Autodesk ShotGrid vs. Celtx vs. Projector PSA

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

We think Projector PSA is a great tool to track and manage people in a professional service environment like management consulting. This system is easy to set up, easy to understand and should easily suit the needs of smaller and medium sized firms. It may be less appropriate for firms that rely very heavily on project management through another system (like MS Project) or firms that rely very heavily on a sales pipeline tracking system. While still very much possible to use, you would (I believe) have to do some re-keying between systems

• 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

• Projector is a very well designed tool for project management. It has allowed us to eliminate a number of auxiliary tools for project timelines and WBS for the vast majority of our projects.
• Time and expense entry is intuitive and quick for our staff.
• Our forecasting and resource management capability has improved greatly with Projector and allows us to grow our team efficiently with minimal additional administrative burden.
• Reporting is extremely robust. It does require some time to really get a handle on the full functionality of the reporting tool, but once you do, you can get almost any kind of report you want out of the system!

• 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

• Release management process needs to be improved. Currently no facility is provided to test the impact of new releases in a sand-box. This introduces business risk if there are interfaces into Projector PSA as part of it's use in the business.

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

Incentivized

We have been using this tool for a year now and find our use of it continually evolves and broadens. We are also very excited about the overhaul that's under way and feel many of the improvements being put in place will help make us that much more effective and efficient. The Projector team is also very responsive and collaborative in terms of user feedback and improvement suggestions, which helps us know they will work hard to help us get what we need out of the tool.

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

Desktop interface feels complex to new users.

In 5 years of use we have never experienced an unscheduled outage.

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 did pursue Quick Arrow another tool that was similar. We found that be in inflexible in use. Projector allows a lot of flexibility in setup. Our organization has very specific business processes and we were able to set up Projector to work with those processes. Several other systems we tried were not as flexible in allowing set up to our needs.

• 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

• Even in the small time that I stayed to see Projector PSA reporting I saw ROI projections become more realistic. There was real data to analyze that proved we were spending way too much and charging way too less on some projects.
• Although employees were not used at entering their hours, this single reporting improved operations management and validated employees concerns that more people were needed to manage workload
• Project proposals were more realistic because they were driven by real data.
• Decision making overall for the department became more efficient and effective

Incentivized