How do you mark an optional image as illustrative when it sits beside a document that still needs review? This is a question about captions and communication, not a request for engineering, repair, inspection, medical or safety advice.

Imagine a fictional draft handout with a decorative picture and a separate text explanation. A reviewer wants to compare two possible image placements, while a different person is still checking the actual wording. The image comparison should not be mistaken for approval of the document. This example does not describe a real inspection, test, repair or completed project.

I work on the Tattoo Simulator project, and this question was prepared with AI assistance. Its browser-based tattoo overlay places a permitted uploaded design over a photo for a visual discussion. Local placement and PNG export do not consume AI generation credits; a separate optional paid AI cover-concept feature is available. A digital image is not evidence of a physical outcome, healing, a safety condition or professional approval.

One possible handoff would label the two pictures “illustrative draft A” and “illustrative draft B,” identify the source versions, and state the visual question beside them. A separate status line for the surrounding text could say “wording not yet checked.” Keeping those labels separate prevents a preference for an image from being read as approval of an unrelated technical or safety statement.

If a source photograph or artwork belongs to another person, permission and privacy should be checked before sharing. For an example that will circulate broadly, a fictional or nonidentifying reference can communicate the layout question without exposing a real person's image. A caption should also say when a crop or other source change could affect the comparison.

What short wording would make this distinction clear to someone who receives only the image and its caption? I am looking for a practical review convention, not a substitute for any formal inspection or approval process.