Autodesk ShotGrid vs. Celtx

ShotGrid seems to be well suited for a video team for reviews and project tracking. It may not be well suited for Project managers who need to see the bigger picture of the project.

Incentivized

In our experience at Eight Engines, Celtx shines in multi-faceted projects that require extensive pre-production planning. For instance, when working on Transport for Greater Manchester's promotional videos, the software's breakdown features helped us meticulously plan everything from location shoots to talent schedules, ensuring a smooth operation. Similarly, its robust scriptwriting tools were invaluable in our work with the BBC, where nuanced storytelling is key. However, for smaller, quick-turnaround projects, such as social media clips or internal training videos, Celtx can be a bit of an overkill. The platform's comprehensive features may not be fully utilised, making simpler tools or templates sometimes more efficient for these tasks. Additionally, Celtx's pricing model might not be cost-effective for freelancers or smaller teams that only need a scriptwriting tool, without the additional pre-production features. Overall, while Celtx is an excellent all-in-one solution for complex video projects, it might be less appropriate for simpler tasks or smaller teams with budget constraints.

Incentivized

• Uploads videos efficiently
• allows annotation within the video
• setting custom filters
• creating Gantt chart with inputs from each editor and animator
• adding versions to shot/asset
• adding assets to a shot

Incentivized

• Scripts
• Call sheets
• Schedules

Incentivized

• Ordering comments made by different people by timecode/frame number, instead by the time and date the comment was made
• Being able to move an uploaded video from shots to assets and vice versa. Right now we have to re-upload but lose any comments made already if they were in the wrong place
• Custom filters are great but they could get a little confusing with all the options. Might help with guidelines or a place we could ask what we want and someone could answer with the best way to achieve those specific filters we want

Incentivized

• Storyboarding
• Modernised UX

Incentivized

For education, we can't see ourselves using anything else that comes at a cost

Incentivized

It's UI/UX is very robust. There's a lot of functionality but it's not very intuitive or intuitive. I spend time with new hires and contractors to overview ShotGrid for a day and revisit after a week or two. Questions always arise down the line

Incentivized

Wipster had limitations on video uploads, which was a major drawback. One thing we liked with Wipster was how we can see comments made in order on the timeline while watching the video.

Incentivized

We prefer Celtx's user-friendly approach over Final Draft for its intuitive interface and ease of onboarding. Unlike Final Draft, which can have a steeper learning curve, Celtx allows us to dive straight into the creative process without getting bogged down by complex functionalities. This streamlined user experience promotes collaboration, as team members can effortlessly switch between scriptwriting, pre-production planning, and other tasks. In a fast-paced agency setting, Celtx's accessibility is not just a preference but a necessity for efficient work.

Incentivized

• We spend less time going back and forth with different stakeholders on shots and assets
• We don't have to pay services that only provided trial versions
• There is unlimited video uploading which was not the case with wiz

Incentivized