James Briggs

I’ve posted this as well on the XL2 forum as that’s what this film was shot with but wanted to get some wider views from general people as-well. It's my first film on my own. You can see the trailer up at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKmofQA4apM. If any fellow filmmakers want to subscribe to my page I’ll be more than happy to check out your work as-well! Likewise if anyone’s kind enough to leave some helpful comments I’ll try and do the same. Thank you in though to anyone who takes the time to check out Spikes world! The films on hold at the moment unfortunately : ( But I’ve got 2 more films in the pipeline. James

Hi Everyone After buying my cam a year ago I came on here all panicked wondering whether I had brought the wrong cam, now after learning to use it, I?ve completed half of my first feature film with it. A lot of how it looked, which I know still isn?t perfect (and I?m sure I could have done things better!) was due to the help I got on this board so thought I would share it as a thank you. You can see the 1st trailer (only just over a minute) at? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKmofQA4apM I know, the youtube qualities awful but once I?ve sorted out the second trailer if anyone?s interested I?ll upload both to my website (of which I really need to sort out!). But in the meantime I think you can get a feel for the shots and camera all the same. The films sadly on hold at the mo but I?m finalising 2 more feature film scripts which will hopefully be going into production in the next few months. Feedback and suggestions welcome please : ) The trailer heavily features mid shots and close ups but the second trailer should incorporate more of the wide shots. If any fellow filmmakers on youtube want to subscribe to my page I?ll be more than happy to check out your work as-well! Likewise if anyone?s kind enough to leave some helpful comments I?ll try and do the same. Lots more to come! Thank you though to anyone who takes the time to check out Spikes world! James

Hi Mitch. How would you describe the results of the more sensitive low light picture from the EX? (They had quite a few problems with the P2 format on this film I was working on so they could edit. Once they worked it out and got the plug ins they needed though they praised it. But with the SxS cards even less established I can imagine the problems. I think compared to the transfer speeds, memory, and all the extrenal harddrives and backing up on more, something I do dread for the amount of footege for a feature film! I think the SxS workflow is really tempting at 16gb for 70 minutes despite any other issues.)

thanks adrian for the suggestion. I certainly don't think the HVX is the best cam in low light from what I saw when using it. I'm waiting for my copy of the film back so I can really disect it shot for shot of what I've filmed. I think canons cams look like they would be the best option in low light. But then I don't get the 720p option and they're not true progressive. I have never used any of Sony's prosumer cameras, but the EX1 really caught my interest and I like the idea of SxScards. The only thing thats held me back is the negative reviews of it in low light. And I always seem to end up doing a lot of low light shooting. I think I really need to work out what the lighting kit is going to be and then certainly rent out the EX1 to see what it can do for dramatic work. I've seen a lot of examples in which the HVX200 comes up trumps with a lighting kit though as-well.

Thanks guys for your feedback. From what I read uncompressed HD retains more data for colour correction and after affects, so at least I know now that the HVX200 recording does retain some of this. The film I want to make is going to be very stylised and atmospheric. So I think I?m really going to look heavily into lighting equipment, as I think that?s a big part for me what is wrongly neglected at times. That said a lot of its going to be dark and I know the XDCAM has some grain issues compared to that of Panasonic and Canon cams. But if I?m lighting what I want correct then grain shouldn?t be a problem on any camera right? Cause I can just keep than gain right down. Or that?s my principle thinking. I?m only experienced in low light really with my XL?s. But I do think with lighting, I?ll be looking to aim to get the picture as close to what I want on the day. After effects won?t be that extensive. 1gb a minute is quite a lot of space! And that hard rive we used last time was a right noisy fella at times. Considering this film is going to be feature in length I am worried about the space. So I?m just going to have to keep thinking on it in the meantime I guess. The 1gb a minute isn?t going add anything otherwise to a transfer to film is it? Thanks again for the help and if anyone has any other advice it would be greatly appreciated.

Hi Everyone Please forgive probably my foolish question in advance if its well known and obvious! I?ve been searching for a really simple answer but can?t seem to find one! I recently used the HVX200 on a short and was really impressed by the results. We shot 1080 at 1gb a minute to hard-drive. I?m really thinking of using it on my first low budget film myself now. But from what I can see I also like the look of sonys EX1. I really want to move away from tape now, but I am pretty new to this so please excuse my lack of knowledge. The 1gb a minute DVC-pro HD compared to sony?s 70minutes per 16gb to SxS cards at the same resolutions, is there any real difference or is the sony?s codec more resourceful for space but maintains the same quality? I?m not interested in sound as that?s always done externally. From screen grab comparisons I?ve seen on the internet at full the HVX doesn?t seem to be any superior to other 720 \ 1080 cams in terms of resolution? What does the 1gb a minute really mean in terms of results!? Thanks for your time!

Hi I love my XL2 but things are just getting harder with more and more people wanting HD. I've seen the Panasonic and Sony HD cams in action and I'm not that bothered compared to what my XL2 can do. Especially in low light. But of course I have had my eyes on the H1 since day one. I've held out for a long time as I do wan't to move to HD BUT I can't see myself doing a project bellow the standard of picture look you can get with an XL2. After using the Panasonic HVX-200 I was impressed by the picture and could see the benefits if it was be transferred to a larger screen. However. The noise and picture in low light was nothing compared to my XL2. The major thing I really care about more than anything is gain control. On my XL2 to insure fantastic rich blacks and zero noise I shoot at -3 whenever I can. The picture control I have learnt on my XL2 I think is unbeatable for getting pictures with clarity and avoiding that really flawed cheap look other cameras get in low light. Reading back over other posts I found mention of such grain on the A1. From mentioning earlier about the Panasonic camera from what I can tell the A1 features the same gain switch of low, medium and high. Which frankly horrifies me after using similar. I found these ambiguous very bulky settings naff compared to my XL2 where everything is at your fingertips and the results are astounding and you can be accurate. I like to set my custom pre-sets for each project and have to then trawl through the menu during shooting as little as possible. Doing my research I can't really find anything that lets me know if its still possible to access proper gain control with the same results as my XL2. And it also makes me wonder for the price is it really total cine control and also are custom presets as good as my XL2? If I can just find out whether the A1 can offer up the same access to gain control my XL2 has like the H1 I would really consider buying it. At the end of the day I can't afford the 6X HD lens, I would like the camera to be more portable and I like the idea of the LCD screen, also one of my XLR sockets doesn't work on my XL2 and I would like to use two mics, and for the price it is really good. But if it can't offer a picture like my XL2 then it isn't worth the money to me. And if the H1 can but will give me it in 1080i I'll have to consider selling my soul or something to come up with money! If anyone can help out at all it would be really great. Thanks. James

Sorry for the late reply I was away doing a job. Hi Jack, no I'm not using the canon mic as-well so just the two Rode mics from the back. I've gone through the manual and so sure I put it to the right settings they said on the pages you outlined. And then I just tried every other sort of mic select I could think of. Really doing my head in. The mic and cables are fine. I'm going to have another mess around with it tonight. Thanks for that extra bit of info Alessandro Machi, probably going to go with that. So don't hope I have to send this thing off again but now I'm stuck with an extra rode mic otherwise.

Hi everyone Recently I just brought a second rode mic to use but when I started using it I couldn?t get its levels up. Later it just stopped working all together. I checked whether it was the mic or lead but their both fine and now I can?t get nothing from the second XLR socket. Pretty sure I?ve tried every kind of setting and have spent ages adjusting all the sound options. I think my the second XL2 cable is just a dud but is there some stupid thing I might have missed? I really don?t think I could stand sending off my XL2 again to be fixed with another fault. Thanks in advance if anyone can help or has any suggestions, even if it's just confirming that I probably have to start getting the thing ready to send off again. Considering that it was the headphone socket that had to be fixed the first time it could obviously be from that.

Thanks Patrick and Michael for all your feedback! Maybe I am just being too picky. It's just for some reason it seems to look more obvious to me with my XL2 than other camera's. At least now I know what it is. I don't think I would want to go with another camera as the XL2 otherwise offers all the picture control and best results for general camera work I want to do. Does anyone know if the problem is reduced with HDV for when I can afford to upgrade?

Thanks for the response guys! Yes Patrick that's it exactly. Finally now I know how to describe it properly. This is exactly the problem I am having. Hi Joseph. No annoyingly this is appearing on TV not just my computer. So it's a real pain. This is another reason I was so confused because many people seem to have no problems at all! Or have noticed nothing. I am using the pal version not the NTSC version as I come from the UK. Does anyone know if this is infact only a problem with the pal XL2 cam's then? This effect doesn't seem to happen for many XL users and I couldn't see any other thread on here with anyone mentioning it at all.

So will it disappear on high def TV's? Other camera's don't seem to have the problem but then I know the amount of lines used is extra in the XL2 than most so that would explain it. Is there anything I can do in editing to get rid of them though or something I can run it through. Or am I just stuck with it and anything filmed with XL2 can not have this probelm fixed. Other projects people have mentioned which were released apparently done on the XL's don't show this. Or maybe that's because they use XL1's? It's a very annoying flaw. Being a perfectionist and so into all the detail I feel it really detracts and certainly destroys any illusion if it being film or even close to it.

