Loading articles
Editors and agency workflows
Write timestamped editing notes with an observation, proposed change, reason, and what to preserve. Includes a feedback template and revision examples.
Give the editor a timestamp, an observable problem, a change to consider, and what must stay intact. "At 0:06 the narration moves to the second invoice, but the picture still shows the first; update the picture and keep the final comparison" can be acted on. "Make it more engaging" leaves the editor to guess which decision you want changed.
A good note also distinguishes a required correction from a preference or a new request. That keeps a revision focused without pretending you know exactly how viewers will respond.
| Type | Example | What the editor needs |
|---|---|---|
| Accuracy or accessibility correction | A name is misspelled or a caption does not match the spoken word. | The correct text and the affected timestamp. |
| Comprehension concern | The selected invoice cannot be identified. | The missing information and a way to check the revision. |
| Brand preference | Use the agreed caption font. | The style reference or approved specification. |
| Creative alternative | Try holding the reaction longer. | The intended effect and whether this is an exploratory version. |
| Scope change | Create three new openings after the original opening was approved. | A decision about time, cost, and which deliverables change. |
Taste can be a valid part of a brief. State it as taste rather than presenting a font preference as proof that viewers will leave. Equally, an accurate observation should not be buried in a vague comment about "premium feel."
For example:
Invoice demo v05, 0:02-0:04. The product result is named but its amount is too small to read. Enlarge the result region or use a close-up so the comparison is visible on a phone. Preserve the uninterrupted action that produces the result and its qualification. Review the revised export at normal speed and confirm both amounts can be identified.
This leaves the editor room to choose an effective technique while making your objective clear. A sample product-demo report shows the shape of a structural review; it is an example, not a measured performance guarantee.
| Vague comment | Executable revision note |
|---|---|
| "The start is slow." | "v03, 0:00-0:04 is host setup. Try the guest's claim at 0:07 as the opening, retaining the topic identifier and the qualification that follows it." |
| "The captions feel weird." | "At 0:01 the caption starts before the word is spoken. Resynchronize it; if we need an earlier task label, use a separate headline." |
| "Make the product clearer." | "At 0:03 the cursor changes the filter but the filter name cannot be read. Show the label at that moment; keep the real sequence of actions." |
| "Add energy." | "0:08-0:11 repeats the instruction from 0:05. Try removing the repetition and retain the example needed to apply it." |
| "Make it viral." | "Review whether the opening identifies the task for an unfamiliar viewer; report the first missing piece of context." |
The proposed edits are hypotheses about the cut. They do not establish that a slower opening caused low views. If you have audience data, attach its exact metric, period, and relevant timestamp separately.
If a viewer needs context before speech begins, ask for a separate editorial headline. Accessibility captions should follow the speech and relevant audio rather than appear early as a substitute for a hook.
W3C's caption guidance describes that synchronized function. The caption timing review gives you more specific checks for text, reading time, and placement. For automated captions, include the corrected wording in your note rather than asking the editor to infer a name or technical term.
Ask one person to combine stakeholder comments. If one reviewer wants a quiet opening and another wants an immediate effect, resolve that decision before asking the editor to satisfy both.
Prioritize notes by consequence: factual or accessibility errors, missing context or broken continuity, agreed brand requirements, then optional creative alternatives. A typo and a speculative alternate opening do not need the same review status.
Use a short table for the handoff:
| Priority | Version and time | Note | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Required correction | v05, 0:04 | Correct the product name to the approved spelling. | Open |
| Comprehension review | v05, 0:06-0:08 | Show the invoice referred to by the narration. | Open |
| Optional alternative | v05, ending | Try holding the final reaction; preserve a comparison export. | Decision needed |
Avoid scattering additional requests across multiple chats once a revision has started. Record later additions with their owner and decide whether they belong in the current round.
Before the first cut, define how many feedback rounds are included, who approves, what a round contains, and what happens when the brief changes. An included correction is different from a new script, new source footage, or additional platform versions.
For marketplace work, check the actual offer and order terms. Fiverr's order-process guidance describes handling revision requests within the order process; it is not a promise that every request is included. The editor-cost and scope guide provides a brief checklist for making that agreement concrete.
Check whether the requested change is visible in the export, not just whether the editor marked the comment resolved. Replay the surrounding passage for audio continuity, missing qualifiers, and new text collisions. Confirm the elements marked "preserve" are still present.
If a note cannot be resolved without changing the video's purpose or requiring unavailable footage, record the decision rather than repeating it as a demand for polish. The weak-second worksheet helps turn a remaining concern into a clearer observation. For a team handoff, use the agency QA checklist to assign final checks and approval ownership.