I need an accepted bright-streak reference as well as a genuine defect for our UR5e bezel camera plan; the present images label moving highlights as scratches, and I want physical decisions and recorded presentation before commissioning or threshold tuning.
Give quality the identified bezels and disputed regions, then preserve its physical judgement independently of each image. A whole-bezel pass label may not explain which bright patch was acceptable or which other region carried a defect.
Could the first repeated captures keep the existing light fixed? That gives you a baseline before a holder change and a lighting change become inseparable.
That is the request now; quality has the retained parts, and the capture plan separates ordinary reseating with fixed settings from any deliberately changed lighting.
Tooling supplied the intended contacts and checked the holder; no mismatch found in that review, so the normal reseating comparison will use that identified configuration rather than a guessed pose.
That is a basis for the comparison, not yet its result. Include how the loader confirms the intended seat, so the operator does not have to reproduce the designer's private technique.
Quality returned an acceptable bright region and a separate real rim scuff; the loading method is recorded, and the fixed-setting comparison shows the accepted region changes brightness while the scuff remains visible in the checked views.
For this bounded development set, perhaps. Reserve independently judged examples for later evaluation, and keep the presentation range explicit. These useful views do not establish performance across all incoming bezels.
Engineer will use the recorded condition for initial threshold development and keep separate judged pieces for evaluation; nothing is being called a commissioned inspection, but we finally have a reason to retain the bright region rather than crop it out.