Workflow & Business8 min readUpdated Jun 2026By · Production Lead at Studio432

How to Use Frame.io for Client Reviews and Approvals

Scattered feedback across email, texts, and calls kills edits — here is how to run clean, timestamped review rounds in Frame.io.

The review-and-approval stage is where good edits go to die a slow death — feedback arriving by email, text, voice note, and a shared doc, none of it tied to a specific moment in the video, all of it open to misinterpretation. Frame.io exists to fix this. It gives clients a single link where they can watch a cut and leave comments pinned to the exact frame they are talking about, while you manage versions, rounds, and approvals in one place. This guide walks through setting up a project, uploading cuts, collecting clean timestamped feedback, handling revision rounds and version stacks, and closing out with a clear final approval — so review accelerates the edit instead of derailing it.

Create the project and folder structure

Set up a Frame.io project for the client or campaign and create folders per deliverable or phase if you have multiple assets, mirroring the same discipline you apply in your editing project.

Invite the client and set permissions

Add the client as a reviewer by email, or share a review link for low-friction access without an account. Set permissions so they can view and comment but not manage the project or download masters.

Upload the first cut with a clear version name

Export a streamable H.264 MP4 and upload it with a clear, consistent name like ProjectName_RoughCut_v1. Avoid ambiguous names that cause version confusion later.

Brief the client on how to review

Tell the client to click to the exact frame and leave specific timestamped comments, and set expectations about what stage the cut is at so they do not flag intentional temp elements.

Collect and clarify feedback

Let the client leave timestamped comments, then use replies and @mentions to clarify anything ambiguous before you start cutting. Request consolidated notes from one decision-maker rather than a contradictory committee.

Address comments and resolve them

Work through every comment in the cut, marking each resolved as you handle it so the client can see their feedback was acted on. Note any requests that fall outside the agreed scope.

Upload the revision as a stacked version

Export the new cut and stack it as a new version of the same asset rather than a separate file, preserving the comment history and letting the client compare against the previous round.

Get explicit final approval

Once the client is satisfied, have them formally approve the version so you have a clear, timestamped sign-off. Then move to final delivery and export, separate from the review phase.

Why Centralized Review Beats Email

When feedback is scattered across channels, you spend more time reconciling notes than editing. 'Make the intro punchier' in an email, 'the color looks off' in a text, and 'can we talk about the music' on a call leave you guessing which intro, which shot, which section — and you inevitably miss or misread something. Centralized review tools eliminate that by attaching every comment to a precise point in the video.

Frame.io's core value is the timestamped comment: a client clicks to a frame, leaves a note, and you see exactly which moment they mean. No more 'around the middle somewhere.' Combined with version tracking and a clear approval state, it turns a chaotic feedback process into an organized, accountable one that both sides can trust.

  • Scattered feedback wastes more time reconciling notes than editing.
  • Timestamped comments tie every note to an exact frame — no guessing.
  • Version tracking and approval states make the process accountable for both sides.

Setting Up a Project and Inviting Clients

Start by creating a project for the client or campaign and structuring folders if you are delivering multiple deliverables — one per video, or per phase. A clean structure mirrors the same discipline you apply to your editing project, and it keeps a multi-asset job from turning into a pile of unlabeled uploads.

Invite clients as reviewers using their email, or share a review link if they prefer not to create an account. Review links lower the friction for non-technical clients who just want to watch and comment without logging in. Set permissions deliberately — most clients only need to view and comment, not download masters or manage the project.

  • Create a project and structure folders per deliverable or phase.
  • Invite clients as reviewers, or use a shareable review link for low friction.
  • Set permissions so clients can view and comment but not manage or download masters.

Uploading Cuts and Naming Versions Clearly

Export a review-friendly file — a reasonably-sized H.264 MP4 is ideal so clients can stream it smoothly without waiting on a huge download. Upload it with a clear, versioned name: something like 'ProjectName_RoughCut_v1' rather than 'final_final_v3_REAL.mp4'. A consistent naming convention prevents the version confusion that derails so many projects.

