clyde villegas

Thanks Christopher. But since the lights will be coming low from the side, they could spill directly to the floor, changing it's (the floor's) brightness. Is placing those "leg lights" closer to the legs the right solution? What else can I do so that the lights will only hit the legs and avoid the floor? I am very new to green screen. I have read in one thread that the "luminance" of the foreground should be different from the luminance of the background (the green screen). What does that mean? How do I make sure they're different? Thanks and God bless.

Preventing spills from a green screen is as simple as moving the actors away from the green screen background. But how about the green colored floor; how do I keep it from from reflecting on my actors? Thanks and God bless.

I have an old Canon XL1 and I noticed that it vignettes, usually when shooting on not so well lit places. I left it at a Canon Service Center. It's been three weeks and they still can't explain why that's happening. They can see an error message when attaching the lens to their computer (I don't know how they did it. Probably with a special connector or something) but can't tell exactly what causes the problem. Does that mean it's time to buy a new set of lens? (Or is it time to shift loyalty to another brand?) Thanks and God bless.

Thanks guys!

Thanks Chad. Does that apply to most camcorders, like the DVX100 and FX1? I've read somewhere that you should check the drum hours before you buy a used camcorder. Since there's no way to check it by just looking, then I think the writer is giving some useless advice. No one will allow a prospective buyer to take his camcorder to have it checked by a service center.

How will I check the drum hours spent on a Canon XL1? Thanks and God bless. :D

Thanks guys! Those are very very helpful tips.

Thanks Chance! What's commonly done in this type of situation, rent more cameras or just have the actors do the scene three times? What do most people do? One problem I can see with shooting the three angles at the same time (with three cameras) is that my lighting setup for the close up shots will be exactly the same with the wide shot, leaving me no chance to tweak the lighting a little for the different angles... not to mention that renting adds to my expenses. The advantage that I see is that amateur actors (like in this particular project; they're my client's children) will just do it one time, saving me a lot of time in production.

I have one scene where I need a wide shot, a close up to the right, and a close up to the left with just one camera. I involves two people talking to each other. For the close ups, I will be lifting the camera and bring it closer to the subjects and adjust the lighting a little. Since I will be using just one camera, does that mean I will have to have the actors do the scene three times for all those three different shots? Is this the proper way to do this? Thanks and God bless.

I want my model to face 45 degrees off my camera. But at 45 degrees of my camera, I have lights on both sides: the fill and key lights. So, whether she face 45 degrees to the right or left of the camera, she'll squint because she's almost looking directly at either of the lights. How will I position my lights to have the same effect (placing of shadows, etc.) so that my model is not looking at the lights directly and still face 45 degrees off the camera? Thanks and God bless.

I know this reply is little bit too late. I'm adding it anyhow. Using Photoshop, duplicate the picture (layer). Crop the person on one picture; that will serve as your foreground. Use spot healing tool to remove the person on the other picture which will serve as your background. Save both as PSD which includes the alpha layers. Go to After Effects and import those PSD files. Use them as 3D layers and play with the 3D camera. Hope this helps.

Yes, but the ones I saw on the first few pages of the search engines look like cardboard and dont' look anything like a real mattebox. Also, they don't have guide rods. Of course, I'm not trying to look for a real professional stuff, otherwise, I'll just buy a real one. It's just that the DIY projects I saw were not good enough. Thanks.

Can anyone provide a link for a DIY mattebox and rod support plans for the Canon XL series camera? Thanks guys.

The problem occurs sporadically. I think if it's only a case of a dirty head, it will happen continuously. Don't you think so?

Hello everybody, We have an old XL1 and it's exhibiting these problems. The problems show up from time to time. When the camera's being shot, everything appears normal as seen through the EVF. But when the tape is viewed either through the XL1 or through another camcorder, it looks like the camera can't record to the tape with all the fields. It looks like it's skipping every other horizontal field. The shot above was good when seen through the EVF as it was being shot. But when later played, exhibited the blue horizontal bars... as if the camera was not able to record on tape those missing fields Again, the camera was shot but this time, using a used tape. The two videos can be seen here with alternating fields. What is the problem? Should I have the head aligned or replaced. (The guys at Canon service center told me they don't replace just the head but the whole recorder unit assembly) Is it the mainboard? Thanks guys.

Nope. I'm doing it because I want the cadence of 24 frames per second. All footages were shot with the XL1 (29.97) on frame mode. I tried to drop it in the 24p timeline and it worked... except that I'm having those artifacts. I was told before that if I do that, Premiere (or After Effects) will convert 30 to 24 automatically. Thanks Jeff.

In order to shoot 30p using an XL1, I use the FRAME mode which basically interpolates the fields to achieve progressive. Using Premiere Pro 2 to create 24p, I simply drop the 30p footage (I shot with the XL1) to a 24p timeline. However, I notice some artifacting doing this method. Am I doing things correctly? Or is it because I need to replace my computer (P4 3gig hyperthreading; 1 gig ram)? Thanks.

Around here, broadcast is SD, TVs are SD, DVD players are SD. One could buy an LCD TV capable of HD but there's no HD video available at video rental shops. Aside from being prepared for the future of video, what advantage does an HDV camera has over an SD camera? If my videos are going to be viewed on SD players, is there still a reason for me to upgrade to HD? God bless.

Is there a DIY guide in the internet on how to make barn doors for the Home Depot halogen lamp? Thanks.

I have limited lighting experience with kinoflos. I will cover a speech and I want the speaker to have the same three point lighting the way I do with tungsten lights. However, I was told I cannot use tungsten because the speaker wouldn't like to be toasted with hot beams of lights. So I came up with the idea of using kinoflos. But I have some problems. I think the back light will wrap around the head so the highlight will not be that sharp looking. Second, I cannot shoot wide because the kinos will be visible in the frame (they are so soft that when I move it away from the subject, they might not be able to light the subject at all.) What do you think?

Are you talking about the jack where the canon shotgun mic's wierd looking plugs go? The canon mic has two little plugs. (I was told one is for the audio, the other is for power). If I have an Azden WLX pro, which only has one small plug, will it work when inserted in the XL1's audio jack? Thanks.

I am choosing between the Letus35 Flip Enhanced and LetusXL for my Canon XL1. I think that the Flip Enhanced is good because I can use it in other cameras. But it could have more light loss than the LetusXL which attaches directly to the XL1 body. Which one should I I buy? Thanks. :unsure:

I am choosing between the Letus35 Flip Enhanced and LetusXL for my Canon XL1. I think that the Flip Enhanced is good because I can use it in other cameras. But it could have more light loss than the LetusXL which attaches directly to the XL1 body. Which one should I buy? Thanks. :unsure: