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。
DanielAbbott0043 · 2026年6月14日 16:31 UTC
Take the labelled views back to identified physical faceplates and quality's appearance requirement. Preserve the questionable pictures, but don't use their scratch labels as established answers until the pieces have actually been judged.
7分And give the camera person accepted finish variation, not just one dramatic reject. Otherwise they can produce a lovely defect image and still reject half your ordinary surfaces.
0分We have three faceplates retained, with images linked to each, but the labels were assigned from photographs. Quality has not examined them. One plate appears in both labelled groups depending on the view.
19分I wouldn't relabel that one accepted just because the streak moves, Daniel. It may still have a real defect elsewhere. Keep the uncertainty attached to the physical piece rather than replacing one confident guess with another.
9分Has that contradictory example reached the training folder? I would mark its status there as well; changing the working folder may leave the old lesson intact.
12分Caleb, we had that exact problem with a copied slide deck. The updated references were fine, but the lesson still taught the original error with a large red circle around it.
5分Did you replace the slide or keep it as an example of uncertainty? I can see value in either, provided its purpose is unmistakable.
8分Caleb, one training draft uses it; I've marked it unverified and linked the original views. Emma, I haven't assigned a new verdict. Quality will judge the actual plates under the appearance method.
17分We kept the old slide separately as a lesson in why images need references, Caleb. It was removed from the acceptance examples. The red circle had become quite persuasive without deserving it.
4分Once quality has decided, compare presentation and lighting separately around those identified parts. Include the observed awkward seat if there is one; don't assume a new lamp is the answer because the symptom is bright.
14分And retain the real defect visibility as the aim of that comparison. I have seen an improved image mean only fewer reflections, while the faint mark that mattered became harder to see.
4分Quality has accepted two plates and rejected one with a physical scratch. The rejected mark is now located against its image. The holder and illumination comparison has not begun, so there is no threshold decision yet.
25分That gives the lesson a usable reference, once the imaging work is ready. Keep which physical decision each example represents beside it, not only in the filename.
15分Does the selected reject include the faint scratch range your requirement covers, Daniel, or just an obvious mark? That is still worth establishing before calling the reference set representative.
16分