INK TO BRICK vs TestFit: site feasibility and development scenarios

TestFit is a development feasibility tool. Compare parcel, parking and financial scenarios with the narrower INK TO BRICK task of developing an existing floor plan or model for spatial review.[1][5]

INK TO BRICKReviewed October 7, 2026

Choose INK TO BRICK if

Browser review of a supplied drawing/model and saved renovation alternatives, without setting up a firm-wide generative design system.[2][3]

Choose TestFit if

Site configuration and early development feasibility.[1]

Task by task

Your taskINK TO BRICKTestFit

Access and cost scopeYour first floor is built in 3D free. Pay to edit it; saving and downloads follow the paid-floor or subscription terms on pricing.[4]Professional feasibility licensing; compare project and integration scope.[1]

Input and starting pointStart from supported drawings, IFC or mesh files; check the import path before uploading.[2]Site boundaries, parcels and development constraints.[1]

Editing and interactionChat and Expert controls work on the same project. Native elements and imported objects expose different editing controls.[3][2]Generate and adjust buildings, unit mixes and parking.[1]

Views and reviewInspect the plan and spatial views of the project; keep the source drawing available as reconstruction reference.[3]Documents 3D site/topography and circulation workflows.[1]

Preservation and recoverySave accepted changes and compare alternatives; verify the source dimensions and openings after each architectural correction.[3]Check alternatives against the same zoning and access assumptions.[1]

Export and integrationBasic paid-floor delivery includes GLB and PNG/PDF; professional CAD formats depend on the plan. Check imported-object behavior in the recipient tool.[4][2]Lists Revit transfer and AutoCAD, SketchUp, Excel and PDF handoffs.[1]

See the editing workflow

For a generated arrangement, compare how you would inspect the level structure and make a specific spatial change afterward. The examples show the sample building’s level list and a native wall being drawn, rather than a generated image being painted over.

The demonstrations use native elements in the sample duplex authored in INK TO BRICK.

Floors, ceilings and stairs

Automatic floors and ceilings, drawing your own slabs, adding levels, moving between them, and placing stairs.

The Scene tab listing the duplex’s site, the building and its three levels, Roof terrace, First floor and Ground floor, with Add level and the first floor’s base elevation, beside the floors pulled apart in 3D. — Add level sits under the building in the Scene tab.

See the steps in the manual

Walls, fences and columns

Draw walls corner by corner, control snapping and continuation, reshape a wall, and draw fences and columns.

A wall being drawn on the plan beside the sample duplex, its running length printed next to it as the cursor moves along the grid. — The length follows the cursor until the next click fixes the wall.

See the steps in the manual

The site constraints define the problem

Keep parcel boundaries, access, setbacks and parking assumptions explicit. Change one variable and compare building yield and circulation. A promising configuration needs review against local rules; a vendor feasibility result is not a planning approval.

Model and financial handoff need separate checks

Inspect the transferred geometry in the design tool and trace a representative quantity into the financial sheet. Confirm units and excluded costs. INK TO BRICK does not replace that underwriting task; compare it for the later review of an existing spatial model.[2][3]

Choose by project phase

Shortlist TestFit for early site and development decisions. Evaluate INK TO BRICK for smaller-scale reconstruction and renovation alternatives from a supplied source. This is a documentation comparison; we did not run a parcel study, validate local zoning or test a Revit transfer.[2][3]

Sources and scope

The cited vendor pages support the capability comparison. Any direct demo observation is identified in the article; this is not a matched-source accuracy benchmark. Product details can change. Unavailable sources are identified, and older claims are not treated as current limitations. Check the linked plan, price and export details.