When you’re building a design editor into your product whether for social content, marketing assets, video, or design workflows choosing the right foundation matters. Many teams start with Fabric.js, an open-source canvas library, attracted by its flexibility and permissive license. But as the project scope grows, so do the limitations.
This article explores the advantages, but also the pitfalls of building a creative tool with Fabric.js and why many product teams ultimately decide to switch or start with a commercial SDK like IMG.LY’s CreativeEditor SDK (CE.SDK).
Consult our comparison page of Fabric.js and IMG.LY for a feature by feature breakdown of the differences between our SDKs and Fabric.js.
Why Teams Switch from Fabric.js
We’ve spoken with dozens of companies, from startups to enterprise clients, who evaluated Fabric.js and in many cases opted for IMG.LY instead. Here's what we consistently hear:
1. Time-to-Market vs. Reinventing the Wheel
Open-source is attractive at first. But once the excitement of building wears off, teams often face a sobering reality: stitching together a decent editing experience from Fabric.js is a months-long effort.
“We used Fabric.js before, but if IMG.LY’s SDK is cost-effective, we’d rather not reinvent the wheel.”
— B2B SaaS Prospect
They want a modern editor UI, fast iteration cycles, and a stable base not to spend their next quarter building the basics like zoom, text editing, object grouping, layer management, or responsive templates.
2. Lack of Advanced Features
Fabric.js excels at low-level canvas manipulation, offering a robust API for working directly with objects on the HTML5 canvas - shapes, images, text, and transformations. It’s a great starting point for developers who want fine-grained control over rendering and interactivity. However, it falls short when it comes to modern editing paradigms. Fabric.js provides no native concept of reusable templates, lacks support for layout and design constraints like alignment guides or snapping behavior, and does not include higher-level abstractions for content-aware or AI-powered editing. In short, Fabric.js gives you a raw toolkit, not a polished, plug-and-play editing solution. If you're building a sophisticated design application, you'll need to layer these capabilities yourself or integrate additional frameworks to bridge the gap.
“We needed a template system and advanced photo editing. Open-source libraries couldn’t do it out of the box.”
— Marketplace Platform Prospect
Teams chasing parity with Canva or Adobe tools quickly hit walls. What starts as a proof-of-concept becomes a rebuild of the tables stakes of design editing.
Real-World Use Cases & Vertical-Specific Challenges
We've seen teams from various industries reach the same conclusion: Fabric.js doesn’t scale to meet their creative, technical, or business needs. A few common themes:
- E-commerce & Web-to-Print: Retailers building product customization flows need template constraints, consistent output quality, and export formats that go beyond canvas. They can't afford rendering inconsistencies or unpredictable export fidelity.
- MarTech & Social Media Tools: Marketers need batch generation, AI-assisted creative workflow, brand constraints and consistent creative output across devices. Fabric.js lacks built-in support for these workflows.
- Mobile-first Apps: Teams building hybrid apps or web apps that need to be functional on mobile struggle with Fabric.js’ lacklustre mobile support. The inability to deliver a consistent UX across iOS, Android, and Web leads to dropped features or split tech stacks.
- Video and Multimedia Platforms: Fabric.js has no native video support, track-based editing, or multi-frame logic. Prospects in this space frequently abandon their Fabric.js POCs once real constraints emerge.
A major pain point across all verticals is rendering consistency. CE.SDK renders identically across browser, server, and mobile thanks to a shared rendering core (CreativeEngine). This is critical for:
- Workflows that begin on web and finish on mobile
- Server-side generation (e.g., previews, PDFs, batch exports)
- Feature parity and UX reliability across platforms
Check out our demo page to explore these use cases.
Technical Debt: The Hidden Cost of Fabric.js
On paper, Fabric.js seems like a fast way to get started. But its real cost emerges over time in performance bottlenecks, missing architecture, and maintenance drag.
Aging Codebase and Patchy Maintenance
As of 2025, Fabric.js has over 400 open issues on GitHub, some dating back years. Many feature requests such as better performance for large object sets, async rendering, or text-on-path improvements are either unresolved or uncertainly prioritized.
The core maintainers do their best, but progress is slow. You’re relying on volunteer effort for critical infrastructure.
Slow Issue Resolution
Many of the GitHub issues (e.g., #5885, #6582) highlight long-standing rendering bugs and performance problems. These are hard to fix, and updates can break your own hacks or workarounds.
Unlike a commercial SDK, Fabric.js doesn’t guarantee backward compatibility. No SLAs. Little roadmap visibility.
Customer Feedback: Why They Walked Away
Here are some soundbites from our customers and prospects on why they decided against building with Fabric.js:
“The quality and UX didn’t meet our standards.”
Product Customizer
“Developer experience was poor. We spent more time debugging than building features.”
B2B SaaS Ad Design
“We needed enterprise support, scalability, and documentation. Open source didn’t cut it.”
Web to print Customer
“Cross-platform support and minimum SDK version constraints were a major blocker.”
Claim Management Application
Voice of the Dev
Beyond enterprise evaluations, developers working with Fabric.js often share their struggles publicly on GitHub, Stack Overflow, and developer forums. Their commentary offers real-world insight into day-to-day frustrations:
“FabricJS doesn't seem to work well on Mobile.”
"Fabric.js object controls don't work until after a common selection is made. Had to hack around it with extra event listeners."
"Trying to integrate Fabric.js with Next.js + Rollup is a mess. Unexpected tokens, config rewrites — it doesn’t play well with modern bundlers."
"We’re blocked by the use of 'unsafe-eval' due to our content security policy. Fabric.js needs a rewrite to be CSP-compliant."
