<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><oembed><type>video</type><version>1.0</version><html>&lt;iframe src=&quot;https://www.loom.com/embed/17ac277619914a0688f41f10f2927daa&quot; frameborder=&quot;0&quot; width=&quot;1918&quot; height=&quot;1438&quot; webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen&gt;&lt;/iframe&gt;</html><height>1438</height><width>1918</width><provider_name>Loom</provider_name><provider_url>https://www.loom.com</provider_url><thumbnail_height>1438</thumbnail_height><thumbnail_width>1918</thumbnail_width><thumbnail_url>https://cdn.loom.com/sessions/thumbnails/17ac277619914a0688f41f10f2927daa-9dd4beac9a6e5a0d.gif</thumbnail_url><duration>252.665</duration><title>Comparing Floor Plan Accuracy: cubicasa vs. Matterport and iGUIDE 📏</title><description>In this video, I walk you through an area calculation based on a Kubicasa floor plan, comparing it with a Matterport Pro2 camera scan. I found discrepancies, such as a room being off by 9 inches and the overall area calculated by Kubicasa being 4,089 square feet, while the Matterport and iGUIDE scans were much closer at 4,230 and 4,231 square feet, respectively. The main issues stem from wall thickness adjustments and inaccuracies in the layout. If you&apos;re looking for the most accurate floor plans, I recommend using either a Matterport Pro camera or an iGUIDE camera. Please let me know if you have any questions or need further clarification!</description></oembed>