When you upload a revised cut, stack it as a new version of the same asset rather than as a separate file. Frame.io's version stacking keeps all rounds of a single deliverable together, lets clients compare versions, and preserves the comment history so you can see what was already addressed. This is the feature that keeps a multi-round edit organized.

  • Upload a streamable H.264 MP4 for smooth client review.
  • Use clear, consistent version names — never 'final_final_v3'.
  • Stack revisions as new versions of the same asset to keep rounds together.

Collecting Clean, Actionable Feedback

The quality of feedback depends partly on how you set up the round. Tell clients up front how to comment — click to the frame, type the note, and be specific — and set expectations about what stage the cut is at. Reviewers who know a cut is a rough assembly will not waste a round flagging unfinished color or temp music you already planned to replace.

Encourage consolidated feedback from a single decision-maker rather than conflicting notes from a committee. If multiple stakeholders must weigh in, ask them to reconcile their comments into one set before sending it back, so you are not implementing contradictory requests. You can use comment replies and @mentions inside Frame.io to clarify ambiguous notes before you start cutting.

  • Brief clients on how to comment and what stage the cut is at.
  • Request consolidated feedback from one decision-maker, not a contradictory committee.
  • Use replies and @mentions to clarify ambiguous notes before editing.

Managing Rounds and Closing Out Approval

Agree on the number of revision rounds before the project starts — it is part of your scope and pricing, and review tools make it easy to track which round you are on. As each round completes, address every comment, mark them resolved as you go, and upload the new version. Resolving comments visibly shows the client their feedback was acted on, which builds trust and reduces repeat notes.

Close out with an explicit approval, not a vague 'looks good.' Frame.io lets a reviewer formally approve a version, which gives you a clear, timestamped sign-off you can point to. That documented approval protects you if scope creep appears later, and it cleanly separates the review phase from final delivery and export.

  • Agree on the number of revision rounds up front as part of scope.
  • Resolve comments visibly as you address them to build trust.
  • Get an explicit, documented approval before moving to final delivery.
FAQ
What file should I upload to Frame.io for client review?

Upload a streamable H.264 MP4 at a reasonable bitrate so clients can watch smoothly without downloading a huge file. Save your high-quality ProRes or DNxHR masters for final delivery, not review. A manageable review file keeps the feedback process fast, which is exactly what a review tool is meant to enable.

How do timestamped comments work?

A reviewer pauses or clicks to a specific frame in the video and leaves a comment attached to that exact moment. When you open the project, each comment is pinned to its frame, so you know precisely which shot, transition, or moment the client means. This eliminates the guesswork of feedback like 'somewhere in the middle' that plagues email-based review.

How do I manage multiple revision rounds?

Agree on the number of rounds up front as part of your scope, then stack each new cut as a version of the same asset rather than a separate upload. Version stacking keeps every round together, preserves the comment history, and lets the client compare versions. Mark comments resolved as you address them so progress is visible across rounds.

How do I handle conflicting feedback from multiple stakeholders?

Ask that all stakeholders reconcile their notes into one consolidated set from a single decision-maker before sending feedback back to you, so you are not implementing contradictory requests. If conflicting comments do come in, use replies and @mentions inside the tool to surface the contradiction and get a clear decision before you start cutting.

How do I get a clean final approval?

Have the reviewer formally approve the final version in the tool rather than accepting a vague 'looks good' over email. A documented, timestamped approval gives you a clear record that the client signed off, which protects you against later scope creep and cleanly separates the review phase from final delivery and export.

F
Written & reviewed by
Faran@432
Production Lead & Consultant · Studio432

Faran is the production lead at Studio432 — the studio arm of Club432, the Karachi collective behind 100+ filmed live sessions and concert films. He plans and consults on shoots worldwide, and owns the gear, settings and craft standards behind everything published here.

Rather we just edited it?

Studio432 edits concert footage, music videos, gaming content, vlogs and short-form for creators worldwide. Send the footage, get a quote by email.

Start a project →