This page explains how ScanLedger chooses what to review, where its facts come from, and what it does when something turns out to be wrong.
1. How topics are chosen
ScanLedger covers individually named 3D scanner models and versions relevant to makers, product designers and engineering or metrology teams evaluating hardware. We name the exact model and version in the review title and body, and we do not merge specifications from an older or newer revision of a product into a review of a different version.
2. Where facts come from
Every specification, capability claim and limitation reported in a review is sourced from the manufacturer’s own product page, technical datasheet, spec sheet, support documentation, or another document we link to directly in the review’s numbered source list. We do not source specifications from unverified retailer listings, forum posts, or our own memory of a product category. If a manufacturer publishes a range or a qualifying condition — for example, an accuracy figure that depends on a certified target or ideal lighting — we report that condition alongside the number rather than the number alone.
3. What we do not claim
ScanLedger does not operate a scanning lab, does not run comparative accuracy tests, and does not claim hands-on use of the devices it reviews unless a review explicitly states otherwise. Where a review discusses real-world workflow, it is describing what the manufacturer’s own documentation and software materials say about that workflow, not an in-house trial. We think this distinction matters more than a plausible-sounding paragraph of invented testing, and every review’s evidence note says so directly.
4. Images
Product photography, where used, is sourced from the manufacturer or from a rights holder we can identify in the image caption. Where we don’t have a rights-cleared photograph of a specific unit, we use a clearly labeled conceptual illustration instead and say so in the caption — an illustration is never presented as a photograph of the reviewed device.
5. Affiliate links and independence
If a review contains affiliate links, they will be identified in that review. Coverage decisions — which models we review and what we report about their documented specifications and limitations — are made independently of any affiliate relationship. A commission from a link does not soften a documented limitation or inflate a documented spec.
6. Corrections
If a specification changes in a manufacturer’s documentation, or you find an error in how we transcribed one, see the current contact status on our Contact page. Factual corrections are made directly to the published review; the review’s “last updated” date reflects the correction.