We retained the covers. The captions were assigned from the pictures, not physical inspection. I have asked quality to assess the identified samples and left those captions unverified.

Keep difficult accepted surfaces in the eventual comparison as well as rejects. Otherwise the team can make a rejected mark visible while quietly making normal bright edges fail too. Both errors matter to the person using the inspection

Quality has accepted one retained cover and selected a separate rejected feature. The images still need matching to their capture conditions. We haven't settled the holder presentation yet.

Let the person loading the holder join that comparison; the intended seat needs to be repeatable by them, not only recognisable in the designer's photograph.

Thanks Sam. They're included. I have separated the quality decision, captured view and remaining holder question in the draft record, so none of them stands in for the others.

When the presentation comparison is done, retain the same sample identities across the views. Replacing the awkward cover halfway through would make the cleaner pictures harder to interpret, not more convincing