I have been using my XL2 now for a long time on many different projects and it is all going great! I can get everything I want considering low budgets so its a dream. But my one query which I have found is that around the edges of stuff at times is like a jagged effect. It's always around sharp lines or edges. I notice if I turn down the detail it is greatly minimised but even so is still faintly there. I have noticed also this year spotting it on the odd TV program. Now I'm wondering if it's just me going mad! But I haven't ever seen these lines appear from any other camera I have used or worked with unlike the XL2. Does anyone else know or have a clue what I'm talking about? And maybe can explain why this happens. I have tried changing the vertical detail but this seems to make no difference at all. But I think it does greatly change depending on the monitor it is playing back on. It appears even through the actual viewfinder and sometimes double as bad. It's really bugging me. Strange... (I did remember seeing in a review once a negative comment about vertical line issues) Thanks!

OK! Ignore the last post just re-read the other link and it's switchable. Thanks again Jack! It looks perfect!

Thanks Jack! Yes that looks like exactly what I'm after. The only problem is I'm from the UK. Just wondred if anyone knows of any compatibility problems with the NTSC signal instead of the Pal one for the UK version of the XL2? Looked everywhere for a UK version but can't seem to find one!

I'm looking for something thats easy to take around and set up. Wondered if anyone had any good ideas for a good 16:9 monitor that easyily hooks up to the XL2.

I would like to start using canon?s own tapes and stick to them. But I?ve researched everywhere and I can?t seem to find anything that really justifies the high pricing over other tapes. I know 80 minute tape is supposed to be thicker than 60 minute tape but that?s about it. Other than that it pretty much just seems all DV tapes are the same and it?s just best to stick to one brand for the sake of the camera?s health. It comes across however that if you only plan on using a DV tape once and not repeated use? they?re all going to give the same output. No matter what camera you put them in. Only after repeated use problems can arise, but this is even unlikely it seems.. I have so far been using Sony premium tapes. If I always use fresh tapes is their no need to swap to Canons seemingly overpriced brand? Just wondered if anyone knew that using the canon tapes with their XL2 will effect the picture quality in anyway whatsoever for the better. Or have I got everything correct from my research and might as-well stick with sony tapes.

Yep Jaco! I think it is all down to lighting now. I?ve experimented and a lot and done my research and now I think I?ve gone as far as I can without lighting. I?m going to look into filteration now though : ) The XL2 really is amazing in low light! I cant believe I ever doubted my camera now. I?m just dying to get filming.

Finally got my camera back today! After a quick brief test I have found that the XL2 definitely does provide nice rich blacks like you say Jaco. I have no idea what the lighting set up is at the moment, and I strongly hope they have someone on that area. I have the same fear of it looking washed out or grainy so I have strongly recommend they look into the lighting side of things a great deal. Any sort of tips on keeping low light images cinematic? The problem I?m still finding is that everything looks very eventy or like any other high picture digital camera, which of course it. And I know I?m not ever going to get a true film look on any camera like but I have seen some very good examples of how at has been achieved really closely. This is most likely a lot to do with lighting. But I?m desperately trying to get away from the event camera look trying do a feature film look, at least as much as I can. At the moment I?ve just set the camera to Cine and the 25p frame rate and am still experimenting with everything else, doing my best to figure out how to get dramatic rather than fly on the wall pictures.

Thanks for the link Jay, that was a big help! It helped being able to see the effects and benefits of all the functions first hand when put into practice correctly in the right contexts. It defiantly pointed out a lot of tips and functions I had probably overlooked as-well. And Josh thanks for the lighting tips! I'm really not used to dealing with low light situations. I always thinks its best to work around them where possible, so it really helps to have the advice. I'm quite looking forward now to the challenge of DOP on this film. The lighting issue was daunting but I don't see now why it should be a problem. Or at least the XL2 wont be anything less than any other camera in the same range out their. So it's just up to me now as a camera operator!

After all the help and comments from my last post (thank you!) I think theirs just two more things I really need to know now about my XL2. If anyone could please point me in the right direction or let me know about these two things it would be really helpful and I would be very grateful! 1) My lens is the 20x one, surely that's better than the 16x one? It's one of Canons luxury range, so surely that is a good start up lens for now. Nothing against the 20x lens but is their a budget lens you can get that allows images that look a little more cinematic? If anyone has any tips or suggestions what I should go for in a lens considering I'm looking for that film look ... I would be very grateful : ) Also I am looking for a really nice wide angle lens, one that can do 35 mm. On a budget! I've seen some on Ebay but i'm just worried that they are low in price for a reason. 2) Also if anyone has any tips or experience on getting nice images in low light or night that would be really helpful. I've seen the other thread but all I'm really worried about is getting any grain to go from the image. My camera is being used by a friend on a project at the moment while I'm here editing. I have committed to this film project but I don't have my camera near me to start testing things out and the settings for this in mind properly. Just from my memory night or low light images looked very grainy. What I really want is the dark and black areas to not have that grain but just nice rich blackness. Will adjusting the gain solve this? What I want is for myself and the lighting guy to worry about the lighting of things and just leave the XL2 to worry about getting a none dull or grainy looking image. So all I really want to know is when I get my camera back and play with the settings can I get rich blacks and shadows, and dimly lit atmospheric shots. Or will my XL2 and Lens mean I am always going to get a certain amount of graininess?

Thank you for you're views. You have all pointed out a lot of things I was probably too foolish to consider. I do have a great camera, and I just have to use it right. I've been doing a lot of jobs in London and people put a lot of doubts into my mind. I realise though they had all invested into HDV, so of course they would look at my XL2 as inferior. Particular problems came apparent though when it became difficult and expensive to transfer their HDV material. I personally have not been yet swept away by the HDV era and I shouldn't be worried about making that choice I did. I should remember all the reasons I brought the XL2 over other camera's and be confident in it and myself. I would much rather focus on getting good pictures on a budget without the extra hassle with very little realistic benefit at this time of HDV. I brought my XL2 for the 16:9 benefit and I can always get new lens's as I go along. I should keep that advantage in mind. If 28 days later used the XL1's and the great David Lynch has seen fit to use DV quality for his next film, their is no reason I should feel my decision was a bad one. I just have to make things work with what I have, and what I have is a great camera. It's up to me to be a great cameraman now.

Thanks for the replies! I understand where you're all coming from and yes I am just setting up so I do need to experiment and practice a lot more. I think I was probably going about asking the wrong things though to what I wanted to know. I am not disputing the XL2 gives great pictures, is an overall great camera (in well lit or daylight situations), but... I have done a few projects and this is where my concerns have raised from. I have been working on documentaries so haven't had time to focus on getting the film like images I myself am really concerned about. I am still adjusting myself with the camera but my initial impressions are worrying me about some issues. Maybe it would have been a better idea to name them: 1. In low light and especially the dark and black areas look very very grainy. The blackness and image in general just doesn't have the richness and pureness I would like. I have adjusted the manual setting to increase the blackness but the graininess remains. Looking over this forum I have seen the mention of adjusting the gain, maybe this will fix the grain? My camera is being borrowed at the moment by a freind so I don't have it and I'm wondering about comitting to a projec.... a horror film which will require low light shooting. My impression is that the camera doesn't seem to produce the very rich pictures I have seen from other camera's when shooting in low light. Such as the FX1. Which has wonderfully rich blacks without any dullness of grainy effect. 2. The vertical lines problem. I realise looking through the viewfinder lines seem worse than when they are played back properly. But their does seem every now and then some really bad line issues. I have seen the vertical line feature in manual set up but I haven't been able to tell whether this actually works yet just by looking through the viewfinder. 3. The second to major issue after the XL2's ability to create nice strong images in low light I have, is I thought with all the manual features I would be able to create really nice "DV" looking cinematic images. However compared to the picture the FX1 gives the XL2 looks like it's mainly for events and fly on the wall looking filming. I can see the Cine mode certainly is a + but so far compared to the feel and look of the image compared to others is it enough? Maybe this is because I haven't had the chance to play with and just actually test this out properly yet. This quote I feel sums up my fears.... "For reality shows or high-def interlaced productions, the FX1 would be the choice. For events/sports/concerts, I'd probably choose the XL2. For weddings it?d be a tossup between the film like ability of the DVX vs. the bigger/more impressive camera size of the XL2. For the indie filmmaker or TV commercial producer, the DVX is still king." http://www.dvxuser.com/articles/shoot3/ I'm really asking other XL2 users from experience is the camera good enough to create low budget films? Or is it best cut out for events. Is it just a matter of figuring out the right settings to produce these results from practice and experience. Cause the screen shots from the FX1 on that website compared to the XL2's show a quality of picture compared to a lower priced one that is really worrying.

Here's the thing! I just brought my XL2... would have liked the Z1 but didn't have the extra money! Anyway I have left college and am trying to set myself up as a freelance camera operator in London and I want to start making my own independent films. I didn't want to go with Sony because I trusted Canon more. After looking at lots of reviews I brought the XL2 for the manual control but now I'm wondering, why on earth is all this needed with the editing software around which can surely do the same in post? Not only that but I completely overlooked the Panasonic camera and now I'm seeing all these raving reviews claiming it better than the XL2 by far. I have seen screen grabs comparing all three and the XL2 seems inferior to both Sony and Panasonic's options at lower cost. Now in even in this new dawn of HDV as-well can my XL2 stand up? I WANT TO PUT 100% FAITH AND CONFIDENCE IN MY XL2 AND FEEL I HAVE A GOOD CAMERA! I REALLY DO! I have invested so much into this camera! Theirs nothing I can do about it now anyway. Have I made the right or wrong decision as a starting up film maker? I would really love to know the verdicts of other XL2 camera operators. Are my concerns justified or can my faith in canon stand firm against sony and panasonic? Thanks! James