Bedrock vs Manual Drawing Comparison

Manual comparison uses side-by-side review or overlay techniques to find drawing changes. Bedrock uses AI to automate matching, alignment, and change detection. This page clarifies when each approach makes sense.

TL;DR

• Choose manual comparison when you compare drawings only a few times per year with small sets under 20 sheets
• Choose Bedrock when you compare drawings weekly or work with sets over 50 sheets
• Consider hybrid approach when transitioning from manual to automated workflows

ICP (Ideal Customer Profile)

Manual comparison is typically a fit for:

• Teams comparing drawings only a few times per year
• Projects with consistently small sets (under 20 sheets)
• Organizations with no budget for comparison tools
• Simple drawings with limited detail

Bedrock is typically a fit for:

• Project engineers comparing drawings weekly or more frequently
• Teams working with large sets (500+ sheets per comparison)
• Organizations needing consistent, documented results
• Complex drawings where manual review misses subtle changes

What Each Approach Offers

Manual Comparison

Manual methods have been used for decades. The tools are familiar and require no new software investment.

Common methods:

• Side-by-side visual review
• Physical lightbox overlay
• PDF overlay in Bluebeam or similar tools

Trade-offs:

• No software cost (uses existing tools)
• Familiar process for experienced staff
• Accuracy varies by reviewer attention
• Time-intensive for large sets

Bedrock

Bedrock automates the comparison process using AI for sheet matching, alignment, and change detection.

Primary capabilities:

• Automatic sheet matching between drawing revisions
• AI-powered change detection and categorization
• Cost impact estimation
• Batch processing for large sets (1,000+ sheets)

How Each Method Works

Manual side-by-side review

1. Open prior version on one screen
2. Open current version on another screen
3. Scroll through both simultaneously
4. Note differences manually

Limitations: Easy to miss subtle changes. No permanent record. Exhausting for large sets.

Manual PDF overlay

1. Import both PDFs into overlay tool
2. Manually align using 3-point calibration
3. Review color-coded differences
4. Mark up findings

Limitations: Manual alignment per sheet pair. No categorization. Time-intensive for large sets.

Bedrock automated comparison

1. Upload two drawing sets
2. AI matches and aligns sheets automatically
3. Review categorized changes
4. Export results

Advantage: Consistent results regardless of set size. Change categorization included.

Where Each Wins / Loses

Manual comparison tends to win when:

• You compare drawings only a few times per year
• Your sets are consistently under 20 sheets
• You have no budget for additional tools
• Your drawings are simple with limited detail

Manual comparison tends to lose when:

• You compare large sets (100+ pages)
• Reviewer fatigue affects accuracy
• You need documented, consistent results
• Subtle dimension changes matter

Bedrock tends to win when:

• You compare drawings weekly or more frequently
• You work with large drawing sets
• You need consistent, documented categorization
• You need cost impact estimation

Bedrock tends to lose when:

• You compare drawings only occasionally
• Your sets are very small (under 10 sheets)
• You have no recurring comparison workflow

Quick Comparison

Dimension	Manual Comparison	Bedrock
Time per 50 sheets	2-4 hours	5-10 minutes
Time per 500 sheets	20-40 hours	15-20 minutes
Sheet matching	Manual pairing	Automatic
Alignment	Manual 3-point	Automatic
Consistency	Varies by reviewer	Consistent
Change categorization	Manual notes	Automatic
Cost impact	Manual calculation	Estimated automatically
Scalability	Limited by labor	Handles 1,000+ sheets
Cost	Labor hours	Usage-based fee

What Manual Comparison Misses

Studies on human visual inspection show limitations:

• Attention fatigue: Accuracy drops after 30-45 minutes of review
• Confirmation bias: Reviewers may focus on expected change areas
• Subtle changes: Small dimension changes often overlooked
• Dense drawings: Complex MEP drawings overwhelm visual scanning
• Consistency: Different reviewers find different issues

According to Autodesk/FMI research, 52% of construction rework stems from poor project data and miscommunication. Missed drawing changes contribute to this.

Cost Comparison

Manual comparison costs

Assuming $75/hour fully loaded labor cost:

Set Size	Time	Labor Cost
50 sheets	3 hours	$225
200 sheets	12 hours	$900
500 sheets	30 hours	$2,250

Plus opportunity cost of what else that person could do.

Automated comparison costs

Bedrock uses usage-based pricing. A 500-sheet comparison costs a fraction of 30 hours of labor.

FAQ

Is manual comparison ever better than automated?

For very small, simple comparisons (under 10 sheets), manual review can be faster than uploading to any tool. But as scale or complexity increases, automation wins.

What if I already have a manual process that works?

If your current process catches changes reliably and fits your timeline, there may be no need to change. Consider automation when volume increases or when changes are being missed.

Can I use Bedrock to verify manual comparison?

Yes. Some teams do manual review first, then run Bedrock to catch anything missed. This is useful during transition or for critical submittals.

How much time does automation really save?

For a 500-sheet comparison: manual takes 20-40 hours, Bedrock takes under 30 minutes. That’s 95%+ time savings. Even accounting for upload/download time, the difference is substantial.

Key Takeaways

• Manual comparison works for occasional, small-scale needs
• Automated comparison is faster and more consistent at scale
• Manual methods miss subtle changes due to attention fatigue
• Bedrock automates sheet matching, alignment, and categorization
• 500-sheet comparison: 30+ hours manual vs 20 minutes automated
• Consider automation when comparing weekly or working with 50+ sheets
• 52% of rework comes from poor data and miscommunication

---

Last updated: 2026-02-04