Video Client Approval Process: The Editor's Guide

Hand off clips through one review queue, not an email thread: one link per clip, a single named approver, an approve-or-reject decision recorded against a numbered version, and a written revision policy that says what a round covers. Anything outside the agreed scope becomes a change order, not a free re-edit.

The other version is familiar: finals in a shared folder, a link in an email, feedback as a paragraph, a voice note, and a reply-all from someone who joined the thread on Tuesday. Weeks later nobody can say which cut was signed off.

Why do a Drive link and an email thread cost you a round?

An email thread cannot hold the three things a review needs: a frame, a version and a decision. Feedback not tied to a timecode has to be interpreted, and interpretation is how a round gets spent. Vimeo describes its review links as being for "private, time-coded feedback", so the note lands on the timeline instead of your inbox. The decision needs the same treatment: Adobe's Workfront documentation lists document statuses including "Needs work", "Approved with changes" and "Approved". "Looks great, ship it" in a thread is a mood, not a status.

What has to be true before you send the first cut?

Three lines, agreed in writing at kickoff: who approves, how long they have, and what a round is. AIGA's Standard Form of Agreement for Design Services defines final deliverables as versions "provided by Designer and accepted by Client". Acceptance is the hinge.

1. Who approves. One name with authority. Other stakeholders comment; one person decides.
2. How long they have. AIGA's terms give the client five business days to object in writing, and add that without such notice "the Deliverable shall be deemed accepted".
3. What a round is. One consolidated list, submitted once, in one place.

What goes in a clip approval checklist?

A clip approval checklist covers seven items per clip: name and version, source reference, destination, caption spellings, rights status, the decision, and the deadline with its named approver. Paste this into the delivery message, one block per clip. It is short on purpose: a checklist the client will not read is decoration.

• Clip name and version: interview-hook v2. Numbered versions, never "final".
• Source reference: the long video and timestamp the clip came from.
• Destination: the platform and aspect ratio.
• Caption spellings: names, brands and product terms, listed once.
• Rights status: music, third-party footage, anyone recognisable on screen.
• The decision: Approve, or Request changes with one consolidated list.
• The deadline and the approver: when the decision is due, and one named person.

What counts as a revision, and what counts as a new job?

A revision moves the clip closer to the brief you both agreed. A new job changes the brief. Write that line down before you need it: written mid-argument, it reads as a bill.

AIGA's terms split the overflow into two tiers. Changes outside the scope of the services are billed on a time-and-materials basis at a stated hourly rate. Substantive changes entitle the designer to submit a new proposal, and "Work shall not begin on the revised services until a fully signed revised Proposal" and, if required, any additional retainer fees have been received. The guidance notes suggest defining a substantive change as one exceeding a percentage of the original schedule or budget, such as 10 percent, or a dollar amount, such as $1,000, whichever is greater. Your thresholds are yours; the point is that one exists.

Mechanical fixes are worth absorbing rather than litigating: a caption typo, a trim, a supplied font. Everpop, an AI clipping tool that turns long videos into Shorts and Reels, prices the same instinct in: the first 3 re-renders of a clip are free, and after that each uses one video allowance (pricing).

How do you record an approval so nobody re-litigates it?

Three fields: who, which version, when. Keep the record where the client can see it: a decision the client cannot find is one you will defend twice.

Then keep a second gate on your own side, because a sign-off and a published clip are different events. Everpop is review-first by default, so a finished clip waits for the account owner's confirmation. Auto-post, on Pro and Scale, stays off until switched on; once on, it publishes without a per-clip confirmation, so leave it off for any client who approves each clip.

How do agencies run client approvals across several channels?

Put every client in one review-first workspace with a folder per client and a single review queue. On Everpop, a Team workspace holds up to 5 invited managers today, invited by email (Everpop for agencies). Managers start clips and mark them ready; every action runs on the owner's plan and is written to an audit log naming the member.

• A folder per client. Assign each client's connected YouTube channels to a folder and filter the workspace by client. Folders hold YouTube channels.
• One review queue. Clips a manager marks ready wait for the owner: the second gate, built in.
• A trust switch. The owner can turn on "Members may publish directly" and turn it off again at any time.
• An audit trail. The log answers "who posted that" without a meeting.

Example: an editor finishes a batch for a coaching client and marks it ready. The owner confirms the clips the client approved, matched to the version numbers in the approval record; the rest stay queued. Pro covers 3 YouTube channels at $49/mo; Scale covers 10 from $149/mo, shaped on a call. Both include the REST API and an MCP server, so an agency's scripts or AI agents can start clips and publish with the account holder's confirmation (Everpop for AI agents); Campaign Mode rolls a campaign's posts into one token-protected report with a CSV.

What does a clean handoff look like at the end?

A deliverables list, not a warm feeling: approved masters, SRT caption files, a project interchange file, the approval record, and access removed.

• Approved masters, named to the approved version.
• Caption files as SRT.
• A project interchange file, so another editor can rebuild the timeline. Apple describes XML documents as "plain ASCII text files with tagged elements" used to transfer project details to third-party applications.
• The approval record: version, approver, timestamp.
• Access removed. If you were reading a shared finals folder, unshare it.

Everpop's editor handoff export writes FCPXML, EDL and SRT for this reason: what each format carries.

How do you show a client what an approved clip did?

Send the receipt link. Each eligible YouTube Short published through Everpop has its own token-protected receipt link a client opens without an account, with views, average view percentage and subscribers gained from the YouTube Analytics API at 48 hours and 7 days (Everpop for agencies). It records what happened and predicts nothing about the next clip. Instagram Reels and Facebook Reels publish through Everpop and TikTok gets drafts, but none of them is measured today. More in proving results with receipts.

What should a revision clause actually say?

A revision clause should set the number of rounds, define a round as one consolidated list inside a review window, send out-of-brief changes to a change order, and say what happens when the window closes. A drafting starting point, not legal advice; have your own counsel read anything you sign.

Revisions. This project includes [N] rounds of revisions per clip. A round is one consolidated list of changes, submitted through the review link within [five] business days of delivery. Changes outside the agreed brief, such as a different source moment, an added platform or aspect ratio, or a new creative direction, are quoted as a change order and begin after written approval. Clips not returned within the review window are treated as approved.

The clause is not there to win the argument. It is there so the argument never starts.

Where does each fact in this guide come from?

Each claim in this guide maps to the page it comes from: