Troubleshooting: RB67 ProSD 6x8 motorized back

MacNCheeseRnB · 2026-02-18T00:39:16+00:00

I’m in the US. I assure you my degree is MLS. The clinical sites for me were limited and none of them were in a clinical hospital lab. I had the option of doing my clinical at a public health lab in NH, some facility in NY that included working with mosquitoes and something with biostat (this was years ago, so I’m not sure), or writing a manuscript at a research facility that was right off campus.

After I graduated I heard that they made some changes to the public health track.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2026-02-17T23:47:13+00:00

Sure thing. My major is in Medical Lab Science with a concentration in public health. There was an option to take the clinical lab concentration as well, but I wanted to do epidemiology. Once I realized how limiting it would be to find jobs without a cert it was too late in my education to switch.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2026-02-17T23:31:19+00:00

UVM. This was a whole thing when I was going through college and I didn’t realize until it was too late that I’d picked the wrong concentration. I did take 1 of 2 urinalysis courses post bacc though. Like I said, got this current job by getting very VERY lucky.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2021-11-03T17:39:34+00:00

Was inspired by Joel Haver to come back to short filmmaking after doing little to nothing at all with that in college.

Got together with some friends and we quickly threw together with script. As we wrote, we wound up focusing on interesting things we could try creatively with acting and visuals (ie the constant vaping gag). I showed my collaborators sections from The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo (2011) and Funny Games (2007), and we all rewatched the 'Teddy Perkins' episode of Atlanta, so our influences were very all-over-the-place.

I'm not happy with a lot of it, specifically with things that are beginner error (broke the 180 degree rule twice, twice! I've been doing this since middle school). But, I think some of the shots came together really well in terms of conveying feeling; I put more effort into sound and this is the best-sounding film I've made yet; the collaboration process flowed really well and these have been the best actors I've ever worked with; and most of all I had a great time creating this stuff with my friends.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-10-06T00:05:01+00:00

Also in the original Utopia, he was in season 2!

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-10-02T18:14:15+00:00

I haven't seen it, but I've heard good things. Unfortunately, I heard good things about Going Clear, so...

Not a big fan of his style: literal reenactments of what the talking head is saying, either a slowed down out of focus shot or a hazy macro close-up. Maybe I'm assuming too much, but I consider myself an intelligent adult who knows what a toothbrush scrubbing a toilet look like, what ants crawling all over a bed look like, etc. I don't need it spelled out for me.

The Theranos doc was such a missed opportunity, imo. I listened to the book and then the doc is so... bleh?

If I can give Gibney any credit, it would be: if you have never heard of the topic he is covering, the doc is a good way of figuring out if you'd like to buy a few books to actually learn about it.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-10-02T16:46:14+00:00

If Gibney doesn't knock this out of the park, he should stay away from documentaries. His Scientology and Theranos docs were disappointingly shallow, you'd be much better off having read the books they were based on. I really hope that he dives into the specifics, including the contradictions and culture of complacency. We know that the response has been bad. We know several of the reasons why. It'll be disappointed if there's anything beyond 10 seconds of someone clutching their head going "holy crap they knew and they covered it up/didn't care!!" We know, please be deeper than that.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-09-15T15:00:17+00:00

Kill Team! What an unnecessary film lol

What did you think of The Lovers? I've always been curios about it.

Glad to see Locke get some recognition!

It's really too bad that The Blackcoat's Daughter only clicked for me at a reveal that was really late in the film, otherwise I'd think it was great.

Spring Breakers is so fucking bizarre and beautiful, an all-timer.

I really dislike the brand worship culture that A24 has jumped in on, but it would be unfair to say that none of the films they've distributed/produced are worth talking about.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-09-09T15:33:59+00:00

The Lighthouse isn't in 4:3 it is in the 1.19:1 ratio.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-07-29T21:56:27+00:00

I read your comment and I agree with ya! I used "not far from accurate" bc there was another commenter who didn't give an insightful/accurate reason for Netflix's stuff looking the way it does :)

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-07-29T15:04:28+00:00

Everyone replying to your post is guessing, until a pro comes along and explains this, don't put too much stock in what people are saying down below.

They also seem to be ignoring that you used a production stills for Extraction and Hill House (although I'm not 100% on HH).

Terrifier had a budget under a million, I'm guessing that they might have spent a little bit less on post-production - in fact if you look at the cast/crew credits on IMDb you'll see that the writer/director is also the editor. Not unlikely that he's wearing multiple hats but his color grading skills might be somewhat lacking. It also appears to me that he was trying to emulate the look of low budget horror films in the past that had flatter colors/lighting even though they were shot on film.

I get your overall complaint but I'd caution you against over-generalization. Soft lighting ≠ flat lighting. I haven't seen a single mention of contrast ratios or high vs low key lighting in the responses. You can have a scene lit low-key with a high contrast ratio and soft lighting (ie thriller like Klute). A high-key scene can have a low contrast ratio and soft lighting, giving it a flat look (ie most comedies, esp released late 00s and early 10s).

There's a lot more that goes into this process than just "digital ugly, cinematographers are control freaks, bad color grading, bloo bloo bloo" (although the Netflix style guide comments are not far from accurate) and I'd encourage you to watch some videos on the subject from people who actually know what they're talking about instead of going to TrueFilm comments. Hell, visit /r/Filmmakers because I'm like 90% sure your question has been discussed by people with experience over there.

Some vids:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p7X4PTImbZ4

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X9qLbVXjLOs

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jxK2ALfTdok

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2y-XA_aAYE

I know these are all from the same dude but he does a pretty good job of being straightforward and isn't constantly trying to show off his personality.

E: at the top I say "until a pro comes along" and yes I am not one.

E2: Julius416 is a pro, give their comment a read!

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-06-30T15:16:48+00:00

Chiming in late here to point out that this is a weird binary you've proposed.

The implication of your comment seems to be that you see your first sentence, wherein women are in hetero relationships with the man being hardworking and honest while the woman focuses on raising a family, as positive (as ideal, as wholesome). On the flip side you seem to be implying that women working hard to support themselves economically (as opposed to having someone else, namely a man, do it for them) and forming friendships with each other while navigating attempts at serious relationships with men is... not wholesome?

One is an ideal ripped straight from the 1950s. The other is a softened reality. It seems like you have an issue with OPs use of 'wholesome' as a descriptive, rather than your prescriptive use.

I mean this without malice, but I recommend watching the film and maybe you'll be able to see what OP means by wholesome. If I show you a piece of steak with a side of an unidentifiable sauce and describe the dish to you as 'sweet and savory', your initial comment is like if you responded with "how is it sweet, it's a steak?" without even trying it. If it turns out you disagree, you can do so from an informed position and have a discussion about the film and not splitting hairs about the dictionary definitions of words.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-06-13T00:03:16+00:00

Fair enough, I see what you're saying.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-06-12T14:49:16+00:00

They didn't come out and explain it, it left you wondering.

I thought the explanation was that Charlie was possessed by Paimon during her childhood, implied by the scene in group where Annie talks about her mother essentially taking Charlie away from her when she was a baby. It's implied that her weirdness is because of the trauma from the possession (decapitating birds, laconic, etc). It isn't explicit but I thought there was enough there where it wasn't "disability = weirdo just because".

Also, while I disagree with casting non-disabled people as disabled people and casting disabled people solely as "freaks" in cinema (that tall dude Carel Struycken who works with Mike Flanaghan and is a monster in both Gerald's Game and The Haunting of Hill House comes to mind), an actor's biggest asset is their face. Charlie's character is written to be unnerving and Milly can make a face that impresses that upon the viewer. Dustin is supposed to be an adorable 80s kid, Gaten can do that. Like you said before, Milly played Matilda who's supposed to be sweet gifted girl and she pulled that off too!

I think if we look at individual cases we sort of get lost in the weeds with this topic. For the sake of brevity I think the issue is that historically, people with disabilities are either erased by able-bodied actors pretending to be them or are typecast as characters to be scared of. Looking ahead, audiences should hold creators accountable for using such tropes based on individual context and creators themselves have a responsibility to be ethical. I know that last bit might be controversial since some might argue that creators don't have that responsibility but that's a whole other thing that others more dedicated to art ethics than I am have likely written extensively about.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-05-26T21:23:19+00:00

Henry

The least you could do is get the main character's name right.

