Obama’s Change.gov is already at it with the beginning of it’s part II branding campaign….The Presidency.  Democrats and Republicans alike tout the Obama branding operation as nothing short of masterful.

Already, Obama’s communications team has produced a series of videos showing Obama at various events leading up to the inauguration.

These videos are shot on a high end / HD camera and are edited with excellent skill, as they reveal what appears to be a glimpse  behind the scenes of the Obama’s movements.  The best videos so far feature the Whistle Stop Tour and the Sunday concert at the Lincoln Memorial.

The Obama Team’s emphasis on video coverage, with almost instantaneous posting to their YouTube channel, conveys a greater sense of access that is in line with their message of change through transparency.

Kudos….The videos look great.

Have you noticed something similar in both the McCain and the Obama commercials? Have you recognized a common look and feel in many political TV ads this cycle?

Well your not crazy.  It’s true. There is something all to familiar in many political advertisements this year.  I found it unbelievable, how many Obama ads and McCain ads look so similar.  Many actually look like they were created in the same production studio, by the same editor.

It’s called, “Kid Stays in the Picture.” It’s a production technique. And both presidential campaigns, and many other campaigns with a high end media budget, are using this relatively new production technique.

What is it?

It’s a cinematic production effect that’s created when you separate the layers of the photos and move them independent of one another to gain depth.

This style is being used commercially as well, as you may have seen much of this technique in ads airing during the olympics.

The look ads drama to still photos, taking it an extra step from the tried and true Ken Burns effect, which is when you pan and scan or pan and zoom on still photos in a video piece. 

Here is a good description given by Bob Donlon, a TV editor with Adobe.

This [Kid Stays in the picture] has become a pretty popular technique, lots of doc-style shows and films are using it. The first film I saw that used this at length (and by “at length” I mean for the entire duration of the film) was The Kid Stays In The Picture. Almost the entire movie was photographs busted up into layers in Photoshop, then animated in 3D in After Effects.

See this new McCain spot as an example of multiple uses of this technique

Many campaigns do not have the luxury of being able to do multiple shoots or get a lot of stock shots of opponents, which cost a tremendous amount of dollars.  So often times, media consultants will use still photos in TV spots to give changes in looks or to tell stories.

But just plastering a picture on a TV spot would be very boring to an average viewer, who’s eye has become used to seeing repetitive amounts of flash and motion.  So, by employing the Kid Stays in the Picture technique, the producer creates movement and depth from simple stills.

Also, campaigns opt to use this technique if a candidate does not look particularly good in video footage.  As you know, except for Arnold Schwarzenegger or Ronald reagan, most candidates are not actors or actresses.

Many times, candidates for office are very awkward on camera.  If a media consultant doesn’t see this and doesn’t address it, they will run spots with a poor portrayal of their candidate, exposing them to unintended negative consequences.  Properly executed still photography alleviates this problem in positive ads.

In negative spots, the use of stills can also create an interesting drama effect.  By cutting the opponent out of stills, and laying them against dark backgrounds or footage related to the subject the spot is talking about, you can tie the visual much tighter to the audio of the spot.  This helps tell the story much more effectively.  It also helps to create a negative visual without doing the fuzzy, grainy, ominous stuff media consultants did in the past – which turns viewers off.

There are a few other very popular techniques being used this cycle, which I will share in future posts.  But this one appears to be the hottest craze.  Now you know what it is.

Creativity for creativity’s sake does not work. Senator Cornyn debuted the following web video at a fundraiser this spring:

Last week, the DCCC released an online parody of this vide intended to hit at Sen. McCain:

This is a perfect example of why some web videos do not work. Both videos are empty. Neither are changing any minds nor drumming up any earned media coverage that justifies their production. While creative and somewhat entertaining, both videos cater to those already likely to vote for Senator Cornyn and Democratic candidates, respectively.

There is an ongoing discussion raging about the effectiveness of web videos in this election cycle.  I do not fall one one extreme – that web videos are the most effective tool for messaging – or the other: web videos are useless when it comes to persuading targeted voters.  

I conveyed my opinion on this in a previous column, which I expressed that web videos, when done well, serve an important role in a broader more comprehensive media mix…. and web videos for the sake of art and creativity will fall short, without an intended target or purpose.  Being cute and funny just to be cute and funny is not justifiable for cutting a web video – leave that to the amateurs and the kids at home.