简体中文界面。帖子、指南及政策正文保留原文；未对原文作自动翻译。
LeoBell0623 · 2026年7月4日 14:35 UTC
Has quality identified the required appearance decision for each retained region, including an accepted finish example? Numbering the covers gives traceability, but it does not yet say what the camera must distinguish.
3分Not yet. Numbered and retained, but the captions came from our image discussion, not quality's physical inspection.
7分Then keep those captions out of the reference answers. They can explain the imaging problem without deciding that the underlying cover is accepted or rejected.
7分I'd keep full views with the numbered parts too. I can follow an arrow on a cropped shiny corner quite confidently and still be looking at the wrong corner; the link needs to survive somebody who wasn't there when it was drawn.
7分Quality rejected a fine score on one cover and accepted the other's broad bright region. Full views locate both.
8分Now compare those same covers under recorded seating, presentation and lighting conditions. Change the factors separately enough to know whether a disappearing score follows the illumination or the part's actual position.
8分Will the normal loading method be represented, rather than only the vision person's careful placement?
21分Yes. Repeated normal loading keeps the intended seat, but one planned view hides the score. Vision is revising that view before any threshold work.
2分That gives the view revision a real job to do. Please keep the accepted cover in the next comparison as well; it would be a shame to recover the score by teaching the camera to dislike every bright region.
4分