A new hook should not mean a new folder, a lost source file and another conversation about which version is current.
In development · Interactive examples use fictional dataThe planned workflow starts with an original asset, its permitted use and a campaign brief. Candidate cuts remain attached to that record. A reviewer should be able to trace an export back to the footage and editorial choices behind it.
Type, placement and review context stay with the candidate.
Compare an opening question with a product-first opening, or a concise caption with a more explanatory one. Keep the other decisions stable while reviewing. A variation is an editorial option, not evidence that it will outperform another version.
Explore the planned workflow ↗The pilot is intended to separate candidate work from approved output. Render limits, supported file formats and processing times will be agreed with pilot teams. No rendering service is available in the sample workspace.
Get the planning templates ↗Keep the source and scope attached to the work.
The next owner needs enough context to understand the deliverable.
A named owner should be able to accept, revise or reject the direction.
Start with one approved sequence and define three opening directions. A process-led cut, a detail-led cut and a question-led cut should keep the core message stable. Otherwise the review changes several variables at once and the team cannot explain what it chose. Keep the source range beside each candidate so that a later revision can recover the original context.
Use one campaign identifier, a short version name and the intended aspect ratio. An opening-a candidate can become opening-a-r02 after a requested change. Keep approval separate from the file name: a tidy folder is useful, but it is not evidence that a reviewer has accepted the creative.
A source, a set of candidates and the decision that moves the project forward.
Keep the source and scope attached to the work.
The next owner needs enough context to understand the deliverable.
A named owner should be able to accept, revise or reject the direction.
The public website, guides and templates are available now. The product workspace is in private development; request a pilot to discuss access and scope. Demonstrations on this site are illustrative, and automatic highlights and transcription are not available.
No. Development includes a browser editor plus CLI and API workflows. These product tools are not publicly accessible on this website; pilot access and supported workflows are agreed separately.
The initial scope starts with footage you own or have permission to use. Generative video is not part of the promised pilot.
Source permissions, supported inputs, output formats, candidate limits, review rounds and the person approving the work. No video-processing service is available on this website.
Bring a recurring production job, approved source material and a clear review owner.
Discuss your workflow ↗No account, trial or payment is created by an enquiry.