Count This・Counting Things App

Analysis by Getfullapps

I like tools that solve one small problem without asking me to build a spreadsheet first. Count This・Counting Things App takes that approach: I point it at a photo containing repeated objects, and it is designed to help me work out how many there are. That makes it a practical business app for situations where manual counting is slow, distracting, or easy to get wrong.

In my experience, the appeal is not that it replaces every inventory system. It is that it gives me a quick visual starting point when I have a pile, shelf, tray, or image full of similar items. The app comes from AIBY Inc., is free to install, and is rated for Everyone. Its current version is 2.4.3, and it works on devices running Android 8.0 or later.

How Count This fits into real counting work

The basic idea is easy to understand. I use a picture rather than counting each object one by one, which is useful for items such as pills, pipes, coins, boxes, rods, or pieces of lumber. The important distinction is that this is a photo-counting assistant, not a full stock-control platform. It helps with the count itself; I would still use another tool for product codes, purchase orders, locations, costs, and long-term records.

A realistic example is a small workshop receiving a delivery of identical rods. Instead of repeatedly touching and recounting the bundle, I can arrange the objects so they are visible, take a clear image, and use the app as a fast check. If the result looks unexpected, I can compare it with the photograph and investigate before entering the quantity into an inventory sheet.

The same workflow can help in a storeroom. Suppose I need to estimate how many boxes are on a shelf before preparing a restocking request. A photo gives me a record of the scene as well as a count to work from. That visual record is a subtle advantage over mental counting, because it lets me revisit the original arrangement rather than relying entirely on memory.

There is also a useful separation between counting and documentation. I can take a picture for the count, then transfer the result to the business system I already use. That makes the app more suitable for occasional checks than for companies looking for a complete inventory database. I would not expect it to organize suppliers or maintain a warehouse history, because that is not the role it appears designed to fill.

What I would do before taking the picture

The quality of the image matters more than many first-time users may expect. I get a more useful result when the objects are visible, separated enough to distinguish their edges, and photographed from an angle that does not hide one item behind another. Good lighting also matters: reflections on coins, dark corners around boxes, and overlapping pipes can all make visual counting less dependable.

My preferred workflow is to pause before opening the camera. I clear away unrelated objects, spread the target items where possible, and check that the entire group fits in the frame. If I am counting a large batch, I would rather create several manageable images than force a crowded scene into one picture and treat the result as unquestionable.

This is one of the app's less obvious trade-offs. It can reduce the effort of counting, but it does not remove the need to prepare the scene. The time saved comes from replacing repeated manual counting with image-assisted checking, not from pointing at any chaotic pile and expecting perfect recognition.

Useful situations beyond a simple inventory shelf

For a small retailer, the app could be useful during a quick shelf audit, especially when the products are visually similar and the immediate goal is quantity rather than item identification. A tradesperson might use it to check a batch of fittings or materials before leaving a job site. An office could use it for a rough count of packed cartons during a move.

I can also see value in quality-control routines where a second count is needed. A worker may count a batch manually, photograph it, and use the app as an independent visual check. That does not turn the result into certified documentation, but it can expose an obvious discrepancy before the batch moves further through a workflow.

For personal use, it may help with organizing collections of coins or other repeated objects. The business category does not prevent practical everyday use; it simply reflects the strongest reason to install it. The app makes most sense when the number of objects matters and the objects can be shown clearly in a single image or a small set of images.

What the free access means for value

The app is available at no upfront cost, which makes trying it straightforward. I can see whether its photo-counting approach suits my objects before committing money. That is important here because performance depends heavily on the scene: a neatly arranged group is a different challenge from a tangled, partly hidden pile.

There are in-app purchases listed from $3.99 to $19.99 per item. I would therefore treat the free access as an opportunity to evaluate the workflow, not as proof that every useful capability is permanently free. The sensible approach is to test the kinds of images I actually handle, then decide whether any paid option offers enough additional value for my work.

That pricing range also changes how I judge the app. For occasional counting, free access may be all I need, making the app an easy recommendation as a lightweight helper. For frequent business use, I would compare the purchase cost with the hours saved and with the price of alternatives such as a dedicated inventory system or a manual process. I would not pay simply because automation sounds convenient; I would pay only if the results are reliable enough in my specific workflow.

There is no reason to assume that a paid item automatically turns the app into a complete stock-management solution. The value is concentrated in the counting task. If I need barcode scanning, product records, staff permissions, export routines, or audit trails, I would look for software built around those jobs instead.

Where the approach can struggle

The biggest limitation is the image itself. Objects that overlap, blend into the background, or appear at very different depths are harder to interpret than cleanly separated items. Transparent objects, reflective surfaces, and irregular shapes can also create visual ambiguity. In those cases, I would use the result as an estimate or a second opinion rather than as the only basis for a financial or safety-critical decision.

Size and perspective can create another problem. Items near the camera may look much larger than items farther away, and a crowded image can make boundaries difficult to distinguish. I get more confidence when the objects are arranged on one plane and viewed from above or from a stable, uncomplicated angle.

The app is also not the right answer when each object has to be individually identified. Counting ten different products is not the same as counting ten identical products. If I need to know which model, color, batch, or condition each item has, I would still need a separate inspection process. A visual total cannot replace item-level records.

Manual verification remains important. I would not use a generated count to approve a high-value shipment without checking it, particularly when the image is crowded. The best use is often hybrid: let the app produce a quick number, then inspect the photo and manually confirm unusual areas.

Three practical habits that improve the workflow

1. I would photograph a small test group first. This gives me a quick sense of whether the object type and lighting are suitable before I spend time arranging a larger batch.

2. I would keep a reference image with the count when the result matters. That makes later checking easier and helps explain how the number was obtained if another person questions it.

3. I would split difficult scenes into sections rather than trusting one crowded frame. Counting several clear groups and adding them together can be slower at the camera stage, but it may be more dependable than asking the app to interpret heavy overlap.

These habits reveal the app's real strength: it works best as a focused assistant inside a sensible process. It is not a magic button that removes judgment. Its usefulness increases when I control the photography and treat the output as something to verify when the consequences of an error are significant.

How it compares with familiar alternatives

The usual alternative is manual counting. Manual work remains better when objects are hidden, mixed, unusually shaped, or too valuable to estimate from an image. It can also be easier when the quantity is small. Count This becomes more attractive when there are enough repeated objects for ordinary counting to become tedious, but not enough operational complexity to justify a full inventory platform.

A spreadsheet is better for keeping records, adding prices, tracking changes, and sharing a structured list. I would use a spreadsheet after counting, not instead of the app, when the task begins with a photograph. The two approaches can complement each other: the app helps obtain a quantity, while the spreadsheet gives that quantity a business context.

Barcode-based tools are preferable when every item already has a scannable identifier and the goal is to track individual products. They are less useful for loose materials such as rods or coins that may not carry separate codes. This is where the photo approach has a practical niche, provided the objects are visually distinct enough.

Dedicated inventory software wins when a business needs repeatable records, multiple locations, purchasing history, or staff workflows. Count This is more appealing for a quick check, a temporary count, or a small operation that does not want to configure a larger system for an occasional task.

Who is likely to get the most value

I would recommend trying it to small-business owners, workshop staff, retailers, tradespeople, and anyone who regularly counts groups of similar physical objects. It is especially promising for people who already take photos during receiving, storage, or inspection and want to make those images more useful.

It may also suit a user who dislikes setting up complicated software. Because the central task is narrow, the learning curve should be easier than adopting a full inventory package. The free entry point makes experimentation less risky, while the Everyone rating makes it suitable for a broad audience from an age-classification perspective.

I would be more cautious about recommending it to a warehouse that needs formal stock control, or to a business where a wrong count could cause a serious loss. Those users should evaluate it alongside established inventory procedures, not treat it as a replacement. The app can support a process, but it should not be the entire process when traceability and precision are essential.

It is also a poor fit for someone who mainly needs to count people, text, or unique objects. Its value is tied to repeated physical items visible in a photo. If my work involves identifying differences between objects rather than totaling them, another category of tool would serve me better.

My buying decision after using the concept in practice

With over 500 thousand installs and an average rating of 3.9 from around 13 thousand ratings, the app has enough adoption to look like a genuine option rather than an obscure experiment. Those figures do not guarantee that it will handle my particular objects well, so I would still test it with real workplace images instead of relying on popularity alone.

My verdict is favorable for the right job. Count This・Counting Things App is worth trying when I need a fast photo-based count and can prepare a clear image. The free access lowers the barrier, and the focused design makes more sense to me than installing a full inventory suite for a one-off check.

I would skip any purchase until I had tested difficult examples: overlapping objects, poor lighting, reflective surfaces, and a crowded batch. If the free workflow gives me consistent results on the scenes I actually handle, a paid item in the $3.99 to $19.99 range may be reasonable for regular use, depending on which capability I need and how much manual time it saves. If the results require constant correction, no price makes the process genuinely efficient.

Overall, I see this as a useful counting layer rather than a complete business system. It can turn a photograph into a practical quantity estimate, support a manual check, and make small inventory tasks less tiresome. I would recommend it to a friend with that expectation clearly stated: use it to speed up counting, but keep human verification and proper records when accuracy carries real consequences.