Talk:Rostrum camera

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Filmmaking task force.

Animation High‑importance

	Animation portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Animation, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to animation on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, help out with the open tasks, or contribute to the discussion.AnimationWikipedia:WikiProject AnimationTemplate:WikiProject AnimationAnimation articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Merge with Animation Camera[edit]

I don't object. --Janke | Talk 08:29, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I do. Rostrum camera is usually used for shot moves over photographs and suchlike. An animation camera is more usually used to shoot sequential frame sequences to simulate animation, whether or not the camera itself is moved between exposures to create rostrum-style moves. The terms refer to fundamentally different techniques. (unsigned)

You are right, the techniques are different, but the equipment is basically similar - provided you're shooting film. There really isn't such a beast as an "animation video camera" - combining video still frames is done on computers or in editing. --Janke | Talk 09:24, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rostrum is heavily used for television work, and (at least in the UK) this normally involves video, not film. There are also rostrum camera software available such as DigiRostrum and a similar function in Avid. As these are specific to the requirements of rostrum work, and not animation it wouldn't make sense to combine the two articles. I bet Ken Morse doesn't use his rostrum for animation! Maniac Pony 16:29, 12 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I was interested to find out about the function of a Rostrum Camera - I didn't know they were the same thing. As long as a search for "Rostrum Camera" would lead me to the merged article then it would be OK - but I think a separate article with a link is preferable.

I have never seen the term Rostrum Camera used outside U.K. productions. The technique involves camera movements whilst photographing a static subject such as a photograph. Animation connotes cartoon animation where drawings on sequential cels are photographed against a possibly moving background. The two techniques are related, but not identical. I vote to keep the two articles separate.--72.75.115.10 05:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the merge proposal from the article, per above consensus. Now should animation stand and animation camera be merged? Discuss at Talk:Animation camera. --Smalljim 12:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Relationship to Ken Burns effect[edit]

This article has a very close relationship to Ken Burns effect. There's a argument for merging these two articles, although perhaps a knowledgable editor might start by adding cross-references between these two articles instead? There also appears to be some British (rostrum) vs. American (Burns) cultural / film industry separation. Andrew Oakley (talk) 13:27, 22 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the Ken Burns effect is created using a rostrum camera (or today, with software), but that's just one of the uses of the camera. Merging is not necessary since there are already wikilinks between the two articles. Merging would put a lot of references of different software into this article, irrelevant to the camera. --Janke | Talk 06:05, 23 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]