We're planning presenting reflective components for surface inspection, with Fairino FR10 presenting a brushed stainless trim plate to a fixed camera in a cosmetic components workshop. Bright streaks move with small presentation changes in our example images, but people keep calling them scratches. We haven't commissioned the cell.
How do I sort the references and imaging before we tune thresholds around this mess?
@JackChan1124 Were those scratches confirmed on the physical samples using your agreed appearance method? Start by linking each image to a sample and its inspection result.
@ImranArcher0392 Some labels came from the pictures alone. We still have the samples, but those labels aren't tied to physical inspection results. That's irritatingly circular.
Keep the image-only labels uncertain pending physical inspection. A controlled comparison of lighting and presentation can then investigate whether the moving streaks indicate reflection effects.
@ImranArcher0392 A scratch's visibility can change with presentation too. Don't let 'moving streak' quietly become the rule for relabelling something acceptable.
You're right to qualify that. The streak behaviour motivates an imaging investigation; it doesn't replace physical classification under the agreed inspection procedure.
@ImranArcher0392 The reference problem is clearer, but I still can't judge inspection performance from our example images. The physical labels and image comparisons need more work.