Vehicle-damage datasets require consistent decisions about component boundaries, reflections, dirt, pre-existing defects and barely visible marks. We align those rules before scale and choose geometry appropriate to the model objective—from detection boxes to detailed damage masks.
Vehicle and component detectionPanel and part classificationDamage bounding boxesDamage polygons and masksScratch and rim annotationTop, side and underbody views
Accepted inputs
Inspection-lane images
Mobile-capture photographs
Vehicle walkaround video
Pre-annotations from detection models
Annotation approach
Part and damage taxonomy mapping
Detection-versus-segmentation selection
Visibility and severity attributes
Reflection and contamination rules
Cross-view consistency checks
Common edge cases
Faint scratches and low-contrast dents
Reflections mistaken for damage
Damage crossing panel boundaries
Occluded or cropped components
Dirty, wet or poorly lit surfaces
QUALITY ASSURANCE
Review that follows the guideline
Quality checks are selected for the data type and acceptance criteria. Metrics and review coverage depend on the project, platform and agreed workflow.
Panel-class and damage-type verificationFalse-positive reflection checksBoundary and coverage reviewCross-view consistencyOutput and image-reference validation
Applications
Drive-through inspection
Dealership intake
Rental and fleet condition capture
Insurance assessment
Repair-estimation datasets
Output formats
COCO JSON
YOLO TXT
CVAT XML/JSON
PNG masks
Client-defined damage schemas
What to include in your brief
Vehicle-part and damage taxonomy
Reference examples
Visibility and minimum-damage thresholds
Geometry required by model task
Camera views, output format and acceptance criteria
Share your guidelines, sample characteristics, volume, preferred platform and timeline. We’ll assess the scope and propose a representative calibration step.