Agreeing cosmetic defect limits for a supplier sample

“Looks good” is too vague for a finish, print, or colour decision. Agree on the areas that customers see, the viewing distance and light, and examples of unacceptable marks. The goal is a repeatable judgment, not a promise that all viewers will agree intuitively.

Define the surface classes

Map prominent, secondary, and hidden surfaces. Describe scratches, colour variation, print misalignment, sink marks, or contamination in product-specific terms. Photograph accepted and rejected examples with the same setup, but use measurable limits where a photograph can mislead. Check the approved artwork and colour reference revision.

Record the decision

Inspect the actual sample, not a retouched image. Note any accepted blemish as an explicit concession that may or may not apply to production. If production approval depends on a cleaner finish, reject or condition the sample accordingly. Send the supplier the criteria and reference images before the next run.

Worked appearance decision

Sample A-9 has a visible scratch on the front surface. Enter its ID in the sample review tool, mark appearance “Deviation”, and note location, length, lighting, viewing distance, and photo filename. Compare with the approved finish reference and documented defect limit. Common error: accepting a scratch in a photograph because it seems small without stating the viewing rule. If the buyer permits it for this pilot only, record that limited concession rather than changing the baseline appearance criterion.

Source context: ISO — ISO 9001 quality management systems supports this limited point: ISO 9001 specifies quality-management-system requirements, not a product-specific inspection result. The buyer procedure above is Suppliers Help editorial guidance. Source checked 2026-09-27.