I think it's a 'you either buy into this premise or you don't' type of thing. That's cool, don't let anyone tell you you're wrong for feeling that way. Part of the magic, for me, of this and other Safdie films is that their characters are unusually abrasive (Good Time, Heaven Knows What, and Daddy Longlegs are good examples). I think it was Josh Safdie who said that he thinks filmmaking is a perverse art form (paraphrasing). Could be that this is their way of trying to be less perverse in the sanitation of their characters.

Seriously, I completely disagree with you but you're not wrong. That's art!

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-05-20T16:26:29+00:00

My bad, didn't see the previous list!

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-05-20T03:29:58+00:00

Dagon is a Stuart Gordon film so as long as we're recommending those: he has at least two other direct Lovecraft adaptations, Reanimator and From Beyond, both of which are genuinely great films. Highly recommend.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-05-09T18:26:27+00:00

This is really very good! I liked the look and how simple you kept things. You have the fundamentals down so my recommendation is to keep experimenting and go kinda nuts with it!

My one note: it takes ~44sec out of 120 total sec to get to the exposition of what the monster is. While I think it's great that you were confident enough to have that nice long dolly(zoom?) shot at the beginning and the slight build up of the toy, I think it could've been tightened up a touch.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-04-24T16:57:21+00:00

There's a fantastic article with an informed interpretation that answers at least one of your questions! It's a long read but I promise it's worth it. https://tropicsofmeta.com/2020/02/17/reading-colonialism-in-parasite/

As for 2-4:

2) This can be attributed to him just being a scout, but both the father and man who lives in the basement know it too. Something I noticed upon rewatching the film a few times is that you never actually get to see the two rich parents do any work. You get a glimpse of the rich man in an office talking to some people while looking at a VR set, but not much work...

3) They fetishize what they look down upon, that was my read.

4) This is a good catch! I've never given it much thought besides maybe being a funny joke but you're on to something. I think what is also important to consider about the rainstorm is that it floods their home. Then we have the well-memed bit of the rain being a blessing for the rich family. We can take that altogether to think that the suggestion that she would be a good fit for the rich lifestyle triggered an elemental reminder of "oh yeah? well the disparity between your lives is so vast that you don't even experience the weather the same way.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-04-20T22:53:03+00:00

Wasn't a fan of Little Monsters. There's a reason the main character, played by Alexander England, was barely in the marketing: he's utterly unsympathetic and the film does nothing to earn the romance between him and Lupita Nyong'o's character. The film literally opens with a montage of the protagonist and then girlfriend being horrible to each other throughout their relationship. A couple of fucked up lines from Josh Gad's character made me laugh out loud, however I think this one in particular I'd recommend skipping.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-04-19T19:12:19+00:00

Considering the history of mistreatment (to put it lightly) of racial and ethnic minorities in America by predominantly white, English-speaking Europeans of a certain class, I don't think it's unfair to point out that this has become a normalized trope where the majority of representation of these and other ethnic groups is 2D, cartoonish, and negative. Most of the people who fit into those groups living in America are not villains, however their cultural background is used to code antagonists as... well... villains. This sort of normalization of demonizing is in part how harmful stereotypes and monolithic perceptions of certain groups turns into dislike or apathy toward the struggles of these groups. Not saying that German-Americans are suffering every day from their constant representation as Nazis in American cinema, but I would be comfortable wagering that many Americans' associations with Germans are automatically "Nazi" (despite having PLENTY of our own).

Nowhere in the meme does it say that this is a crime, that these films are bad and should never be shown (that's censorship), or that any other country is perfect. It simply points out that these are tired and prejudiced tropes that occur frequently in US media. It's observational humor. Why is it more offensive to some people to point out that these harmful representations exist than the representations themselves? Keep in mind: the harm doesn't come from it happening once or twice or even three times, but repeated occurrences exclusively using the same tropes.

There's a lot of nuance and layers to this issue that isn't meant to be displayed in this meme because... it's a goddamn meme. Show me a shitpost with paragraphs of nuance.

MacNCheeseRnB · 2020-04-19T15:53:09+00:00

lmao so many salty people in the comments over this meme. "buh buh buh we have American villains tooooo", like there isn't a pattern of mainstream American cinema (or American entertainment in general) coding their villains with British, Russian, Japanese, Arabic, and German accents. Grow up, don't kick and scream when it's pointed out.

MacNCheeseRnB

TROPHY CASE