Concrete takeaways from developer feedback:
- Basic UI control quirks: Common issues with selection handling and control behavior require manual workarounds.
- Compatibility friction: Fabric.js does not play well with modern build tools like Next.js and Rollup without additional configuration or patching.
- Security blockers: The reliance on
unsafe-evalcreates CSP conflicts, making it unsuitable for projects with strict security requirements. - Uncertain roadmap: Critical features like async rendering may sit open for years, and niche features important to your use case may never land if they don’t align with community priorities.
While every open source project faces these difficulties, they do represent systemic issues with performance, extensibility, and production-readiness. For teams building long-lived, customer-facing tools, this developer feedback is often a leading indicator of future roadblocks.
Back-of-the-Envelope Cost of Building with Fabric.js
Many teams underestimate the cost of building a design editor from scratch. Here's a rough breakdown of the time investment we’ve heard from teams who tried:
| Task | Estimated Engineering Time |
|---|---|
| Core canvas-based editor UI (zoom, drag, resize, selection, tool switching) | 6–8 weeks |
| SVG support, snapping, grouping, and layer management | 4–6 weeks |
| Template constraints | 3–5 weeks |
| Cross-platform adaptation (ironing out issues on mobile browsers, defining fallbacks) | 4–6 weeks |
| Bug triage, ongoing maintenance, and refactors (first 12–18 months) | 6–9 weeks |
Total: ~6–8 months of senior dev time just to get to feature parity with what CE.SDK offers out of the box.
This doesn’t include the cost of QA, product management, or future extensibility. Nor the opportunity cost of what your team could be building instead.
IMG.LY’s CE.SDK: A Ready-Made Solution Built for Growth
By contrast, IMG.LY offers a production-grade SDK built for cross-platform creative tools, backed by a dedicated engineering team and used by major apps across industries.
| Category | IMG.LY (CE.SDK) | Fabric.js | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| Out-of-the-box UI | ✅ Prebuilt modern UI | ❌ Build from scratch | CE.SDK ships with full UI/UX patterns |
| Plugin System | ✅ Native plugin architecture | ⚠️ Manual code extension | IMG.LY supports formal plugin APIs |
| Free Drawing Tools | ⚠️ Requires integration | ✅ Built-in pencil + shapes | Fabric.js excels at shape-level control |
| Advanced Editing | ✅ Vector + raster support, layering, filters | ⚠️ Basic vector only | CE.SDK includes pro-grade editing capabilities |
| Templating System | ✅ Dynamic placeholders + constraints | ❌ Manual implementation | IMG.LY supports automation workflows |
| Video Editing | ✅ Multi-track timeline editor | ❌ Not supported | No video support in Fabric.js |
| Cross-Platform | ✅ Web, iOS, Android, Node, Flutter | ⚠️ Web only | IMG.LY has native SDKs and server tools |
| Asset Integrations | ✅ Unsplash, Getty, Brandfolder | ❌ Manual setup | CE.SDK integrates assets out-of-the-box |
| Enterprise Support | ✅ SLAs, onboarding, deployment help | ❌ Community support only | IMG.LY offers dedicated engineering help |
| Design File Improt Support | ✅ PSD, AI, INDD, | ⚠️ None | CE.SDK supports importing common design file formats |
| AI Editing | ✅ Background removal, integrate any AI model for image/video/text/audio gen | ❌ Not supported | AI-native editing pipeline available |
| Rendering Consistency | ✅ Unified engine across platforms | ⚠️ Browser dependent | CE.SDK ensures pixel-parity on all targets |
When Does Fabric.js Still Make Sense?
This article might read like a put-down, but it’s not supposed to be that. Until now we were simply evaluating Fabric.js with respect to building fully-featured design editing tools. There are, however, a number of well-scoped use cases where Fabric.js excels. These include:
- Building an internal tool, proof of concept, or educational app
- Creating a custom, single-platform sketching or annotation layer
- Developing a low-fidelity prototype with full code-level control
- Building canvas collaboration tools such as drag and drop editors or interactive canvases, such as Miro.
An example of where Fabric.js worked well is a tool such as Mockola, a drag-and-drop diagram editor, where shape manipulation, lightweight rendering, and canvas-level control are more important than cross-platform design fidelity. Mockola's is a good use case, because its emphasis on real-time collaboration and planning rather than high-fidelity design. This means that features like free drawing, drag-and-drop, and JSON-based serialization are a great fit, all of which Fabric.js supports out of the box.
For teams willing to invest in building and maintaining their own editor infrastructure and whose use case does not require cross-platform parity, advanced media editing, or enterprise scaling Fabric.js continues to be a compelling foundation.
However, for products that need to ship quickly, scale reliably, and support modern creative workflows across platforms, IMG.LY’s CE.SDK offers the infrastructure and polish that customers now expect.
The Bottom Line
As MIT CIO Symposium speaker Mark Holst-Knudsen put it:
“You shouldn’t build anything that’s available off the shelf because it’s not a source of competitive advantage if everybody else can avail themselves of it.”
For most companies, building an editor from scratch is not a competitive edge, it’s a distraction from shipping and scaling. And Fabric.js, while capable in the hands of specialists, isn’t a shortcut to the finish line.
IMG.LY’s CE.SDK gives you a head start with advanced editing features, AI automation, template support, plugin extensibility, rendering consistency, and battle-tested scalability across platforms.
So before you dive into Fabric.js and start reinventing core functionality, ask yourself: What competitive advantage are you going to build on top of a design editor and which functionality are you better served buying from a trusted vendor?
