简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文；未对原文作自动翻译。
HanaBennett0709 · 2025年2月23日 08:54 UTC
Point them at the agreed release observation and ask for the whole sequence, because another close-up of the pick won't answer it
11分Sent that. Also can't identify the contact pads in the existing shot. Two missing observations.
17分Ask for a tool close-up tied to the continuous run, with whatever order identification you agreed visible too
25分We didn't agree an identification shot. We did agree our sample and fixture. Neither is clear.
7分Could you send them a marked photo of your fixture so the person filming knows exactly what has to be visible?
18分Yep, and describe identification as an additional clarification, not an agreement they broke if it wasn't in the original terms
15分Does the current clip show the fixture at all, even before the cut?
3分That matters, because a poor angle and a completely absent fixture need different answers from whoever ran the test
12分List what the footage establishes and what remains unseen. That lets you acknowledge the visible lift without accepting a placement demonstration that stops before placement.
7分And keep the request short enough to forward to their operator, otherwise the useful shot list disappears inside the purchasing argument
13分Fixture edge is visible, Anil. Seller now says the camera stopped recording, not the cycle.
9分They've promised another recording with the pads, sample and release visible. Sent our marked fixture photo. Still awaiting it.
11分That explanation is plausible, but the missing placement is still missing until they send it; don't let the explanation stand in for the recording
10分此讨论已连续六个月没有活动，现已关闭新回复。 最后活动： .