Yes. Same engraved sample reference visible in all three uncropped captures, and quality has that bezel. The arrows were added by the person assembling the presentation.

Remove those defect labels until quality has judged the indicated areas.

What changes between the captures, Naomi? I've seen someone straighten a sample for a nicer photo and quietly change the very thing the trial was meant to compare.

Our teaching bench had a bright band from a nearby screen. We kept calling it a camera problem until someone moved the screen. Keep the presentation and surroundings with each capture, even if the first explanation looks obvious.

And withdraw the shared labelled copy. We had to do that with a cover lesson; fixing my own folder didn't fix anybody else's.

Chen, yes, though I would keep the original as an example of why it was withdrawn. Not leave it in the teaching set, I mean preserve enough that the next tutor understands the change.

Liam, agreed, but don't make the first comparison harder than it needs to be. I'd start with the same bezel, camera and lamp and change the presentation deliberately while quality watches what happens to the indicated areas. Then repeat with an actual defect example. That gives the optical person something concrete to work with. If everything moves at once, you can spend an afternoon proving that shiny metal is shiny. I've managed that particular achievement myself.

Has quality found a physical mark at any of those three arrows, Naomi, or is that still awaiting examination?

No mark at those arrows. Quality accepted the bezel and supplied a separately identified scratched reject. Nina, the original pictures used slightly different tilt. We repeated that with the camera specialist: the bright band moved; the reject's scratch remained on the same physical region.

Can the proposed setup show that reject throughout the presentation range, Naomi? I am interested because a reference picture can look clear while a slightly different seated part is difficult to judge

Beth, your smaller comparison was a better starting point than my whole changeover exercise. Eric's question is the next test now that quality has established what the parts actually contain.

Thanks for answering the tilt question. That is useful detail, not somebody declaring the camera fixed.

Eric, not throughout the range yet. The specialist is revising the lighting arrangement. We withdrew the labelled presentation and changed the quote to include this work; no threshold settings have been accepted.