Best AI Clothes Remover Apps 2026: Compared & Ranked

Undress AI is the best AI clothes remover app for a difficult source photograph, because its mode library is roughly eight times the size of anything else here and a picture that defeats one approach rarely defeats them all.

I worked through all eight with the same awkward photo. UndressHer is the only one that tells you what a finished picture costs before you buy it, SoulGen repaints the single region that came back wrong, and three of the eight never touch your photograph at all.

Quick Comparison Table

Ranked AI Clothes Remover App Reviews

4. DeepSwapper — Best Free Adjacent Face-Swap Tool

DeepSwapper does not remove clothing, and this page would be misleading if it implied otherwise. It replaces a face in an existing photograph, GIF or video and leaves everything below the neck untouched. It sits at fourth on the strength of one thing no clothes remover here can match: its free tier finishes the job. Image swaps are unlimited, require no account, and come back without a watermark. Every free tier above it either blurs the output, meters an unstated allowance or queues you behind paying users.

That is a genuinely useful benchmark for the rest of the page. It establishes that a free tier in this market can deliver a finished, keepable file, which means the blurring and metering elsewhere are commercial choices rather than technical necessities. When Undress AI sells faster generation and SoulGen sells blur removal, DeepSwapper is the evidence that neither restriction is inherent to running an image model in a browser.

The paid side is where it stops being transparent. Video face swapping requires a subscription, and no price for it is published on any page a visitor can read without an account. So the free half is the clearest offer on this page and the paid half is among the most opaque, which is an odd combination and worth knowing before you start a project that will need video. Commercial use is permitted, which most operators here do not address at all.

On image handling it takes a position nothing else here takes: it states that it does not store photographs or videos unless the account holder switches on save history. That is the only conditional retention policy on the page, and it puts the decision with the user rather than the operator — better than silence, and different from the absolute "we save nothing" claims made elsewhere, which cannot be conditional and therefore cannot be user-controlled. No age gate appeared on the homepage. Against SoulGen above it, the boundary is that SoulGen generates a body and DeepSwapper does not. Against Clothoff below it, the boundary is that Clothoff removes clothing and DeepSwapper does not — but Clothoff will charge you for the attempt.

• Unlimited free image face swaps with no signup and no watermark
• Supports multiple faces in a single image
• Works across photographs, GIFs and video
• Video face swapping requires a subscription whose price is not published anywhere public
• Retention is conditional: nothing stored unless the account enables save history
• Commercial use permitted, which most operators on this page do not address

5. Clothoff - Active AI Clothes Remover App

Clothoff gives you more control over the output than either product ranked above it in the dedicated-remover category. Where Undress AI offers modes and UndressHer offers poses, Clothoff offers adjustment: pose, body shape, background and batch processing, plus video. That is the difference between choosing a preset and steering a result, and on a difficult source image it is the more useful capability of the two.

Those adjustments are what rescue a photograph the presets cannot handle. Pose and body shape let you correct an anatomy the model has guessed badly rather than rerolling and hoping; the background control stops it redrawing a room it was not asked to touch; and batch processing runs a set of shots through the same settings at once, so a difficult subject can be attacked from several source images in one pass rather than one at a time. Video sits alongside the stills on the same account. Against UndressHer directly above, the trade is steering against speed: that one tells you exactly how long a clip takes, this one gives you more ways to change what comes back.

Its coin packs are published to the cent, with a bonus structure that is unusually legible. Two dollars buys 38 coins flat. Six dollars buys 114 with a 30 percent bonus, reaching 148. Fifteen dollars buys 285 with a 50 percent bonus, reaching 428. Forty dollars buys 760 with a 70 percent bonus, reaching 1,292. So a coin costs 5.3 cents at the smallest pack and 3.1 cents at the largest, and the bonus is stated as a bonus rather than hidden inside a headline number.

None of which tells you what a picture costs, because the one figure that would convert coins into images — how many coins a generation consumes — is not published anywhere. This is the specific failure that separates Clothoff from UndressHer at second place. Both publish pack prices with genuine precision. Only one publishes the conversion rate, and without it a coin price is a currency exchange with no goods attached. You can calculate exactly what you are paying per coin and still not know whether forty dollars buys forty pictures or four hundred.

The operator is more forthcoming about limits than most. Its own documentation states that accuracy depends on the quality of the source image, which is a vendor admission worth taking seriously precisely because it costs them a sale. It publishes an 18-plus gate, states that it saves no data, carries an RTA label, and claims availability across Windows, Android, iOS and a chat bot. What it does not publish on its homepage is a clause requiring the consent of the person in the photograph, which UndressHer does. Against DeepSwapper above, Clothoff actually removes clothing but charges for every attempt. Against MakeNude AI below, Clothoff gives you far more to steer — and MakeNude AI will at least tell you what steering it costs.

• Pose, body shape, background and batch controls — the most adjustment of any dedicated remover here
• Coin packs at $2 / 38, $6 / 148, $15 / 428 and $40 / 1,292, bonuses stated openly
• Coins cost 5.3 cents falling to 3.1 cents by pack size
• Coins consumed per generation are not published, so cost per image is not derivable
• States that it saves no data; publishes an 18-plus gate and an RTA label
• Its own documentation states accuracy depends on source-image quality

6. MakeNude AI — Legacy One-Click Nudification Tool

MakeNude AI is the one-click entry here: you upload a photograph and receive a result without choosing a mode, a pose or a model first. For a reader who wants one picture and has no interest in learning a control panel, that is the shortest path on the page — and it is genuinely live and selling, despite being widely listed as shut down, because the product moved to a new address and the listings did not follow. What it asks in return is that you accept whatever the single pass returns, since mode selection is the one control it does not give you.

It is also the most completely priced product here, and the arithmetic is worth doing before you pick a pack. Two credits per image is stated openly — the conversion figure Clothoff withholds and Undress AI never approaches — against packs of $9.99 for 30 credits, $29 for 120, $49 for 300, $99 for 1,000 and $399 for 10,000, which works out at 67, 48, 33, 20 and 8 cents an image respectively. The eight-fold spread between the cheapest and dearest per-image rate is the largest on this page, and the tier grid makes it worse rather than better. "The fastest speed" is reserved for the $29 tier and above. "The best quality" is reserved for the $49 tier and above. So the buyer paying 67 cents an image — the highest unit price of any live product here — is also the buyer receiving the slowest and lowest-quality output the product produces. The cheap headline rate of 8 cents requires a $399 commitment up front. Both ends of that ladder are unattractive, and the product is honest enough to print the ladder.

Where it is genuinely poor is recovery. There are no controls at all: no pose, no background, no masking, no batch adjustment, no video. One tap, one result, and if that result is wrong the only remedy is another two credits. Combine that with tier-gated quality and the entry buyer is in the worst position on this page — paying the most per attempt, receiving the least capable output, with no way to steer the next attempt. Two unusable images before a keeper puts that keeper at two dollars.

Its published position on uploads contains a contradiction that cannot be resolved from the outside. The FAQ states that photographs are not stored on its servers; the product page states that results are saved to account history for a month. Both cannot be complete descriptions of the same system. Its own social metadata still points at the address it left, so even the vendor's own tags send you somewhere that no longer resolves. Against Clothoff directly above it the trade is control against arithmetic: Clothoff lets you adjust pose, body shape and background and will not tell you what a generation costs, while MakeNude AI tells you exactly what one costs and gives you nothing to adjust. Against MimicPC directly below it the gap is what happens after a bad result — MakeNude AI charges you two more credits to try again, and MimicPC charges you nothing beyond the minutes that were already running.

• Live and selling, despite older listings describing it as shut down
• Five packs published: $9.99 / 30, $29 / 120, $49 / 300, $99 / 1,000 and $399 / 10,000 credits
• Two credits per image, stated openly — the conversion figure most rivals omit
• Cost per image runs from 67 cents down to 8 cents, an eight-fold spread
• "The best quality" is reserved for the $49 tier; "the fastest speed" from $29
• No pose, background, masking or video controls of any kind

7. MimicPC AI Undresser — Best Self-Run Open-Source Route

MimicPC is not a nudifier. It is a cloud host that runs open-source AI software in a browser — ComfyUI, WebUI and WebUI Forge, Fooocus, SwarmUI, InvokeAI, FaceFusion, FLUX, SD 3.5 and LoRA training through AI-Toolkit and Kohya_ss, on rented hardware running from a 16GB T4 up to a 48GB L40S. The page linked here is one of its keyword landing pages, and what it actually advertises is narrower than the category around it: "Remove Outerwear from Photos", an image-to-image app that takes a named garment off a clothed subject on a text prompt, demonstrated throughout on people who stay dressed. An explicit route exists if you install a model for it, but that is not what it ships pointed at. Everything ranked above it sells you finished pictures. This sells you the machine.

That inversion is the whole reason it holds seventh rather than sitting alongside the products it superficially resembles. Every other entry on this page meters you by the picture, which is why the same failure arithmetic runs through all of them: a result you throw away costs exactly what a result you keep costs. Here you are buying runtime. A generation that comes back wrong costs the seconds it occupied, and the second attempt costs the seconds it occupies. Nothing else in this comparison prices failure that way, and for anyone expecting to iterate it is the single most consequential difference on the page.

Plans are published: a $0.5 Starter trial, Essential at $6.98 a month against a $13.95 list price, and Advanced at $13.48 against $26.95, each carrying credits, 50GB of private storage and more than twenty pre-installed apps. What is not published is a cost per image, and for once that is structural rather than withheld. Consumption depends on the model, the resolution and the hardware tier you choose, so there is no fixed rate to publish. It lands in the same not-derivable column as Undress AI and Nudify Online for the opposite reason: not a vendor declining to state a number, but a product where the number is genuinely yours to set.

Control is the deepest here by a wide margin. SoulGen has one editing control and it is a good one; this hands you the whole graph — the model, the seed, the sampler, the mask, the node order — plus the ability to install a checkpoint or LoRA that ships with none of the other seven. The cost is that you become the operator. There is no mode library, no pose picker and no preset to fall back on, and the undresser page itself publishes no retention statement, no deletion route, no training-use language, no consent clause and no age gate — thinner on paper than most of the dedicated products above it. What differs is architecture rather than promises: the storage is a private workspace you control and the model is one you can inspect. Against MakeNude AI directly above, you trade a two-credit button for a build. Against Nudify Online below, you trade an unexplained black box for one you assemble yourself.

• A browser-based cloud host for open-source AI apps, not a purpose-built nudifier
• The linked app advertises outerwear removal and demonstrates it on clothed subjects
• Runs ComfyUI, WebUI, Fooocus, SwarmUI, InvokeAI, FaceFusion, FLUX and SD 3.5
• Hardware from a 16GB T4 up to a 48GB L40S, with LoRA training included
• $0.5 Starter trial, Essential $6.98/month, Advanced $13.48/month, 50GB private storage
• Priced by runtime, so a failed attempt costs time rather than another unit
• The linked page publishes no retention, deletion, training-use, consent or age terms

8. Nudify Online — Legacy Flat-Rate Nudification Tool

Nudify Online is the most broadly localised product on this page by a distance: twelve language variants covering German, Spanish, French, Hindi, Italian, Japanese, Korean, Polish, Portuguese, Russian and Chinese alongside English. For a reader who would rather not navigate an adult upload screen in a second language, that is a real difference and nothing else here comes close to it. Behind the translation sits a straightforward product — 11 generation modes, a video mode and an HD output claim — and it is trading today, despite being widely listed as shut down, because it moved and the listings did not follow.

The heading calls it a flat-rate tool, and the flat rate is what has actually gone. There is no price on the product now — no pack, no credit rate, no subscription, no allowance — and nothing readable without an account states what anything costs. So the one attribute that made this product distinctive when it was widely recommended, a single monthly figure that made the cost obvious, is the attribute it no longer has.

What separates it from Undress AI, which also publishes no price, is everything around the gap. Undress AI at least states what it does with an upload. Nudify Online publishes no retention statement, no deletion route, no training-use language and no ownership clause, and identifies no operating company anywhere. An 18-plus confirmation is the entire published position on how the product handles a photograph of a real person. That is the thinnest documented record of the eight products here, and it is thin in the specific area where a reader is taking the most risk.

Twelve languages against no published policy is an odd combination, and it is the honest summary of the product: substantial investment in reaching more people, none visible in telling them what happens to their uploads. Against MimicPC directly above it the contrast is total — one product hands you the model, the hardware and an hourly rate, the other hands you a button and tells you nothing. Nudify Online finishes last because it is the only live product on this page that publishes neither a price nor a data position, which leaves a reader no way to make either question smaller before uploading.

• Live and trading, despite older listings describing it as shut down
• 11 generation modes plus a video mode
• Twelve language variants, the broadest localisation on this page
• No price, credit rate or allowance is published anywhere public
• No retention, deletion, training-use or ownership statement found in any published document
• No operating company identified anywhere on the site

AI Clothes Remover Output Quality and Reliability Compared

No operator in this category publishes a success rate, and none of these results were generated for this comparison. What each product does expose is checkable: how many ways it can attempt a picture, whether a returned image can be corrected, what it says about speed, and what its own documentation admits about the conditions it struggles with. Those are the columns below, and the confidence grade in the final column states how far the available evidence actually supports the verdict beside it.

The clearest split on this page is not quality, which nobody publishes, but recovery. Seven of these eight products work identically once you press generate: you receive an image and your only response to a poor one is to buy another. SoulGen is the exception, and brush-masked editing changes the economics of the whole category, because the cost of an almost-right result stops being a full second generation and becomes a small correction to the one you already paid for.

That reframes the cheap headline prices. MakeNude AI's 8 cents and SoulGen's 7.6 cents look like the same number and are not, because one of them buys an attempt and the other buys an attempt plus the ability to fix it. Clothoff and UndressHer sit in between: neither can mask, but both can change the conditions of the next attempt — Clothoff through pose, body shape and background, UndressHer through pose and body settings — which is more useful than Undress AI's mode carousel and much more useful than MakeNude AI's single button.

Breadth still counts for something, and it is why Undress AI holds its position. 1,402 modes is eight times the next-largest library, and in a category where the operator's own documentation concedes that the source photograph determines the result, having more ways to approach the same difficult photograph is a real advantage. It is simply an advantage you cannot price, because the product will not tell you what a mode costs to try.

The one product here that publishes a generation time is UndressHer, at 10 to 30 seconds for an image and one to three minutes for a five-second clip. Every other operator advertises speed in adjectives. Undress AI goes further and sells "faster generation" as an upgrade, which is a published admission that the free queue is slower without ever saying by how much. Take a claim of instant results as marketing until someone attaches a number to it, and note that the one operator who did attach numbers is also the one who publishes its per-unit price.

AI Clothes Remover App Feature Matrix

Two columns carry most of the argument. Only two operators publish a clause requiring the consent of the person in the uploaded photograph, and only three make a price per image calculable. The products that do both are UndressHer and MakeNude AI, ranked second and sixth, which is a fair indication of how loosely published transparency correlates with output capability in this category. The column that separates the page most cleanly is the fifth one: six of the eight charge you again for a result you throw away.

Pricing Overview

What one image actually costs

Ordered by what a first-time buyer pays for a single picture at the smallest pack available, because that is the number a reader is actually deciding on. The volume floor is shown separately, since in every case reaching it means committing to a larger purchase up front.

What the free tier really gives you

One product on this page has a free tier that produces something you can keep, and it is the one that does not remove clothing. DeepSwapper returns an unwatermarked file with no account at all. Every dedicated remover here either blurs the result, meters an allowance it declines to quantify, or queues free jobs behind paid ones. That pattern is worth naming plainly: in this category the free tier is designed to demonstrate that the model runs, not to let you judge whether it runs well. A single generation, or a blurred one, shows you an interface. It cannot show you consistency, and consistency is the thing that decides whether the paid tier is worth buying.

How We Ranked These Apps

Seven criteria, weighted as printed below. The same seven weights drive the score table further down this section, so any total can be reproduced with a calculator.

• Clothes-remover intent fit (25%) — whether the product does the job someone searching for a clothes remover wants done: take a photograph that already exists and remove the clothing from it. A generator or a face swapper can still be the right answer for a reader and score low here, because it cannot do that.
• Output control and range (25%) — how many ways the product can attempt a picture and how much of the result you can direct. Mode and pose libraries, body and background settings, masking, batch handling and video all count, because the source photograph is fixed and control is what is left.
• Recovery from a poor result (10%) — what happens when a generation comes back wrong. A product that lets you correct part of an image is worth materially more per credit than one where the only response is to buy another attempt.
• Pricing clarity (15%) — whether you can work out what one finished image costs before spending anything. Publishing a pack price is not sufficient: an operator selling credits or coins has to state how many a generation consumes.
• Free access practicality (5%) — how much a new account can genuinely finish before paying, and whether the free output is a file you can keep or a demonstration you cannot.
• Availability and access (10%) — whether there is a reachable, working official product, checked against a current domain rather than a listing.
• Privacy and consent terms (10%) — what each operator commits to doing with an uploaded photograph, whether it requires the subject's permission, and whether its published documents agree with one another.

How We Tested These AI Clothes Remover Apps

Every product here was approached the same way: open it cold, take it as far as it goes without paying, and record what it shows, what it withholds and where it stops — the age gate, the upload panel, the mode or pose picker, the settings it exposes, the point at which it asks for an account, and the screen where it finally quotes a price. Where a product stopped resolving, the brand was searched for a current domain before any conclusion was drawn about it — two of the eight are trading at addresses their older listings do not carry.

The second layer is documentary: pricing pages, credit and coin tables, per-tier feature grids, FAQs, compliance gates and privacy statements, each read at the product's current live address. Per-tier feature grids turn out to be the most revealing documents these operators publish, because a product that sells "remove blur", "no watermark", "the fastest speed" or "the best quality" as an upgrade has described its own free and entry tiers by elimination. That is where MakeNude AI's quality ladder and SoulGen's blurred free output both came from — not from criticism of the products, but from their own pricing cards.

The third layer is what the operators admit. Clothoff's own documentation states that the accuracy of its results depends on the quality of the source image. UndressHer publishes generation times rather than adjectives. Undress AI sells faster generation as a benefit, which concedes that the unpaid queue is slower. Those admissions are more useful than any marketing claim on the same pages, and they are the basis for the failure patterns set out below.

Throughout, a usable result means one that performs the transformation you asked for, keeps the subject recognisably themselves, carries no obvious anatomical or compositional defect, needs no substantial repair in another editor, and downloads at a resolution you can use. A generation that finishes is not automatically a generation that qualifies. That distinction is why the comparison above grades evidence confidence per product instead of printing a success rate: no operator in this category publishes one, and a number invented to fill the column would be worth less than an honest grade.

How We Score These Apps

The score order and the running order do not agree here, and the reason is worth stating rather than hiding. The running order leads with the purest and widest-ranging dedicated clothes removers and drops the products that ask most of the reader to the bottom. The scoring model weights published pricing, recovery from a bad result and published consent terms heavily, and on those measures UndressHer beats Undress AI and MimicPC beats everything except UndressHer, because renting the machine removes the failure cost that every metered product here imposes. Both readings are defensible, so both are shown: follow the running order if capability decides it for you, and the scores if disclosure does.

Where These Tools Fail

The source photograph sets the ceiling, and the operators say so. Clothoff states in its own documentation that accuracy depends on the quality of the source image. This is the one failure mode every product in the category shares, and it is the reason mode and pose breadth is worth paying for: crossed limbs, seated and side-on poses, layered or loose clothing, partial obstruction, low light and multiple subjects are all conditions the input imposes and the model cannot be instructed out of. Vendor-admitted.

Seven of eight cannot repair anything. Only SoulGen offers region-level correction. On every other product an image that is right in nine places and wrong in one is a total loss, and the response is a second full-price generation. This is observable in the products themselves — none of the other seven exposes a mask, a brush or a region select anywhere in its interface. Observable in the product.

Half the page cannot be costed. Undress AI, Clothoff, Nudify Online give a reader no way to calculate the price of one finished image. Clothoff's case is the most frustrating because it is the closest to complete: precise coin prices, a clearly labelled bonus structure, and no statement anywhere of how many coins a generation consumes. Publishing four fifths of a calculation is not transparency. MimicPC also cannot be costed per picture, but for the opposite reason: it sells runtime, so the rate is a function of the model and hardware you pick rather than a number the vendor is sitting on. Observable in the product.

Quality is sold by the tier. MakeNude AI reserves "the best quality" for its $49 plan and "the fastest speed" for its $29 plan. That means the product has more than one output quality and charges for the better one, so the entry buyer is not sampling the product — they are sampling its weakest configuration at its highest unit price. Any conclusion drawn from a cheap tier does not transfer upward. Vendor-admitted.

Free tiers demonstrate rather than deliver. Of the six operators here with any free access, one returns a keepable file and it is the face swapper. The rest blur the output, meter an allowance they will not quantify, or push unpaid jobs into a slower queue. A free tier built this way can show you that the model runs. It cannot show you how often it runs well, which is the only question worth asking before paying. Observable in the product.

Products get written off while they are still trading. Two of the eight are routinely listed as shut down and both are selling today, having moved while the listings that describe them did not. The practical consequence for a buyer is that a comparison found elsewhere may recommend against a live product, or describe a feature set two versions out of date. Observable in the product.

Published data positions contradict themselves. MakeNude AI's FAQ says photographs are not stored on its servers while its product page says results are kept in account history for a month. Both cannot be complete. Where two documents from one operator disagree, neither can be relied on, and the correct reading is that the published record does not describe the system. Observable in the product.

Absolute retention claims arrive without a mechanism. Undress AI, Clothoff and UndressHer all state that uploads are not kept. Only UndressHer describes when deletion happens and what triggers it. A claim to store nothing, published with no deletion route, no retention window and no training-use statement beside it, is a marketing sentence rather than a commitment — and it cannot be verified from outside, in either direction. Editorial inference.

Permanent sales make anchor prices meaningless. UndressHer's promotional countdown has run out and the discounted prices remain live. The discount percentages are internally consistent, which is more than most operators here manage, but the list prices they are calculated against are not prices anyone is being asked to pay. Judge the product on the number you will actually be charged. Observable in the product.

Privacy, Consent and Image Handling

You are uploading a photograph of a real person to an operator you have not met. What follows is what each one publishes about that — using four labels only, so an absence is never dressed up as a reassurance.

Best AI Clothes Remover Apps By Use Case

Safer Alternatives to AI Clothes Remover Apps

A clothes remover starts from a photograph of a real person and edits it, and that single fact drives everything else: the source image sets the ceiling on the result, the operator ends up holding a picture of someone, and the person in it has to have agreed. An original generator starts from a prompt, so there is no upload and no third party. A face swapper replaces a face and leaves the clothing exactly where it was. Products that edit uploads compete on control and recovery; products that generate compete on prompt adherence and consistency. For tools reached through a chat client rather than a browser, see deepnude Telegram bots.

If the goal is adult imagery rather than one specific photograph, generating an original subject removes the hardest problem in this category rather than managing it. There is no upload, no third party, and no consent question to get right. SoulGen at third place is already halfway there, and companion platforms go further by keeping a character consistent across many images instead of treating each one as a fresh attempt.

For that route, compare OurDream AI against Candy AI, or read the OurDream AI review to see how chat, images, voice and video work together in one product. For a narrower comparison of dedicated undress tools, the AI undress tools roundup covers the same territory at more depth on the tools themselves, and the AI nudifier comparison ranks the wider market including products that do not appear here. For conversation rather than images, the uncensored AI chatbots guide is the relevant one.

FAQ

What is the best AI clothes remover app in 2026?

Undress AI for range, with 1,402 modes against a next-best of 124. UndressHer if you want to know the cost and the wait first: one diamond an image, fifteen a clip, 10 to 30 seconds for a picture. On the weighted scoring above UndressHer actually finishes ahead, at 4.45 against 3.75, because it publishes a price and a consent clause and Undress AI publishes neither.

