Fashion Diffusion

The free plan is on the marketing pages, not on the pricing page

This is the first thing to settle, because the answer you get depends on which page you land on.

The pricing page publishes four tiers - $12, $29, $59 and $199 a month - and no free option. Feature pages say something else. The FAQ on the AI fashion video page, marked up as structured data so it is eligible to be read back by a search engine, answers “Is the AI fashion video generator free to use?” with:

Yes. You can start with a free plan and access the AI video generator online free with no upfront payment or credit card required.

Other feature pages describe “free credits available when you sign up”. Signup itself is free, and there is clearly some allowance behind it. What is not published anywhere we could find is how much - no credit count, no time limit, no statement of which tools it covers.

So treat the free tier as a demonstration of unknown size, and budget the product at $12 a month. That is the cheapest published figure that comes with a stated allowance.

What the credits meter

Plan	Monthly	Annual	Credits a month	Credit bank	Vendor’s rate
Starter	$12	$120	100	300	≈ $0.12 an image
Creator	$29	$290	320	960	≈ $0.09 an image
Pro	$59	$590	760	2,280	≈ $0.08 an image
Studio	$199	$1,990	2,800	8,400	≈ $0.07 an image

Annual billing is a straight ten-times-monthly, which the vendor markets as two months free. The credit bank is the more interesting mechanic: each tier accumulates up to three months of allowance, so a quiet month rolls forward instead of evaporating. Beyond that cap it does evaporate.

On top of a subscription, one-time packs add 80 credits for $10, 240 for $25, or 800 for $70, and the vendor states they never expire. At $0.0875 a credit the large pack is cheaper per credit than Starter’s subscription rate, which makes a small plan plus packs a reasonable shape for irregular work.

Video costs more than a still, and the pricing page does not publish the multiplier.

What it does, and where it stops

The input is always a garment. Upload a flat-lay and it will produce an on-model shot, a ghost-mannequin image, a product-detail crop or a background swap; upload a fabric swatch and it maps the material onto a reference garment; upload a sketch and it renders it. Model generation carries demographic, pose and body-type controls, including a plus-size preview. One still becomes a 1080p video.

That is the whole of it. There is no patternmaking, no grading, no tech pack and no 3D garment simulation, so nothing here reaches a factory. It sits upstream of production and downstream of nothing - it is a photography and visualisation budget line, not a CAD replacement.

The other absence is people. No seats, no roles, no shared workspace and no approval step appear on any of the four tiers; the plan table does not mention users at all. Studio buys volume, not a team. An agency running client review will be doing that in email.

The API is a fifth product

“Developer API access” is listed as a feature of all four self-serve plans, but the API page tells a different story: it describes “more than 18 purpose-built fashion AI endpoints”, publishes per-endpoint latencies from one second for background removal to three minutes for video, and then asks you to contact sales, because “plans are scoped to your workload, endpoint needs, and service requirements”. No API pricing is published. Assume a quote.

There are no ecommerce connectors either - no Shopify or WooCommerce app - so without the API, getting imagery onto a storefront is a download and an upload.

Who you are actually buying from

The website names only “Fashion Diffusion (hereinafter referred to as the Operator)” and gives no company address. The App Store listing names the seller as Trendscopes Technology Limited, and both app listings carry the same name. The terms of service are “governed exclusively by the laws of France” with exclusive jurisdiction in Paris. Founding year, headquarters, team size and funding are not disclosed anywhere we could find.

Two terms are worth knowing before you commit:

• Output ownership is clean. All content generated by the platform is owned by the user, with full rights and licences to use it. The counterpart obligation is yours: you warrant that you hold the rights to everything you upload.
• Refunds are described as Apple’s problem. The terms cover only Apple in-app purchases - refunds are “handled by Apple in accordance with Apple Media Services Terms” and the operator “does not directly process refunds”. Web subscriptions run through Stripe, and nothing is published about refunding those. Liability under the terms is capped at USD $100.

On data, the privacy policy is better than the average in this category: uploaded images are not used to train or fine-tune the models without separate, explicit opt-in consent, inference copies are deleted within 24 hours, and face images uploaded for try-on and face swap are stated to be used only to fulfil the request.

One thing a vendor review will raise

Alongside the fashion tools, the same domain publishes and indexes a set of consumer generators that a brand’s procurement or brand-safety review is likely to stop on - among them an AI dress remover, an AI x-ray clothes tool, an AI breast expansion tool, an AI hot girl generator and an AI celebrity generator. They sit in the site footer and in the sitemap, on the same domain and the same account as the try-on and photoshoot tools.

We record this rather than rule on it. It does not change what the fashion tools do, and the terms place the burden of upload rights and lawful use on the user. But if your supplier review reads the vendor’s whole published surface - and enterprise reviews generally do - this is where the meeting will slow down.

Where it fits against the alternatives

Within fashion, FASHN AI is the closest comparison on price and job: $19 a month for 200 credits against Fashion Diffusion’s $12 for 100, and it does give new accounts ten free credits, which answers the question Fashion Diffusion leaves open. Botika sells the adjacent thing - on-model photography with human retouch rounds and stated delivery windows - which is a service purchase rather than a meter.

Outside fashion, Recraft is $10 a month billed annually and returns editable vectors, which is a different output entirely. Canva turns whatever you generate into collateral, and Adobe Creative Cloud is still where a generated image gets fixed rather than regenerated. None of the three knows what a garment is, which is the entire case for buying a fashion-only tool - see our design tools guide for how that trade-off looks across the wider category.