL]

We're all good here. I agree that automated stuff looks... er... automated.

How many songs do you put the photos to on these things? I find that one a 7+ mp picture that you have a lot of space to work with... and to change pictures more then about once every 5 seconds is pushing it. Sure there are some quick cuts, but generally with any motion in the picture, it can stay up for 5-10 seconds.

Let's just say 5 seconds for an average. That's 12 pictures per minute... with maybe 3 fast cuts... so 15 per minute. To give somebody even 150 pictures composed would be 10 minutes of music.

Are people getting about 200 pics compilation from you for $400? How long is the result? Just curious.

[Vidular]

Let me suggest Photo Story 3, a free download from Microsoft.com that works with XP - do a search for Photo Story on the MS site. He can load in digital photos, arrange them, set timing, do pans and zooms. He can also bring in music but he would have to set the image durations to time it to the music. I believe it renders to AVI or WMV files. Don't expect professional features - but it is definitely the type of program I would recommed to someone like my sister who is just a PC user but not into video editing at all.

[alwayslearning]

200 photos +/- 10ish runs about 18-20 minutes. Maybe between 20-23 on occasion. A photo with one face or other subject is up about 4-5 seconds. A group shot is, of course, longer. If it's a group shot like 10-15 people, I start on one end, zoomed in and pan across to the other end and smoothly pull out to a full wide shot and just as it is getting to full wide I crossfade to the next. That takes sometimes 12ish seconds. So it varies ......

Music would be 3-4 songs ...... I like to crossfade one, if the total music they want is too long, before it ends, into the next. Looking at the waveform you can pretty much get things to happen on a beat and I never cease to be amazed at how well it ends up working out. Many folks have told me that they realized they were into another song but didn't notice when it transitioned. I never let a song do it's own recorded fade and then start another. Also, if levels are much different, I adjust one or both up or down to match. Also, personal taste here, I like the music to start a couple seconds before the video comes in. That tends to draw one's attention to the screen before anything is missed. Depending on the mood generated and what the project is for, I like to sometimes end the music a few seconds before the end of the video and let the picture say everything and then let it fade.

Just some ideas ....... I've done lot's of them and they are all different some.

Larry

[egproductions]

The photo montages I typically do are from prints that I have to scan in. So the process involves scanning them in according to a chronological order (or order of appearance) that the client gives them to me at. I then apply an batch action in photoshop that includes auto color corrections, downrezing (fit image), reduce noise. I then go through the images and make manual adjustments such as dust removal, time stamp removal on the pictures that need it etc. Then I import to photoshop and automate to timeline using the videofx as a default transition (the filenames will keep the chronological order from the originals) Then I apply 1 keyframe at the beginning and one at the end that are bezier not linear and paste to all the frames. I make sure that the photos are up for 5 seconds at a time not including transition time. Remember these picture montages aren't for an audience who wants it to go by quickly they are for the family who is more concerned with seeing their loved ones for a longer period of time, they don't want it to feel rushed. I will start off the montage with some sort of titling sequence maybe an invitation for an event etc. I will also finish it off with a multi-window transition that flys by as a recap of pictures throughout the montage. If the clients photos are really good and professional and I want to do something special that i will obviously take more time I will cut the photos into layers and do something like this http://eden.rutgers.edu/~egabor/Website%20Videos/Karabella.flv