Compare your intended design against the implementation. Inspect visual changes, pinpoint possible layout issues, ignore dynamic content, and create a review-ready handoff report—all in your browser.
Upload both screenshots of the same viewport, or start with the included example.
◫
Design reference
Figma / design screenshot
Choose image
PNG · JPG · WebP · GIF (first frame)
▧
Implementation
Screenshot from the built page
Choose image
Match the design viewport
Inspection canvas LIVE
Upload reference and implementation screenshots to begin.
◫
Every pixel tells a story.
Compare the design intent with what shipped. Try an example or add your two screenshots.
Point at the preview to inspect colors
Actionable review findings
Regions are ranked by changed pixels. Categories are visual suggestions, not verified DOM diagnostics.
Your inspection findings will appear here.
Ready. Screenshot files are processed locally in the browser.
BUILT FOR DESIGN SYSTEM HANDOFFS
Make visual QA part of the workflow.
What differences can this inspect?
Pixel and edge analysis reveals changes that may involve spacing, color, alignment, typography, image content, or possible missing interface elements. Each region is a hypothesis for human review, not a precise CSS measurement.
Does it require Figma or a backend?
No. Export your Figma frame as an image and capture the matching implementation viewport. Both files are analyzed in the browser; nothing is uploaded by the core comparison engine.
What about dynamic content?
Use Ignore region for timestamps, animations, and changing avatars. Optional auto-alignment compensates for small capture offsets but should be disabled when pixel-accurate positioning matters.
Is this truly AI powered?
The reliable visual diff is deterministic. Optional on-device OCR compares text; a separately consented WebGPU language model can explain measured differences. Neither AI system verifies the live DOM or underlying CSS.
Processing
Analyzing differences…
Compare design and implementation screenshots
Load two screenshots from the same viewport, compare overlays and pixel-difference views, then inspect candidate regions. Registration and ignore rectangles can help account for alignment or intentional changes; the results are visual hypotheses rather than DOM/CSS measurements.
Example workflow
Capture the design reference and implementation at matching dimensions, or load the bundled pair.
Start with alignment off, compare the five views, and mark intentional changes with ignore rectangles.
Inspect candidate regions and color samples, then export an annotated PNG and findings CSV/JSON; use optional OCR only when text comparison helps.
Authored example: Compare two supplied page screenshots at the same viewport, mask an intentional label change and inspect a shifted button edge. Confirm the result against the actual implementation before filing a defect.
Limits and privacy: Images are downsampled for analysis, and alignment can hide shifts. A detected region is not a verified CSS/DOM measurement. Optional OCR requests Tesseract.js 5.1.1 and English language assets from jsDelivr; delivery and inference were not checked here. Reports omit original image bytes, but screenshot exports can still reveal sensitive interface content.