# Unforged Nib vs checking signatures by eye

> Checking by eye depends on the reviewer and whatever specimen is to hand. Unforged Nib compares each signature with the person's own references, the same way every time, and gives a verdict with reasons.

Source: https://unforged.ai/nib/compare/manual-review

A person with a specimen card, or Nib with the person's own references. Here is how the two compare, point by point.

## Side by side

| | Unforged Nib | Checking by eye |
|---|---|---|
| What a signature is compared against | The person's own reference signatures, enrolled once, and how much that person usually varies. | Whatever specimen the reviewer has to hand, and their sense of what the signature should look like. |
| How the verdict is explained | One of six verdicts, a calibrated probability from 0 to 1 with a band, and plain-language reasons you can show an auditor. | Usually a tick or a note. The reasoning stays with the reviewer unless they write it down. |
| Consistency | Every document goes through the same steps and your policy's thresholds. Each result records the policy and version that produced it. | Depends on the reviewer, their training, and how many they have already looked at that day. |
| Speed | Each check answers when it finishes: streamed as it runs, or by signed webhook. Batches go in by bucket drop. | As fast as someone is free to look. The queue grows with volume. |
| Audit trail | Reasons, probability, policy and version on every result, and an append-only audit log kept 400 days. | Whatever the reviewer records: a name, a date, perhaps a comment. |
| Unclear cases | FLAG sends it to a person. FAILED always goes to a person, never automatic. UNREADABLE asks for a better image, free. | Down to the reviewer's judgement, or passed to a colleague. |
| Pricing model | $0.50 per check. A check is one document checked against one person's references, however many signatures it holds. UNREADABLE and NO SIGNATURE results, and enrolling references, are free. Volume pricing and invoicing on Talk to us plans. | Reviewer time for every signature, clear or not. |
| Data handling | Hosted in London (AWS eu-west-2). Used only to run your checks, never for training. Kept as long as your retention setting says. | Documents pass to whoever reviews them, on whatever systems they use. |
| Integration | A REST API described in OpenAPI 3.1, bucket drop (S3), signed webhooks, and a dashboard with check history and exports. | A person, a screen and a process to route the work to them. |

## When checking by eye still makes sense

Nib is not the right tool for every signature. A person is the better choice when:

- **You see a handful a week**: A trained reviewer may be all you need.
- **You hold no references**: Nib compares a signature with the person's own references. With none on file, there is nothing to compare it with.
- **The paper itself is in question**: Nib works from images and PDFs. Ink, pen pressure and paper need a document examiner with the original.
- **The signature is not in Latin script**: Nib reads signatures in Latin script today.
- **A failure needs a final call**: Nib never makes it for you: FAILED always goes to a person.