Retained faceplates are identified, but no physical decisions have come back. I own the folder and have separated the unverified annotations. The same part appears in the bright and less bright views, so at least that comparison is traceable.

Were those views ordinary repeat seating, or deliberate changes to the presentation?

And does the holder have a defined seating condition you can return to?

Deliberate small rotations for the photographs. The holder has locating features, but the allowed presentation variation isn't documented. I have asked tooling for that before calling the pictures a repeatability study.

Keep the deliberate rotations, then; they're useful diagnostic views even if they don't represent normal seating. You can ask whether the eventual required scratch remains visible across the intended range without making every demonstrator-chosen angle part of the operating requirement.

Will quality see the physical parts, not just your best images?

Yes, physical review happened today. One plate has a rejected scratch running roughly along the finish. Its brightest streak crosses that direction elsewhere. Quality marked both locations separately and accepted the region under the bright streak.

Does the known scratch show in your least glaring image?

Barely. The view we liked for removing the broad highlight also loses useful contrast at the real scratch. I have taken it out as our preferred single-view candidate.

Would another view recover it, or has that only been suggested so far?

Before adding another view, compare the existing capture conditions against the marked location and intended seating range. A second view might be useful, but it brings another presentation to reproduce and should answer a specific visibility gap.

Agreed. Two uncertain views aren't automatically a better reference than one uncertain view.

Keep the rejected single-view choice in the record too. Otherwise someone will rediscover that attractive image later.

Tooling has now defined the intended seating condition and the variation for the comparison. The imaging owner will test candidate conditions against the marked scratch and accepted streak region. No new captures back yet. Nina, thanks for separating useful diagnostic rotations from a range we would accidentally promise to tolerate.

Please return with the awkward view as well as the best one when that comparison is done.