No plans.Just a walk, photos and notes.
Most repair and maintenance work has no drawing set. The estimate comes off a job walk, a folder of photos and a page of notes. That is a harder problem than reading a plan, and it is a different problem, because there is no dimensioned document to check the answer against.
100% money-back guarantee. Terms apply.
Nothing to check the number against
On a new build you can re-measure a sheet. On a repair job the only record is what someone photographed, so a quantity is either traceable to a photo or it is an opinion. Most estimating tools assume a plan set exists, which is why they are no help on this work.
The quantities, and where each one comes from.
Units an estimator on this work would recognise, with the note that matters rather than a definition.
| Item | Unit | Note |
|---|---|---|
| Building geometry | sf, lf | Footprint perimeter and storey count give wall area without a dimensioned plan. Confirm against a site measurement, not against a scaled photo. |
| Photo coverage per elevation | count | Before measuring anything, confirm every elevation was actually photographed. Two of four carports shot is a gap, not a quantity. |
| Damage extents | sf, lf, ea | Cracked panels, rotted trim, corroded fascia. Counted from flagged photos and kept separate from sound material. |
| Document-sourced quantities | varies | Where a scope sheet or a unit mix exists, quantities come from it rather than from the photos, and the estimate records which document each number came from. |
| Open questions | count | Anything the photos do not cover becomes a question on the estimate, not an assumed number. |
The three things that decide whether the number holds.
A photo is not a measurement until you know the scale
You cannot scale a photograph reliably. Photos tell you what is there and what condition it is in. Dimensions come from a site measurement, the building footprint or a document. Anything that skips that step is producing numbers nobody can defend.
Missing coverage is the real risk, not missing precision
An estimate built on 80 percent photo coverage is not 80 percent accurate, it is missing a scope. Check coverage per building and per elevation before you price, and flag the gap rather than averaging across it.
Which document wins has to be decided, not assumed
When a scope sheet and a set of notes disagree, one of them governs. Write down which, and for which quantities. That single instruction is worth more than any measurement technique.
Try Ruh on a real bid. 100% money-back guarantee if you are not satisfied.*
*Scoped delivery, terms apply. Read the guarantee terms
Where to read next.
The trade pages, tools and guides that carry the detail this page summarises.
Estimating without a drawing set: frequently asked questions
Can you produce a real estimate with no drawings at all?+
Yes, provided you are honest about where each number came from. Wall area follows from the building footprint and storey height. Damage extents come off flagged photos. Interior quantities come off a unit mix. What you cannot do is scale a photograph and call the result a measurement. The estimate has to record its sources, so anything unsupported shows up as a question rather than disappearing into a total.
How many photos does a property walk actually need?+
Enough to cover every elevation of every building, plus close-ups of every damaged area you intend to price. In practice that runs to a few hundred on a multi-building property, which is why coverage matters more than volume. The useful check is not how many photos you have, it is whether any elevation or structure has none.
Is this less accurate than estimating from a plan set?+
It is differently constrained. A plan set gives you dimensions but tells you nothing about condition, and condition is most of a repair scope. A walk gives you condition but no dimensions. The defensible approach uses each for what it is good at, and states which source produced each quantity so a reviewer can check the ones that matter.
What should the proposal say about assumptions?+
Everything you assumed, next to the line it affects. Coverage gaps, which document governed where two disagreed, coats assumed, access assumed, and anything you priced as an allowance rather than a measured quantity. On work with no drawings the assumptions are the estimate, and burying them in a footnote is how a job goes wrong three weeks in.
Try Ruh on a job you are leveling now.
Put us on a live trade package rather than a canned demo. Ruh reads the drawings, measures that scope independently of any bid already in hand, and prices it on your own rates, with every line traceable to the sheet. If it does not hold up, you are covered by the guarantee below.
- 1Tell us about a job you are leveling and which trade package to take
- 2Ruh measures that scope from the drawings, independently of the sub bids you have received
- 3You get quantities you can hold the proposals against, each one traceable to the sheet
Put it on a property you are pricing now.
Ruh reads the walk photos and the documents, measures the scope, and prices it on your own rates, with every line traceable to what it was read from.