CalebBrown0928 · 13 Oct 2025, 16:16 UTC
Keep the original pictures, but have quality identify and judge the actual plate before using those defect labels; a moving highlight is useful evidence about the image setup, not a ready-made reject example.
13 pointsKeep undecided separate from accepted and rejected. Otherwise somebody will force a label just to finish the folder sorting.
7 pointsWe had a reference plate that picked up a new scratch during training. Everyone kept calling it the good one because that was written on its box. Whoever keeps your samples needs to check their condition, not only their number.
20 pointsBeth Brooks, how often did you check yours after that? Before every lesson, or when somebody noticed a change?
22 pointsCaleb, do those different views use the same holder position?
9 pointsJonas, the temporary holder allows a slight tilt. Quality has the identified plate now, and Ella Barnes, its label stays undecided until they inspect it.
-1 pointsThe holder review should establish repeatability across the intended part variation. Even a stable image of this single plate would not establish a suitable production presentation.
21 pointsDo the files record the camera settings, or just the image names?
14 pointsBeth's example is why a physical reference set needs an owner and handling rules, not merely a nice spreadsheet; otherwise the lesson can quietly change while the slide deck stays identical.
19 pointsAnd keep the full images linked to any close-ups. We nearly argued about the wrong edge because every crop filled the screen. A recognisable hole or corner makes the defect location much easier to explain.
4 pointsDon't annotate over the defect. Separate marked copy, original retained.
13 pointsBeth Bell, would you show the whole plate beside the close-up in training, so the loader can find the same place?
15 pointsElla Archer, before use after that incident, with inspection owning the replacement decision. Nora, yes, we also stopped passing the reference around loose. People meant well and handled it like an ordinary sample.
12 pointsQuality accepted the plate and retained a separate faint reject. Chris, settings were not saved for all old views. Henry, tooling is checking the holder range. New captures will record the setup.
19 pointsDon't discard the failed old views just because their settings are incomplete. Mark the gaps and keep them out of tuning; they still explain why you restarted the comparison.
23 pointsElliot, yes. Whole plate plus close-up. Easier than guessing which shiny corner the picture means.
13 pointsThanks, Beth Brooks. I was thinking only about keeping the sample number attached, not checking whether the sample itself had changed.
22 pointsCaleb, did the holder check explain the tilt, or is it still waiting behind the image work?
22 pointsTooling found the rim can catch one temporary support. Revised support is proposed, not fitted. The known reject stays in the repeat-image set; no threshold decision yet.
20 pointsCheck that revised support against the drawing variation, not only the two retained plates.
17 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .