A comparison is only useful if you know what is being placed side by side. This one does not put vendors next to each other — we build one of these products, so that would be theatre. It puts two integration paths for the same face AR pipeline next to each other, runs them through identical fixtures on identical devices, and writes down where each one costs you more than…
React Native changes the shape of an AR problem. The face analysis is identical regardless of framework; what differs is how many boundaries a frame crosses before something useful happens with it. That is why a demo that looks fine on a developer’s device can behave differently once the same module sits inside a real component tree with navigation, analytics, and gesture handlers competing for attention. Rather than publish scores…
“Tested” on an SDK page usually means someone opened a demo and it looked good on the phone nearest the charger. That is a demonstration, not a test, and it predicts almost nothing about how the effects will behave three months later on a device in your user base. This article describes the test method itself — fixtures, device matrix, metrics — so you can run it yourself and get…
A conventional Top 5 list ranks vendors we cannot responsibly rank from the inside. We build one of these products, so any comparison table we publish would be organised around criteria we happen to score well on. Rather than pretend otherwise, this article reframes the list: five dimensions that decide whether a Face AR SDK survives contact with real users, written so you can apply them to any shortlist, ours…