know the reality

Since I am not from the user side, I do not have a complete grasp of the "reality" of automated visual inspection in the field.
However, I have had the opportunity to talk with many users of automated visual inspection through deliveries and exhibitions, and have gained knowledge of what is happening in the field. After all, it is still a "people-to-people" thing.
So what about the real "reality"?
I am sure that many users have already tried automated visual inspection once or twice.
For those who have done so, we would like you to re-examine the effects of introducing the system. Although they are very eager to calculate the effect of introduction before introduction, after introduction, they leave it to the field and do not re-examine the results.
Now, I think it is possible to accurately calculate both implementation and operating costs.
If it were now, I think the effectiveness could also be accurately calculated. How many man-hours have been saved? After all, aren't almost all of them visually re-inspected?
How many years will it take to pay for the inspection equipment?
If it pays for itself, it is still good.
But, wouldn't the operating costs outweigh the benefits?
Such an unfortunate situation is possible in "automatic visual inspection.
Please make an effort to understand the reality of the situation.
Isn't that the first step for automatic visual inspection?