Retained and linked. Some still carry protective film; our images don't consistently record whether it was removed.

What surface condition does the intended inspection require? If quality judges the exposed finish, a mark on film and a mark in the bezel cannot be treated as the same reference. Establish that before improving the lighting around mixed conditions.

Keep film condition with each capture. Don't guess it from brightness afterward.

Inspection is after normal film removal. The mixed image set includes earlier incoming photos which aren't that process state.

Are any disputed marks actually on the exposed bezel?

And can quality link that decision to a specific region, including accepted bright areas rather than only defects?

Quality found one visible line only in the retained film; the corresponding exposed finish is acceptable. Another bezel has a rejected rim score after normal film removal. Both decisions now identify the surface and region, not just the original photo.

Use those bare-bezel conditions in the camera comparison, with the actual normal preparation recorded. Preserve the film-covered images as history, not as matched before-and-after lighting examples. Removing the film changed the inspected surface condition, not merely the camera view.

Bare-bezel comparison now preserves the rim score at the tested positions. Broader finish variation remains untested.

Who withdraws the old film-covered teaching examples? Fixing the capture folder won't update every copy.

Training owner has withdrawn those examples and linked the new physical decisions. Imaging acceptance remains limited to the tested set.