Our framework takes a single still image and animates it via panning and zooming while adding 3D parallax. Does adding the 3D parallax not make it the Ken Burns effect anymore? Please let me know in case I am misunderstanding anything.
Yes, the examples that we have shown do not zoom as much as common Ken Burns examples. This stems from our framework processing the input at low resolution due to limitations in deep learning and the overall complexity of the problem. As such, there is not enough detail that could be zoomed into. This will be improved in later generations.
Yes.
Specifically, the Ken Burns effect describes taking a still, 2D image and panning and zooming on the 2D image in a motion picture.
Adding 3D parallax makes it something quite different in the eyes of many of us on this forum. It is cool! We would just not use the words "Ken Burns effect" to describe what you've made.
One might even argue Ken Burns would have paired the panning and zooming with this parallax effect if he could.
I look forward to this enhancing basically all photo slideshows for a long time to come.
Googling "How to make a parallax video from 2d pictures" brings up lots of tutorials, none of which mentions "Ken Burns Effect"
https://www.google.com/search?q=how+to+make+parallax+video+f...
Conversly searching for "How to make the Ken Burns Effect" will show that it's not the same effect your software makes
https://www.google.com/search?q=how+make+the+ken+burns+effec...
For instance, you take the source image at resolution n*n and do all processing at n/2 or n/4. Then at the moment you are going to composite the finished image you instead draw "pixels" from a source image which contains X,Y not RGB. Then you upscale the output image x2 (or x4) and replace each X,Y index with the relevant pixel from the source image (adding X%2,Y%2 or X%4 to the indexes to return to source resolution).
MacOS has "Ken Burns" screen saver if you are on Mac. There's also plenty of examples of "Ken Burns" effect on youtube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjdWvmjgBa0
Also Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ken_Burns_effect
The authors might want to change the description on their amazing effects if they want to avoid lots of threads and comments about it not being the Ken Burns effect (or maybe that will generate more comments)