We're planning inspecting reflective surfaces for scratches, with Fairino FR5 presenting a polished metal cover 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?
@ReeceAllen0297 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.
I've found that some labels were assigned from the images themselves. The samples are still available, but those labels have no corresponding physical inspection results, making the reference circular.
@ReeceAllen0297 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.
That clue needs a limit: presentation can also change how a real scratch appears. Movement in the image isn't enough to reclassify the sample as acceptable.
@NaomiBrown0941 You're right to qualify that. The streak behaviour motivates an imaging investigation; it doesn't replace physical classification under the agreed inspection procedure.
@TobyAllen0318 I can explain the reference uncertainty better, although the example images still don't support a performance judgement. Physical classification and image-condition comparisons remain outstanding.