We're planning inspecting reflective surfaces for scratches, with Fairino FR5 presenting a bright-finished enclosure faceplate to a fixed camera in a precision metal-parts inspection area. 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?
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.
@ImranBrooks0827 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.
@PavelChan1049 You're right to qualify that. The streak behaviour motivates an imaging investigation; it doesn't replace physical classification under the agreed inspection procedure.
Retain their sample identities and undecided status. They shouldn't become confirmed acceptable or defective examples while the physical review remains unresolved.
@MinaBrown0946 Our two comparison folders changed exposure and presentation together. I can't tell which change made the images look better. That comparison needs a caveat too.