Inspection Signal & Target Feature
Define what feature or defect needs contrast (e.g. scratch, edge, fiducial, OCR, or oil).
Technical considerations
- Determine target part finish, reflectivity, transparency, and mechanical envelope.
Selection Tool
Machine Vision Lighting Selection Brief Builder
Use the brief builder to turn an inspection problem into a lighting RFQ request. Define the target feature, material behavior, field of view, working distance, camera, lens, speed, trigger, mechanical constraints, and sample images before selecting a light family.
Selection considerations
Selection follows the observable condition, the optical setup, and the production constraint.
Optical Geometry & Light Path
Select candidate geometry: backlight for silhouette, low-angle bar for scratches, coaxial for specular marks, or dome for glossy curves.
Technical considerations
- Determine wavelength and filter combinations based on material color and sensor sensitivity.
Camera & Controller Constraints
Specify FOV, working distance (WD), lens focal length, exposure time, and line speed.
Technical considerations
- Select controller mode: continuous, strobe, overdrive, or time-sharing pulse control.
RFQ Output & Next Steps
Generate a structured engineering brief containing optical requirements and fixture constraints.
Technical considerations
- Submit brief details to LuxMV application engineers for sample testing or quotation.
Questions for the engineering discussion.
What information makes a machine vision lighting RFQ easier to evaluate?
The most useful RFQ information includes inspection target, material, surface behavior, target feature, field of view, working distance, camera, lens, speed, exposure, trigger mode, mechanical limits, sample images, failed images, drawings, and pass/fail criteria.
Does the lighting brief replace sample testing?
No. The brief helps define a first test path and the information useful for discussion. Final lighting geometry, wavelength, controller mode, mounting, and model selection can then be confirmed with real samples and production constraints.
Can this brief identify a final light model?
The brief identifies a practical first test path and relevant LuxMV light families. Final model selection is easier after discussing real part reflection, camera angle, exposure, mounting space, and sample variation.
What information is useful with the generated brief?
Send good and bad sample images, the current failed image if available, a part drawing, field of view and working distance, camera and lens information, line speed, trigger method, and any fixture or environmental constraints.
Interactive selection intake
Build a lighting RFQ brief
Answer the engineering questions that usually decide the first lighting test path. The result is a structured brief with suggested options, risk checks, and the project details LuxMV can use for quotation or sample testing.
0%RFQ readiness
RFQ-ready brief
LuxMV machine vision lighting selection brief Inspection goal: [add inspection goal] Target feature or defect: [add target feature, defect, tolerance, or pass/fail condition] Material / part: [add material, color, finish, coating] Surface behavior: [add reflective, matte, transparent, curved, oily, textured, etc.] Field of view: [add FOV] Working distance: [add WD] Camera: [add sensor, resolution, area-scan/line-scan if known] Lens: [add focal length, aperture, telecentric/macro if known] Motion / production state: [add static, indexed, conveyor, line-scan web, robot-held] Speed / takt / exposure: [add line speed, parts/min, exposure, frame rate] Trigger / controller mode: [add continuous, strobe, overdrive, PLC trigger, encoder, current mode] Mechanical limits: [add mounting, light position, cable exit, heat, enclosure limits] Environment: [add ambient light, dust, washdown, temperature, vibration, ESD if relevant] Images and files available: [add good/bad images, failed image, drawing, line video, datasheets] Recommended first test path: Ring, bar, coaxial, dome, and backlight screening set Why this path: The current inputs are not yet specific enough to lock one light family. A comparison set reduces the risk of choosing by catalog category too early. Alternative tests: Sample testing to narrow geometry before model selection; Controller support if exposure, speed, or repeatability is uncertain Risk checks: Missing FOV, WD, surface, or speed details can change the recommended family. Final model selection still depends on real sample images and mounting constraints. LuxMV families to discuss: Machine vision lighting, Sample testing service, Light controllers Additional notes: [add current failure mode, reference model, or project constraint]
The brief is stored locally in your browser when you continue to the contact form. Do not include confidential files until a secure transfer method is agreed.
How inputs change the first lighting path
| Inspection signal | Likely first test path | Risk to validate |
|---|---|---|
| Silhouette, edge, hole, contour, or dimensional check | Backlight or collimated backlight | Works well when there is access behind the part and the working distance can be checked. |
| Shallow scratch, dent, metal texture, or directional defect | Low-angle bar or low-angle ring | Defect direction and part curvature can require multi-angle tests. |
| Flat reflective mark, glass surface, circuit line, or planar feature | Coaxial or narrow-angle coaxial lighting | Uneven or curved surfaces may still produce glare. |
| Glossy curved part, solder area, reflector, or mixed-angle surface | Dome, diffuse, or polarization comparison | Diffuse light can suppress useful defect shadow if the target is texture-based. |
| OCR, print, stain, glue, contamination, or color separation | Visible wavelength plus filter comparison | Lot-to-lot material variation can change color contrast. |
| Moving web, film, strip, fabric, or long scan width | Line-scan light and controller timing support | Uniformity, heat, exposure, encoder timing, and duty cycle work well when checked together. |