Our FR10 faceplate captions followed the wrong files into the lesson

RaviBennett0737 · 18 Mar 2026, 04:43 UTC

Closed
RA
RaviBennett0737
We have judged physical faceplates and a real reject to carry into lighting comparisons. The new teaching export has still managed to put the reject caption under an accepted plate's bright band. I caught it because I recognised the hole pattern. I want to repair the links before anyone treats this as a new threshold problem.

18 replies

CA
CallumChan1056
Replying to RaviBennett0737

We lost the orientation clue when a weld photograph was cropped. Keep the full views while you repair this. A familiar bright streak is a poor way for a tutor to identify which part a caption belongs to.

4points
RA
RaviBennett0737
Replying to CallumChan1056

The full view is what gave it away. Both original files have the right part identity. The mistake is in the page assembled from them, not quality's physical decisions.

19points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to RaviBennett0737

Check the whole export, not only that page. Were the files and captions sorted separately? That could put several valid captions against the wrong images.

14points
ZA
ZaraAllen0308
Replying to RaviBennett0737

And keep the source set unchanged while you check. Don't relabel an accepted faceplate just to make it agree with the page.

2points
LU
LucaBarnes0526
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Sarah's question is worth following because each row can look perfectly reasonable on its own, especially when the caption only says scratch near edge.

10points
RA
RaviBennett0737
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Author found that exact mistake. Image names were sorted after the captions had been copied into a separate column. They are rebuilding the page from the identity-linked source entries. Old export withdrawn.

12points
CA
CallumChan1056
Replying to RaviBennett0737

Good. Keep an orientation feature in each detail as well as the full view. That helped you catch this one; the next tutor may not know every hole pattern by heart.

0points
ZA
ZaraAllen0308
Replying to RaviBennett0737

Ravi, are there specially prepared demo plates mixed into the source set? Ours had buffed samples among untouched production finish. Correct filenames didn't make them comparable.

7points
RA
RaviBennett0737
Replying to ZaraAllen0308

No buffed demo samples in this set, Zara. Both finishes and the normal preparation are identified with quality's decisions. Callum, the new details keep the nearby holes visible.

7points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to RaviBennett0737

Have the author try the sort again as a check. The caption should travel with the image identity, not depend on everyone remembering to leave the rows alone.

20points
LU
LucaBarnes0526
Replying to RaviBennett0737

And can the tutor find the real rejected faceplate from that page without you helping, Ravi? That seems a useful end-to-end check.

13points
RA
RaviBennett0737
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Reordering the source entries now leaves each caption linked to its file and part. The tutor check is next. We have not touched the lighting settings to make this page error disappear.

8points
CA
CallumChan1056
Replying to RaviBennett0737

The tutor should compare the exported copy, not the editor view. That is where your first mismatch reached the lesson.

2points
ZA
ZaraAllen0308
Replying to CallumChan1056

Printed copy too, if that's what they use at the bench. A corrected folder can be surprisingly far away from the actual lesson.

14points
SA
SarahBarnes0589
Replying to CallumChan1056

Also check the full-view link survives export. A caption can be right while the linked detail opens another part.

2points
RA
RaviBennett0737
Replying to ZaraAllen0308

Tutor found the correct accepted and rejected plates from the exported page and its full views. The printed replacement matches. One old handout was still in the bench folder; removed now.

11points
RA
RaviBennett0737
Replying to SarahBarnes0589

Thanks, Sarah, the separate-sort question found the cause quickly. Reference export repaired and checked. The station lighting comparison continues with the same physical samples and their original quality decisions.

16points
LU
LucaBarnes0526
Replying to RaviBennett0737

Nice to fix the page without asking the poor accepted faceplate to become defective for consistency.

12points

Discussion closed

This discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .