Agisoft Metashape vs GRASS (2026): Pricing, Features & Verdict
GRASS is our pick, scoring 6.5/10 against 6.3/10 for Agisoft Metashape on our Industrial & Infrastructure Software criteria. Its biggest advantage: higher Analytics score (9/10 vs 6/10). Only GRASS has a free plan.
Last updated: November 2026
Agisoft Metashape
6.3/10
Desktop photogrammetry software that turns drone, aerial and close-range photos into point clouds, meshes, DEMs and orthomosaics for surveying and mapping.
GRASS
6.5/10
Free, open-source geospatial processing engine for raster, vector, imagery, lidar and time-series analysis, used by researchers, governments and engineering teams.
Feature-by-Feature Comparison
| Feature | | |
|---|---|---|
| Scores | ||
| Overall Rating | 6.3/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Integration | 6/10 | 7/10 |
| Security | 5/10 | 4/10 |
| Support | 5/10 | 4/10 |
| Cost | 8/10 | 10/10 |
| Analytics | 6/10 | 9/10 |
| Ease of Use | 6/10 | 3/10 |
| Customization | 8/10 | 9/10 |
| Scalability | 7/10 | 7/10 |
| Pricing | ||
| Free plan | No | Yes |
| Cheapest paid plan | Contact for pricing | Contact for pricing |
| Estimated cost for 10 users | Contact for pricing | Free Open source |
| Features | ||
| Drone Inspection | ||
| LiDAR Processing | ||
| GIS and Mapping | Not listed | |
| Spare Parts Inventory | Not listed | |
| Work Orders | Not listed | |
Agisoft Metashape vs GRASS cost by team size
| Team size | Agisoft Metashape | GRASS |
|---|---|---|
| 1 user | Contact for pricing | FreeOpen source |
| 5 users | Contact for pricing | FreeOpen source |
| 10 users | Contact for pricing | FreeOpen source |
| 25 users | Contact for pricing | FreeOpen source |
| 50 users | Contact for pricing | FreeOpen source |
The plan that fits each team size, billed monthly, before add-ons and usage charges. Each cost opens that tool's pricing calculator for the team size.
Who Agisoft Metashape and GRASS suit
Agisoft Metashape fits engineering firms better; GRASS fits education better.
| Audience | Agisoft Metashape | GRASS |
|---|---|---|
| Education | 7/10Educational licensing is available and the tool is widely used in research. | 9/10Universities such as NC State help develop it, and it is free with extensive tutorials and Jupyter support. |
| Engineering Firms | 8/10The Professional edition offers georeferencing, measurements and survey-grade outputs. | 6/10It offers strong hydrology, terrain, and lidar analysis, but has no design or asset features, and staff must learn command-line workflows. |
| Construction | 7/10Volume measurement and site progress tracking are listed capabilities. | Not rated |
| Consultancies | Not rated | 7/10Environmental and geospatial consultancies can run reproducible analyses without paying licence fees. |
| Developers | Not rated | 8/10Python, C, and R APIs, JSON output, and the new grass.tools package make it easy to embed in pipelines. |
| Drone Service Providers | 9/10Its core use is processing UAV imagery into orthomosaics, DEMs and 3D models. | Not rated |
| Freelancers | 7/10The $179 Standard license is a low one-time cost for individual operators. | Not rated |
| Government | Not rated | 8/10It came from US Army land management work and is used for environmental and terrain modeling, at no licence cost. |
| Utilities | Not rated | 4/10It is useful for terrain and network analysis, but has no utility asset registry, field apps, or maintenance workflows. |
Which One Should You Choose?
Why choose Agisoft Metashape
- Higher Ease of Use score (6/10 vs 3/10)
- Higher Security score (5/10 vs 4/10)
- Better fit for engineering firms (8/10 vs 6/10)
Why choose GRASS
- Has a free plan (Agisoft Metashape does not)
- Higher Analytics score (9/10 vs 6/10)
- Higher Cost score (10/10 vs 8/10)
- Better fit for education (9/10 vs 7/10)
Pros & Cons
Agisoft Metashape
Pros
- Perpetual licenses avoid subscriptions: Standard is $179 and Professional is $3,499 as a one-time cost.
- Reviewers praise the quality of its DEMs and orthomosaics.
- The Python and Java API allows automated, customized processing pipelines.
- Network processing spreads large projects across multiple local nodes.
- Runs on Windows, macOS and Linux.
- Moving from PhotoScan to Metashape was free, and Standard licenses can be upgraded.
Cons
- Users report long processing times and difficult troubleshooting.
- Automatic GCP target detection sometimes fails.
- Some users find textures messier than in competing tools.
- There are no asset management, work order or inspection reporting workflows.
- The online store currently accepts only wire transfer, ACH or SEPA.
- Support is mainly email and forum based.
GRASS
Pros
- Free under the GPL with no user or seat limits, so it can be installed across a whole organisation at no cost.
- Very deep analysis toolset, with more than 500 core tools for hydrology, terrain, 3D voxel, imagery classification, and spatio-temporal analysis.
- Highly scriptable through Python (including the new grass.tools API in 8.5), Jupyter, R via rgrass, and JSON output, which suits automated pipelines.
- Runs inside QGIS through the Processing toolbox, so QGIS users can call GRASS tools without switching applications.
- Version 8.5 parallelized r.mapcalc and added OpenMP to more tools, which speeds up large raster jobs on multi-core machines.
- Over four decades of continuous development, with an active release schedule and NumFOCUS fiscal sponsorship.
Cons
- Reviewers on Capterra and GISGeography report a steep learning curve and a clunky interface with awkward toolbar placement.
- Cartographic layout is weak. GISGeography calls it unsuitable for producing finished maps.
- Its project and location structure ties each project to a single coordinate system, unlike the on-the-fly reprojection in QGIS or ArcGIS.
- No vendor service-level agreement. Support comes from community forums or from third-party firms whose prices are not published.
- It has no asset registry, work orders, mobile field app, or maintenance features for infrastructure operations.
Not sold on either?
Air Inspection Automation (AiA)Our product
Plans DJI drone inspection missions for power line towers from LiDAR scans: it finds the towers, places photo stops, checks clearance, and splits the route into battery flights.
Made by the team behind b stack radar. Shown here because it fits this topic. It is not part of our rankings. How we rank tools
Frequently Asked Questions
GRASS scores higher on our Industrial & Infrastructure Software criteria: 6.5/10 against 6.3/10 for Agisoft Metashape. The largest gap is in Analytics: 6/10 for Agisoft Metashape and 9/10 for GRASS.
GRASS has a free plan; Agisoft Metashape does not list one.
GRASS is the better fit for education: we rate it 9/10 for them, against 7/10 for Agisoft Metashape.