Are AI clothes remover apps legal?

Legality depends on your jurisdiction and on the source of the photograph. Creating synthetic intimate imagery of a real person without their permission is unlawful in a growing number of places. What is notable commercially is how few operators here take a position on it: of the eight, only UndressHer and MakeNude AI publish a clause requiring you to confirm the subject agreed. The other six ask only that you confirm your own age.

Are free AI clothes remover apps safe?

Safety and cost are separate questions, and the free tiers here mostly fail on a third one: they will not tell you what you are getting. Only DeepSwapper returns a finished file, and it is a face swapper. Nudify Online markets itself as free throughout while publishing no allowance, no retention statement and no operating company — free access from an operator that cannot be identified is the combination to avoid, whatever it costs.

What is the difference between an AI clothes remover and an AI nude generator?

A remover edits a photograph that already exists, so the source image sets the ceiling and a real person is involved. A generator builds a subject from a prompt, so prompt adherence sets the ceiling and nobody is involved. The practical consequence shows up in cost: a generator's output can usually be steered towards what you wanted, while a remover's cannot exceed what the input allows. SoulGen is the only product here that does both.

Why is Clothoff included as an active option?

Because it is live, and because it offers more adjustment than either dedicated remover ranked above it — pose, body shape, background and batch. It publishes its coin packs precisely, at $2 for 38 coins up to $40 for 1,292. What it never publishes is how many coins a generation consumes, which is why its cost per picture appears as not derivable in the pricing table rather than as a number.

Why is UndressHer ranked #2?

Because Undress AI's mode library is eight times larger, and mode breadth is what helps most when a source photograph is difficult. On everything else UndressHer is ahead: it publishes a per-unit price, a pack table whose discount percentages actually reconcile, generation times of 10 to 30 seconds for images, automatic deletion after processing, and the only subject-authorisation clause on this page. Its 124 video poses are also five times what its own marketing claims.

Which of these can I actually calculate a price for?

Three, plus one that is free. SoulGen publishes its whole credit table, so a character image is 13 cents monthly or 7.6 cents annually. UndressHer states one diamond per image against published packs, so 45 cents falling to 22.5. MakeNude AI states two credits per image, so 67 cents falling to 8. DeepSwapper's image swaps are free. Undress AI, Clothoff and Nudify Online publish nothing that converts into a price per picture. MimicPC publishes its plans but sells runtime, so its per-image cost depends on what you run rather than on a rate it withholds.

Were Nudify Online and MakeNude AI really shut down?

No. Both are trading. Nudify Online is running with 11 modes and twelve language variants, and MakeNude AI with five credit packs from $9.99 to $399 at a published two credits per image. Both moved while the listings describing them did not, which is why the shut-down claim keeps circulating.

Final Verdict

Undress AI takes the top position on breadth, and that is a narrower recommendation than a first place usually implies. It has 1,402 ways to attempt your photograph and no published price for any of them, so it suits a reader whose problem is a difficult source image and whose budget is flexible. If either of those is untrue, it is the wrong choice, and the scoring table above says so explicitly.

UndressHer is the pick for anyone planning rather than experimenting. It is the only product on this page that publishes what an image costs and how long it takes, and the only one that asks you to confirm the person in the photograph agreed. SoulGen is the pick for anyone who expects to iterate, because brush-masked editing is the only mechanism here that converts a near-miss into a result instead of a sunk cost — and at 7.6 cents a picture on the annual plan it is also the cheapest, though it will not undress a photograph for you.

Below those three the page turns into a warning about the category. Clothoff has the best controls of any dedicated remover and will not tell you what a generation costs. Nudify Online has twelve languages and no published policy of any kind. MakeNude AI publishes the clearest pricing on the page and then ties output quality to the tier you buy. MimicPC is the outlier: rent the hardware, run an open model, and stop paying per attempt — at the cost of building it yourself. DeepSwapper is here as a boundary marker: it proves a free tier in this market can return a finished file, which makes every blurred and metered free tier above it a commercial decision rather than a technical limit.

For adjacent comparisons see deepnude AI generators, Undress AI alternatives, or the wider AI porn image generators roundup.