That style is fairly well documented and actually fairly simple. The trick is layers stacked together to build a scene. The sample used text animation for headlines. The text layer and the animated layer are on the same 3D plane, the images, either cropped or masked and the video are also just layers in the same 3D plane or separated by one pixel, typically in Z space, All of these elements are grouped, probably by parenting so they act as one 3D object, then you add a camera and do a move.
If you are new to 3D animation it is usually a good idea to think about these layer groups as you actors. If you are new to directing people it is a lot easier to move your actors instead of move the camera. It's also a lot easier to move the camera than to move the actors and the camera. The point of that explanation is that it is much easier to learn 3D animation techniques to start out moving your "actors" (grouped together layers) than it is to start bay arranging your layers on the stage and then moving the camera. That is a technique for a little later time.
One way to group the layers into an actor is to make the layers 3D, arrange them in 3D space, parent them together, add a camera to the scene, then move the group by moving the parent through the scene. When you get the movement the way you want it and it's time for a transition to the next group you can pre-compose the first group leaving the camera in the main comp, collapse transformations so the main comp camera sees the actor move, and then start start building your next group. Usually templates use this technique.
Another way to accomplish the task is to just arrange your layers to form your actor and animate the camera to do the move. When you have the move on the first group done the way you want then you add layers to make the second group. This is harder because adding the second group of layers will put them out of view of the camera and you will have to reposition the entire group so the camera can see it and continue the animation.
Still another way is to arrange all of the layer groups on a stage like you wold arrange actors, then move the camera through the group. Also more difficult and time consuming that the first method I suggested.
It also gets really complicated when you have a long project and you try and make the entire movie in a single comp. Most of the time, when I am doing this kind of thing there will be only a couple of actors on the stage, I create a "scene" that only lasts a few seconds, then I render the scenes or shots and edit them in a NLE like Premiere Pro. That's where I do the transitions. The example you posted had a lot of simple transitions that could easily have been done that way. If you render your comps with transparency you have a lot more options for transitions.
The final product has some film damage overlays that look more like footage than effects and there are some particles moving around. That's just another set of layers.
I hope this helps. If you are new to AE and 3D animation I wold recommend that you start by learning how to group layers in 3D space and then animate the group through the scene in a pleasant way. My last KenBurns type animation was 20 minutes long and had more than 50 AE projects and about 200 comps in it. It took me three weeks. My first KenBurns type animation was done before in 1970, twenty years before this technique was called the "Ken Burns Effect" with art cards, historical photographs from the University of Washington archives and a waxer (if your are not 60 years old you'll probably not know what that a waxer is). The art cards were hung from grip arms on a C stand in a studio. The layered artwork on stuck to the art cards were my actors, the C-stand and grip arm was my stage. I wold run the 16mm camera, swing the actor into and out of the shot by rotating the grip arm, do it again and again, then edit the processed film on a MoviScope and have the transitions printed at the lab. It worked a lot better than trying to move the camera.
1 Correct answer
6
Replies
AdChoices