Bevell vs ShapeScan

Two tools for the same job, with genuinely different strengths.

ShapeScan and Bevell solve the same problem, a photograph of a real object becomes a file you can cut or model from, and arrive at it differently enough that the right answer depends on what you are doing.

The headline difference is how each one knows how big things are. ShapeScan uses printed calibration markers: you download a marker sheet, place it next to the object, and it derives scale from the markers, quoting ±1 mm typical accuracy. Bevell asks you to drag a line across a dimension you have already measured and type the value. Markers are more accurate and less error-prone; typing a measurement is faster and works on a photo you took last year without planning ahead.

When ShapeScan is the better choice

Pick ShapeScan if you need verified physical accuracy and can plan the photo. The marker sheets are a real advantage that nothing in Bevell matches. Pick it too if you want STL or STEP out, if you are making Gridfinity inserts, or if you convert often enough that a €100 lifetime licence beats paying per file.

When Bevell is the better choice

Pick Bevell if you are converting drawings, sketches or scans rather than photographed objects. Centerline tracing is built for linework that would otherwise come back doubled. Pick it if you want real arcs and circles you can constrain in CAD rather than polylines, and pick it if you convert occasionally, where £1.99 for the one file you need beats a subscription.

Side by side

ShapeScan details verified on 15 September 2026 from their own site. Pricing changes, check theirs before deciding.

FeatureBevellShapeScan
Scale calibrationYou drag across a known dimension and type the real measurementPrinted marker sheets (10 paper sizes), ±1 mm typical. ShapeScan is better here
Works on photos taken before you planned to convert themYes. Any photo with one dimension you can measure on the objectBest results need a marker sheet in the shot
Output formatsDXF and SVGSVG, Fusion SVG, DXF, PNG, STL, STEP. ShapeScan is better here
3D output (STL / STEP)No, 2D profiles onlyYes, on the paid tier. ShapeScan is better here
Centerline tracing (single lines, not doubled outlines)Yes, strokes thinned to a 1px centerline before tracingNot claimed
Arc and circle recovery as real entitiesYes, fitted to true ARC and CIRCLE entitiesNot claimed
Gridfinity insert generatorNoYes, with a dedicated builder. ShapeScan is better here
Pricing model£1.99 per file downloaded, one-off. 3 free on signup€5/month, or €100 once for lifetime. Free tier available
Cost if you convert one thing a year£1.99€5 for the month, or the free tier's limits
Cost if you convert constantly£1.99 each adds up€5/month or €100 lifetime is better value at volume. ShapeScan is better here
Converting without payingFree and unlimited, no account, pay only to downloadFree tier with batch and saved-job limits; account needed to save
AdsNoneShown on the free tier when enabled

Rows in green are ones where ShapeScan is genuinely better.

Common questions

Which one is more accurate?
For photographing a physical object, ShapeScan's marker-based calibration is the more reliable method and they quote ±1 mm typical. Bevell's accuracy depends on the dimension you measure and type, so it can match that with a careful calliper measurement on a long edge, but it can also be wrong by however much you mistyped, and nothing catches that for you.
Does Bevell do STL or STEP?
No. Bevell produces 2D profiles as DXF and SVG. If you need a 3D file out of a photo, ShapeScan's paid tier exports STL and STEP and is the better choice.
Which is cheaper?
It depends entirely on volume. One file: Bevell at £1.99 versus a €5 month. Constant use: ShapeScan's €100 lifetime licence is hard to beat. There is no per-file pricing on ShapeScan and no subscription on Bevell, so the crossover is just arithmetic on how often you convert.
Can I try both?
Yes. Bevell lets you convert and preview free and unlimited without an account, and you only pay to download. ShapeScan has a free tier with batch and saved-job limits. Running the same photo through both is the fastest way to settle it.

Read next

Converting is free and unlimited, try it before you decide.

Convert an image