In short: Erase.bg cut the outline most accurately (96.0%). For a full-size result with no account, iLoveIMG was the pick; remove.bg’s free preview was clean but small.
- ✓ Same image · same day · measured by us
- Test image 5,778,833 bytes (2000×1500)
- ! All 5 upload your image to a server
We ran one test image, whose exact outline we know, through 5 free background removers and measured pixel by pixel how well each result matched the true outline. Hair and a semi-transparent glass were scored separately.
Results (most accurate first)
| Rank | Tool | Free result | Overall accuracy | Hair area | Transparent glass | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Erase.bg | 1500×1125 PNG | 96.0% | 91.3% | 57.4% | 1500 px without an account; HD needs sign-up |
| 2 | remove.bg | 577×433 PNG | 93.6% | 86.0% | 57.5% | Free result is preview size; full size needs credits (login) |
| 3 | iLoveIMG | 2000×1500 PNG | 89.0% | 80.3% | 0.0% | Full size without an account; the glass was removed entirely |
| 4 | Adobe Firefly | 2000×1500 PNG | 69.5% | 79.6% | 57.5% | Left patches of background around the person; download without login not verified |
| 5 | Fotor | 1280×960 PNG | 17.1% | 0.2% | 55.2% | Did not recognise the illustrated person; kept only the hand and glass |
Which one to use
- Cleanest cutout: Erase.bg. Highest hair accuracy (91%) and a free 1500 px result.
- Full size, no account: iLoveIMG returns the original 2000×1500 PNG. It treated the semi-transparent glass as background.
- Small images such as social thumbnails: remove.bg’s free preview (577×433) had a good outline; larger sizes need credits.
- Check the result carefully: Adobe Firefly left some background around the person, and Fotor missed the person in our test image.
How we tested
- Test image: a 2000×1500 PNG illustration we drew, 5,778,833 bytes: one person with about 580 loose hair strands, a semi-transparent glass, and a background with a window frame and colour blocks. It contains no personal data and is generated identically each time.
- Ground truth: because we drew the person, we know the exact outline. Accuracy is the overlap (IoU) between pixels at least 50% opaque in the result and the true outline; 100% would be perfect.
- The hair area (a 480×320 px region above the head) and the glass area were scored the same way.
- Conditions: 28 Sep 2026, Chrome desktop, not signed in, default settings. We scored the file each site gives for free.
- Limit: this is an illustration, not a photo. Rankings may differ on real people or product photos.
Left out of this comparison
Photoroom and Pixlr did not open their editor during our automated run, so we got no result; we plan to retest them. Canva was left out because it requires signing in.
Extra check: a real photo
Because our main test image is an illustration, we also ran a real cat photo (Wikimedia Commons, 1795×2397, with fur edges) through the same tools on the same day. On the real photo all five produced almost the same outline (98.5–99.6% overlap with each other); the differences were the free output size and download rules.
| Tool | Free output size | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| iLoveIMG | 1795×2397 (original) | Download right away, no account |
| Adobe Firefly | 1795×2397 | Result shows without an account, but Download opens the Firefly app (Adobe account) |
| Erase.bg | 1347×1799 | Downscaled by the server; HD requires sign-up |
| remove.bg | 432×577 | Free preview size (0.25 MP); website closes 1 Dec 2026 |
| Pixian.AI ↗ | 432×577 | Download without account; free limit is 0.25 MP, so large photos must be scaled or cropped |
The photo was used for testing only and is not shown here. Overlap was measured on 96×128 cut-outs against a majority-vote reference, so for fine edges such as hair, use the illustration results above.
Measured 28 Sep 2026 · Tool policies and results change.