RaviChan1085 · 28 Feb 2026, 14:56 UTC
Match each retained plate to its actual finish identity before changing labels. Then quality can establish accepted and rejected references for the finishes this job really includes.
24 pointsCheck the parts, not just their bags.
17 pointsParts checked. Both finishes belong to this job. Quality supplied separate accepted and scratched references for each.
7 pointsDoes one camera arrangement need to handle both finishes? Or will the setup change when the finish changes? That choice belongs in the trial, not in an explanation added after the difficult images appear.
4 pointsOne arrangement is proposed. Vision engineer has both finish sets for the same repeated-presentation comparison.
22 pointsInclude the inspected edges. Don't let a convenient crop remove the real scratch.
6 pointsDavid Baker's point is worth checking against the actual acceptance area. You can make two finishes look similar by excluding exactly the surface quality needs inspected.
16 pointsFull required area stays in. First lighting candidate hides an edge scratch on one finish. Rejected that candidate.
7 pointsUseful to keep that failed comparison with the lesson. People see a clean image and understandably assume the inspection improved. Here it got cleaner by losing something it needed to show.
6 pointsHas the next candidate handled both reference sets, Ravi, or is the shared arrangement still an open question?
7 pointsBy creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.