ImageKit Reviews

I use ImageKit for purposes similar to Cloudinary, including storage of images, CDN, and features where you can retouch, remove the background, and upscale an image.

When we upload products for e-commerce, the product images are rendered and stored in ImageKit, and they are rendered through CDN for faster optimization and delivery of the images. Since many products usually take a large chunk of bandwidth, the images are compressed, similar to what Cloudinary does, and delivered in an optimized way.

The features in ImageKit, especially the retouch feature where you can retouch an image, are great. You can upload an image and usually find a pop-up where you can remove the background, turning it into a PNG with a white background if you need it for that purpose.

You can also upscale an image, so a raw image with enough pixels becomes optimized, maintaining the quality while being compressed and not too large.

I use the real-time image manipulation functionality.

There is a huge disparity in the pricing model, from the free option to the $9 plan, then it jumps to the $89 plan, which is quite substantial. I think there could be something in between, maybe at $20 or $50.

The huge difference in pricing is the only inconvenience for me. I do not know the reasoning behind it, but I would have to think twice about upgrading.

I have been using ImageKit for approximately one year.

According to my experience, ImageKit is stable. I have not experienced challenges so far.

ImageKit is very scalable.

I have not had any experience with ImageKit's technical support, as I have not encountered challenges requiring it so far.

I am currently using Cloudinary, but I am also using something else now. I currently do not use Cloudinary; I am using another tool called ImageKit.

The installation process of ImageKit is quite fair and not very complicated. If you are a developer, the installation process is not very complicated.

There are clear savings with this tool, as I experience both time saving and money saving. Storing images myself would require tools like Photoshop for size reduction before uploading. Using VPS or hosting means the size affects storage cost and can significantly increase bandwidth costs. Loading large images can impact bandwidth heavily, leading to increased overall costs. The compression technique saves money, and the CDN improves user experience with faster load times because of caching and CDN delivery.

I would not say the pricing model is unfair. I just think the difference from the $9 to the $89 plan is significant. The pricing of ImageKit is fair.

High-performance caching is very important to me. When you cache the images, such as for the most visited products and pages, it is faster to retrieve them because they are already in-memory. This means they load faster compared to accessing other products that are pulled from storage, which can take longer.

I do see an impact from lazy loading. With lazy loading, as a user accesses the product page, images load in an asynchronous way, meaning not all images load at once. For example, if there are ten products, they do not all load together, which saves bandwidth instead of loading all thousands of products at once.

For analytics, I rarely pay that much attention to them, though they are useful for monitoring the website. I have not experienced a challenge where I really need to go deep into the analytics; they are quite optimized primarily for bandwidth monitoring.

I have not experienced any technical disadvantages with ImageKit, though I have not tried their video storage and delivery aspect.

I would rate this review a 9 out of 10.

One of our subsidiaries, OLX Indonesia, works with ImageKit as an integration for video and image compression. When a user uploads a car image to our server, ImageKit compresses it and integrates it with our CDN system.

A specific example of how this works in practice is that from the user's standpoint, if a customer uploads an image to sell their used car, the image will be connected with our CDN. If the image exceeds our threshold size, ImageKit will compress it, which reduces our memory usage.

If the image size is compressed, from the user's standpoint, they can also load the image faster. This is how we are utilizing ImageKit.

ImageKit offers compression capabilities, and they can connect with any tech stack because they have an API and SDK with embedded integration, making ImageKit very flexible with all of the platforms we are using.

ImageKit has positively impacted our organization by reducing our page load times.

ImageKit can improve on the integration side because their downtime occurs quite often. Although they provide a fallback recall where image files that do not upload will be placed in a queue and automatically re-upload once the system returns to normal, sometimes any glitch on ImageKit will affect our brand perception. From the user's standpoint, they will claim that the error is coming from our brand, even though we are using ImageKit on the backbone.

I have been using ImageKit for three years.

Regarding ImageKit's AI capabilities, I find that they are very compliant and trustworthy. Regarding the accuracy and reliability of its output, I find that they are very scalable.

Regarding specific outcomes, ImageKit can reduce our storage usage by approximately 30% year over year.

My advice to others looking into using ImageKit is that if you would like to utilize it, you should put it on the most visited page or any product that has the highest traffic. With ImageKit, caching can be stored in their users' in-memory, which can reduce page load and improve lazy loading since the image loads asynchronously, providing a better user experience. I would rate this product a 9 out of 10.