Our uncommissioned UR5e bezel station has bright streaks moving with presentation, yet the image discussion keeps naming them scratches. I need physical references and controlled imaging before thresholds, because I can't tell whether we're hiding a real defect or chasing an accepted reflection. How would you separate those jobs?
Have quality judge identified retained bezels against the appearance requirement and locate the actual regions. Then compare those same accepted and rejected regions with recorded seating and lighting. Do you still have the physical pieces represented in the disputed images?
Yes, all retained and linked to the original captures. Quality accepted the broad bright regions and identified a small nick on one rim. We've kept that nick separate from the harmless band elsewhere on the same rejected bezel.
Can the intended camera view see the nick through the allowed presentation variation? A clean-looking face view might answer the reflection question while leaving the rim defect outside useful coverage.
Not through all of it. Our comparison shows the rim nick turning out of useful view at one allowed angle, although the broad band gets less prominent. Imaging is assessing another view; no threshold choice can rescue the current missing coverage.
Keep that failing angle in the comparison and the teaching references. Thanks for reporting the real defect separately from the bright region; it makes the next imaging question specific without claiming every reflective bezel needs a different camera.