Bluebeam runs the drawing side of construction work: Revu PDF markups, calibrated measurements and takeoff, Studio Projects and Sessions for real-time collaboration, Quantity Link to Excel on Complete, AI drawing tools on Max, plus Bluebeam on web and mobile. Public pricing (verified 2026-10-02) lists Basics about $260 USD, Core about $330 USD, Complete about $440 USD, and Max about $590 USD per user billed annually (Max at an introductory price). Reviewed public Bluebeam marketing, pricing, product, and solutions materials do not describe a native employee time clock, timesheets, GPS attendance, or a required second reviewer who must approve hours before they become a paycheck. Task Link with GoCanvas assigns field forms from markups and tracks dispatch status — it is not documented as a payroll attendance or second-approver timesheet workflow. Keito is the layer crews add for the hours: AI-drafted time entries a crew member confirms, reviewed and approved by someone else, with any change reasoned and recorded, before the hours become a paycheck.
Illustrative review queue
Illustrative pay period
Hours reviewed
Entries confirmed
41
Crew reviewed
8
Jobs covered
16
Hours tied to each job
Crew member, job, and role on every entry
Reviewed before payroll runs
A separate reviewer confirms hours before the batch closes
Evidence behind payroll
Reviewed hours back the payroll run
Bluebeam users markup PDFs, measure takeoffs, collaborate in Studio, export quantities to Excel on Complete, and — on Max — use AI drawing reviews and comparisons. What reviewed public materials do not describe is a native employee time clock or a required second-approver payroll attendance workflow before crew hours become a paycheck. Keito answers the payroll question that leaves open: did each crew member confirm their hours, and did a separate reviewer approve them, before those hours became a paycheck.
Set up crew members, leads, and reviewers in Keito in days — Bluebeam keeps running Revu markups, measurements, Studio collaboration, web/mobile access, and plan-tier automation exactly as it does today.
Keito drafts a time entry from the job a crew member worked, so they confirm hours instead of reconstructing attendance from calendars, texts, or markup activity at payroll time.
A separate reviewer approves payroll status before the period closes, then hands the approved hours to payroll as evidence.
Drawing collaboration is not a second-approver payroll gate
Bluebeam is published as construction collaboration software centred on Revu: PDF creation and markups, calibrated measurements and takeoff, Studio Projects and Sessions for real-time collaboration, CAD plug-ins, Quantity Link with Microsoft Excel on Complete, batch automation, and — on Max — AI drawing reviews, comparisons, multi-view stitching, and related tools. Public pricing on Bluebeam’s pricing page (verified 2026-10-02) lists Basics about $260 USD, Core about $330 USD, Complete about $440 USD, and Max about $590 USD per user billed annually, with Max offered at an introductory price; all plans include Revu for Windows plus Bluebeam on web and mobile, phone/email support, Bluebeam University training access, and unlimited secure centralized storage. Bluebeam also documents Task Link, an integration that dispatches GoCanvas field forms from Revu markups and tracks dispatch and submission status — not a native employee time clock or second-approver payroll timesheet product. Reviewed public Bluebeam marketing, pricing, product, solutions, and Task Link support materials do not document a native employee time clock, timesheets, GPS attendance, or a required second reviewer who must approve hours with a distinct payroll approval status before payday. Keito’s argument is not that contractors need a new PDF markup or takeoff app — Bluebeam already publishes that stack, and Keito makes no claim to Revu markups, Studio, Quantity Link, or Bluebeam AI. It is that the hours behind a paycheck deserve AI-drafted entries a crew member confirms and a separate reviewer approves, rather than treating drawing activity, Studio participation, or texted hours as payroll attendance. The boundary is deliberate: Keito has no PDF markup, takeoff, Studio, or drawing AI tools, and it claims no native Bluebeam integration, automatic import, or synchronisation. Bluebeam keeps running drawings-to-collaboration; Keito is where crew hours get an independent review before payroll.
Choose Bluebeam when the team needs construction PDF markup, measurement/takeoff, Studio collaboration, and plan-tier automation on Revu plus web and mobile
Choose Keito when the problem is independently reviewed payroll hours that Bluebeam markups, Studio sessions, and Task Link dispatches are not designed to replace as a second-approver gate
Prove it in one pay period: Keito runs alongside Bluebeam, reviewing hours without touching drawings or Studio
Workflow fit
Keito keeps Bluebeam alternative connected to client, project, billable status, approval, and invoice context before the work reaches finance.
Choose Bluebeam when the team needs construction PDF markup, measurement/takeoff, Studio collaboration, and plan-tier automation on Revu plus web and mobile
Choose Keito when the problem is independently reviewed payroll hours that Bluebeam markups, Studio sessions, and Task Link dispatches are not designed to replace as a second-approver gate
Prove it in one pay period: Keito runs alongside Bluebeam, reviewing hours without touching drawings or Studio
Keito drafts a time entry from the job a crew member worked; they confirm and correct it instead of reconstructing attendance from calendars, texts, or markup activity at payroll time.
Bluebeam markups, measurements, and Studio sessions surface drawing collaboration; Keito’s reviewer settles payroll status for every entry before the period closes.
Reviewers approve crew hours and hand the evidence to payroll for labour-cost review, through exports the team designs and tests itself.
The difference is not just recording time. It is whether the record can support billing, project decisions, and client conversations.
Product shape
A standalone workspace for reviewed, payroll-ready hours and labour-cost evidence.
Bluebeam publishes construction PDF markup, measurement/takeoff, Studio collaboration, web/mobile access, and plan-tier automation (including Quantity Link and Max AI tools).
How time is captured
AI drafts a job-specific entry from the time worked; the crew member confirms it, and a separate reviewer approves before it becomes a paycheck.
Bluebeam focuses on drawings, markups, measurements, and Studio collaboration; reviewed public materials do not document a native employee time clock or required second-approver payroll attendance workflow. Task Link tracks GoCanvas field task dispatch, not payroll timesheets.
Correction and review
Every reviewed hour carries a reviewer, an approval state, and a reasoned record of any change, tracked from the first draft.
Bluebeam markup lists, statuses, and Studio collaboration help teams review drawings; they are not documented as a second-approver payroll attendance gate.
Review before payroll
A reviewer distinct from the crew member settles payroll status per entry before the period closes.
Bluebeam keeps the drawing and takeoff source of truth; payroll-grade attendance review is commonly handled outside the core platform.
Pricing and adoption
Published flat pricing (Solo from $19 USD/month; Team from $49 USD/month) and a setup measured in days, run alongside Bluebeam.
Bluebeam presents Basics, Core, Complete, and Max annual per-user plans (public list prices about $260, $330, $440, and $590 USD per user billed annually on 2026-10-02, with Max at an introductory price), including Revu plus web and mobile.
Data movement
Team-designed, tested exports and API handoffs moved in deliberate stages.
Bluebeam’s own Studio, Quantity Link, integrations directory, and Task Link/GoCanvas workflows belong to its platform; connecting reviewed-hours data to outside payroll tools is not an assumed automatic sync with Keito.
It is software a contractor, estimator, or AEC team adopts instead of, or alongside, Bluebeam, which runs Revu PDF markup, measurement and takeoff, Studio collaboration, web/mobile access, and plan-tier automation. Because Bluebeam already covers that much of drawing collaboration, an alternative rarely replaces all of it at once. Keito is the alternative for independently reviewed crew hours: AI-drafted entries a crew member confirms, approved by a separate reviewer before those hours become a paycheck.
Bluebeam manages PDF markups, calibrated measurements and takeoff, Studio Projects and Sessions, web/mobile collaboration, and plan-tier tools such as Quantity Link and Max AI features. Reviewed public Bluebeam marketing, pricing, product, and solutions materials do not document a native employee time clock, timesheets, GPS attendance, or a required second-approver payroll attendance workflow before hours become a paycheck. Task Link with GoCanvas assigns field forms from markups and tracks dispatch status; it is not documented as a payroll timesheet or second-approver attendance product.
The gap is payroll attendance review, not drawings or takeoff. Bluebeam already owns markups, measurements, Studio, and plan-tier automation. Keito adds the hours layer: it drafts a time entry from the job worked, the crew member confirms it, and a separate reviewer settles payroll status before the hours become evidence. Bluebeam still owns the drawings and the takeoff; Keito owns the independently reviewed hours record.
Choose Bluebeam when the business needs construction PDF markup, measurement/takeoff, Studio collaboration, and plan-tier automation on Revu plus web and mobile. Keito does not reproduce any of it: no markup tools, no takeoff measurements, no Studio hosting, no Quantity Link, no Bluebeam AI. It is the wrong choice if the immediate need is drawing collaboration software rather than an independently reviewed record of crew hours.
Each reviewed record keeps the crew member, role, job, duration, description, payroll status, reviewer, approval state, and pay period, tied to the hours worked rather than a markup, Studio session, or schedule block alone. That package backs the payroll run and gives an office manager a reviewed answer when a crew member’s hours are questioned.
No. Keito claims no native Bluebeam integration, automatic import, or two-way synchronisation — Bluebeam’s own Revu, Studio, Quantity Link, integrations directory, and Task Link workflows belong to its platform, not Keito’s. Capture in Keito is its own workflow: AI-drafted, typed, timed, and manually entered records that pass review before becoming payroll evidence. A contractor can keep Bluebeam for drawings and takeoff and run Keito alongside it as the independent review layer for crew hours, with any transfer between them designed and tested by the team.
Solo includes 1 licensed user, unlimited AI agents, Mac, Windows, and iOS apps, Stripe payments, and standard CSV and Excel exports. Pro adds your team. Business adds integrations, planning, advanced reporting, and stronger controls.
1 licensed user
For independent consultants, freelancers, and small studios running work with AI agents.
Flat workspace price for 1 licensed user
Team collaboration
For teams that need shared workspaces, approvals, and team-level project visibility.
Flat workspace price with no per-user fees
Advanced operations
For organizations that need integrations, planning, advanced reporting, and stronger controls.
Flat workspace price with no per-user fees
Optional Business add-on: Microsoft Entra SSO.
View add-on and pricingAI agents do not require licenses on any plan.
Solo, Pro, and Business can use API keys for agent workflows.
Solo, Pro, and Business include standard CSV and Excel data export.
Start with Solo, add people on Pro when you need reviewers or collaborators, and see how Keito turns tracked effort into clearer reports.