Botika vs FASHN: a fair comparison for 2026

How this comparison was made

AURA Studio publishes this page and competes with both tools, so we kept ourselves out of it until one short section at the end. Every fact about Botika and FASHN comes from their own pricing, FAQ, help and terms pages, read on 2 October 2026 and linked beside the claim. Prices are in US dollars, as both list them.

This page does not rank image quality. We have not run both tools on the same garments under controlled conditions, and quality depends heavily on your own inputs. Both offer free credits, so the last word belongs to a test on your own pieces.

Botika vs FASHN at a glance

What each one costs, worked out

Both charge in credits, but a credit buys very different amounts. Botika charges a flat 1 credit per photo and 5 per video. FASHN charges 1 to 3 credits per image depending on resolution and quality mode, plus 2 for a Face Reference, and 1 to 12 for video depending on length and resolution.

A worked example: a shop that needs 40 new photos and 4 short clips a month. On Botika that is 40 + 4 x 5 = 60 credits, past the 50-credit Pro tier, so the 100-credit tier at $105 a month. On FASHN, 40 photos at 2K in Quality mode with a Face Reference cost 40 x (2 + 2) = 160 credits, and four 5-second 720p clips cost 12, so 172 credits fit inside Basic at $19.

Both count attempts, not keepers. If one tool needs three tries for a usable photo and the other needs one, the real gap is smaller than the table suggests. Count keepers in your trial; our tool comparison shows how to work out cost per keeper.

Models and faces

Botika is built around its own gallery: "over 50 models and dozens of backgrounds", with a small set on Pro and the full library on Advanced. Asked whether you can create your own models, its FAQ answers "Not yet. We don't support custom models or backgrounds to keep the quality high." Its Enterprise plan lists exclusive custom models built for a brand, and kids and youth models are listed as coming soon.

FASHN gives you more control. Its Create Model tool makes new AI models, and its Face Reference feature applies "a consistent face to every image you generate". You can pick from a curated gallery of FASHN Faces on any plan, at 2 extra credits per image, or upload your own photos on Agency at $99 a month.

• Pick Botika's approach if you would rather choose a face than cast one, and like a limited, curated set.
• Pick FASHN's if you need one specific face across a season, or your own model's face.

How you work in each

Botika is deliberately simple. Its FAQ says: "We don't offer the ability to make images from text or custom prompts" and "Our AI can't create new clothing or generate new models." You upload a photo of the garment on someone, or as a flat lay or on a mannequin, and pick a model, a pose for flat lays, and a background. On-model photos keep the original pose and body type while Botika swaps in one of its models. Processing takes about 15 minutes.

FASHN is a toolbox with an agent on top. You start from a product photo, a model image, or "an idea in your own words", and the FASHN Agent picks the process. The individual tools are there too: Product to Model, Try-On, Model Swap, Packshot, Edit, Reframe and Create Model. Basic runs up to 3 generations at once.

• Botika suits a team that wants fewer decisions and a predictable result from photos it already has.
• FASHN suits someone who wants to direct the shot, try variations, or also make packshots.

When a photo comes out wrong

This is Botika's clearest advantage. On annual plans, every generated photo includes a fix service: you click "Photo Issue" and Botika's team retouches it. Pro annual includes 2 retouch rounds per photo, delivered within 2 business days; Advanced annual includes 3 rounds within 1 business day. Monthly plans do not include it. Photos the system marks unsupported do not use credits, and Botika says its safety filter sometimes flags semi-transparent garments or lingerie by mistake.

FASHN's pricing page lists no human retouching. You fix a miss by regenerating or editing, which costs credits, at FASHN's lower price per credit.

Video, resolution and where you can use them

Refunds, rollover and who owns the images

• Refunds: neither offers them. Botika: "No refunds are issued." FASHN: "Subscriptions and top-ups are non-refundable."
• Unused credits: FASHN rolls them over up to three times the monthly allowance (600 on Basic). Botika says rollover credits expire immediately if you cancel.
• Commercial use: Botika says its photos are free of usage-rights fees for commercial use, with restrictions that include presenting its AI models as real models. FASHN's terms say you own the outputs and may use them commercially under your plan, and note that outputs may not be unique.

Botika's restriction on presenting its models as real people lines up with the platform and legal rules on AI disclosure; our guide to marketplace rules for AI model photos covers what Amazon, Meta and TikTok ask for. Sources: Botika FAQs, FASHN pricing, FASHN terms of service.

The verdict

• Choose Botika if you want a person to fix distortions and will pay annually for it, or if you prefer a short menu of curated faces and a few clicks to directing every shot.
• Choose FASHN if cost per image decides it, if you want 4K or cheaper video on the entry plan, if you need a specific or your own face, or if you want Android, an API, or packshots as well.

Both give free credits: 8 on Botika, 10 on FASHN. Spend them on the same two or three garments, ideally your hardest ones, and compare what you would actually post.

A third option, disclosed: AURA Studio

We make AURA Studio, so weigh this accordingly. It fits one case neither tool covers on an entry plan: a boutique that wants its own model's face on every photo, in Instagram and TikTok sizes, from the cheapest plan. AURA takes one photo of your own model on every plan, or one of four house models, and adds prices as an editable text layer.

The catch: no API, no store app, no retouch service, and files at platform sizes up to 1080 x 1920 rather than 2K or 4K. On those, FASHN or Botika is the better pick. Our head-to-head pages, AURA vs Botika and AURA vs FASHN, go line by line.