ChloeBaker0483 · 2 May 2025, 16:12 UTC
Quality needs the actual bezel, we recently had a reject bag disagreeing with the tag on the part so I wouldn't let a folder name settle anything
8 pointsThey've got it. I remember your bag story, which is why I checked the physical tag before renaming anything. The two pictures really are the same bezel.
8 pointsExcellent, one less mystery box
19 pointsDoes the trial record say where the light and bezel were for each picture? We're good at saving images and rather less good at saving why they look different.
-2 pointsOnly the camera settings. Light position was changed by hand and not measured. I've stopped calling this pair a controlled comparison.
10 pointsI used a simple positioning reference during a bench comparison so we could return to each view. Before changing the camera, try a small repeatable set with the vision engineer and quality's confirmed samples.
18 pointsHas quality decided about that bezel yet?
23 pointsIt passes their appearance check. We've made a small repeatable set with that bezel and two confirmed damaged samples. One real scratch becomes faint under the lighting that removed the false streak.
10 pointsKeep that difficult pair in the review. It sounds more useful than another dozen easy examples.
2 pointsWe are. Thanks for the positioning-reference idea, Carla; we can finally compare the views without somebody saying 'I think the lamp was over there'. Still choosing the imaging setup.
13 pointsDoes the approved label stay with the sample when someone exports those images, or are we heading back to the folder argument with better lighting?
22 pointsThis discussion is closed to new replies after six months without activity. Last activity: .