Which appearance check should accompany our FR10 bezel-pad comparison?

Only after pictures. One bezel has a line outside the pad contact area too, so no, I can't account for all the marks

Can you see the suspected pad mark under the same light every time, or does turning the bezel change what people call a mark?

And what does quality actually reject? A visible mark may still be within the appearance requirement.

Oscar, agreed. Caleb, use an agreed viewing and cleaning method on identified untouched and handled samples. Otherwise we're going to compare everyone's favourite lamp rather than the pads.

Luca, the bright line changes with the viewing angle. Oscar, quality hasn't judged this set. I've asked for that before the next pad sample arrives

Will the eventual appearance instruction say which surface and viewing position? I mean enough for a second shift to repeat it, not simply inspect for marks.

CalebBrown, yes. The next person should not have to recreate the inspector's desk lamp arrangement.

Quality accepted the wandering line but rejected a small contact scuff on another bezel. We now have a reference for each. No softer-pad result yet, and holding and release remain in the comparison

Keep the accepted reflective example in the set. Easy to tune the appearance check until that harmless line disappears and accidentally hide the real scuff as well.