Our FR10 image folder labels a bright streak as a scratch, but it crosses different holes when the same trim plate is reseated. We still have the identified plate. I want a physical reference decision and a holder check before the planned inspection gets tuned to that arrow.
Ask quality to judge the retained plate under the agreed appearance method, then keep the original frames as diagnostic material with their scratch labels unverified. A moving reflection does not tell you whether the actual surface is acceptable.
For the holder and lighting comparison, use that identified plate alongside genuine accepted and rejected examples. In particular, include a faint defect you still need to find, so making the bright streak disappear does not become the whole definition of success.
Quality accepts the retained plate and has selected a separate faintly scuffed reject. The original scratch arrow is withdrawn from the teaching folder. Full frames show the plate seating against different corners of the holder.
Give tooling those full views with both physical pieces, and ask them to compare the intended contacts. Does the loader have a clear way to tell which seat is correct?
The rear stop is hidden from the loading side. Tooling is reviewing a visible seating check; no holder change or lighting choice has been accepted, and both pieces are retained for the comparison.
Have someone who did not design it try the proposed check before it reaches the lesson. The corrected surface decision is useful, but the next set of reference images still needs repeatable presentation.