Approvals and comments on AI drafts before you send them to the client

With AI drafts the problem gets worse, because making a new version is cheap. You can have eleven takes of a thirty second clip by lunch. The client says "go with the second one" and nobody is sure which file that was. A wrong file reaches the ad platform, and now it is a dispute about who approved what.

This page is about sign-off after the clip is generated. It is not about planning the idea (see storyboard to moving previs and the pitch video page) and it is not the general agency process (see the client approval workflow guide). Here I add the parts that are specific to AI drafts: a record of how each draft was made, a pre-send checklist, and a cap on revision rounds that reflects real credit cost. I use Higgsfield as one generation tool in the examples, and I say plainly what it does not do for review.

This page may contain affiliate links from which Blur Studio earns commissions.

The real problem: nobody knows which version is approved

Four things go wrong, in this order of how often I would expect them:

• Version confusion. Files with names like final_v2_new_USE-THIS.
• Feedback in five places. Email, chat, a call, a text, a comment on a shared link.
• Silence taken as yes. You assumed approval because the client stopped replying.
• Approval inside a tool. A comment thread that disappears when a subscription ends or a workspace changes.

A tool does not fix any of these by itself. A short process does, and the tool just makes it easier to follow.

Zero tool fix: a version sheet and a filename rule

The cheapest option needs no new software. Make one shared sheet with one row per draft:

Column	What goes in it
Version	v01, v02, v03
Date	The day the draft was made
Tool, model and settings	The generator, model name, length, size, and any seed number it shows
Input files	Photos, logos, scripts used, with where they came from
Reviewer	The one internal person who checked it
Status	Draft, changes requested, approved
Approval link	The email or form where the client approved it

Then name files in one fixed pattern: client_campaign_v03_2026-11-03_DRAFT.mp4. When approved, rename the same file to end in _APPROVED and never overwrite an older version. Only the approved row ever goes to the client as final.

Recording the model and inputs for each draft is the AI specific part. If a client later asks "what made this?", or a platform asks for proof of rights, the row answers it in a minute. For the rights side, see the rights checklist for paid ads.

Name one reviewer and one approver per draft

Two roles, each held by one person:

• Internal reviewer. Checks the draft against the pre-send checklist below before the client sees it.
• Client approver. The one person at the client who can say yes. Get their name before the first draft.

For a three person team, I would split it like this: the producer generates, one internal reviewer checks, and one account manager sends. Nobody forwards raw generations. If the client has a committee, ask them to collect comments into one reply. Feedback from six people on six drafts is the quickest way to lose track.

Approve in stages, and ask for feedback in a fixed shape

Many review guides split sign-off into stages, such as rough cut, fine cut and final. For AI drafts I would use three: idea (a still frame or a script), motion (a first rough clip) and final (with sound and text). Ask for approval of each stage before you spend credits on the next one, because a changed idea after the final render is the most expensive kind of change.

Also give the client a fixed shape for comments: the time in the clip, what to change, and why. "0:07, make the logo larger, it is hard to read on a phone" can be acted on. "Make it pop" cannot. Put the shape in the send note.

Agree criteria first, tier the review, chase on a schedule

Guides from review-tool makers and agencies, such as ProofHub and Superside (both sell related software, so read them as practice, not neutral research), agree on a few habits that fit AI drafts well:

• Agree the approval criteria before the first draft. Put three to five plain tests in the brief, such as "logo readable on a phone" and "no claim we cannot prove". The client then approves against a list, not a mood.
• Match the review to the risk. A low-risk internal clip needs one internal check. A normal campaign asset needs the internal reviewer plus brand check. A clip with product claims, a real person's face or voice, or a regulated topic needs a named brand owner, a legal look and the client approver.
• Lock scope in writing. New ideas after approval of the idea stage count as a new round. Say so in the brief. If a client questions the AI route itself, see scripts for "can't we just use AI".
• Chase on a fixed timetable. Send the draft with a deadline. Remind once at the halfway point. At the deadline, send one short note that names the person who can decide and says the date will move if there is no reply. Do not treat silence as yes.
• Lock the approved file. After sign-off, make the approved file read-only in company storage and make any later change a new version.
• Feed lessons back. Once a month, read the rejected rows in your sheet. If the same fix appears three times (for example garbled text on screen), add it to the pre-send checklist.

Measure two numbers per client: rounds per approved clip, and days from send to approval. If rounds climb above your cap, the brief or the criteria are the problem, not the tool.

Pick where comments live

You have four realistic options. All prices are from each vendor's own page as of 3 November 2026, and they change, so confirm before you buy.

Option	Good for	Watch out for
Email plus the sheet	Fewer than about 10 deliverables a month	Comments are hard to tie to a moment in a video.
Frame.io	Video review with comments on frames	Its page showed Free (2 members, 2 projects), Pro $15 and Team $25 per member per month plus tax on the monthly view, with 13 percent off for annual billing.
Runway Team	Teams already generating in Runway	$69 per seat per month ($55 billed yearly), 2 to 9 seats.
A custom approval portal	Agencies with many clients and repeat deliverables	Costs build time. Worth it only at volume.

Frame.io, a video review tool, is built for this job. Its pricing FAQ says outside reviewers do not need an account when you share by link, and they can comment in a browser or in its free iPhone and iPad apps. That removes the most common objection, which is a client refusing to sign up. Its Pro plan lists up to 5 members and Team up to 15, and Team adds internal comments, which keep your own notes apart from the client's. Check the live page for current prices.

Runway, an AI video tool for creative teams, documents comments tied to exact frames with @mentions inside its Team plan, plus up to 100 shared projects, so an agency can give each client its own project. If your clips are made in Runway, that is simple. If not, comments live in a different place from the clip.

Luma, another AI video generator, lists guest collaborators with edit access on its Plus plan and shared sharing and usage analytics on a Team plan sold by quote. That is about working together, not about client sign-off, so I would not treat it as a review tool.

What Higgsfield does and does not give you for review

Higgsfield's team help article (dated 2 August 2026) lists shared assets, roles on Enterprise and spend controls. It does not list frame-level comments or an approval workflow, so I would not plan around either. Comments are not documented there, so treat them as not available unless Higgsfield support confirms in writing.

That is fine. Higgsfield is a place to make drafts. Use a review step after it, and the draft moves into the review tool as an exported file. One more point from its terms: under section 2.5, workspace administrators can access and reassign members' content. So the person who made a draft is not the only one who can see it. Plan who has admin rights, and see the shared account page for how seats and roles work.

If you generate on Higgsfield, the prompts and templates page helps you get a usable first draft, which means fewer rounds to review.

A pre-send checklist for AI drafts

The internal reviewer runs this before the client sees anything. Copy it into your sheet.

1. Every claim shown on screen is true. If the ad shows a result or a product doing something, it is real or clearly an illustration.
2. Any real person's face or voice is cleared in writing. See the page on putting a face into video for the consent points.
3. Logos, colours and product shapes match the client's brand files.
4. All text on screen is spelled correctly, and numbers and prices are right.
5. Hands, teeth, eyes and moving objects look normal on the full screen, not only in a thumbnail.
6. Audio matches the picture and the voice is the one you meant to use.
7. No known brand, character or artist is visible that you do not have rights to.
8. The AI disclosure decision is made and recorded. Check the platform's current rules on the launch day.
9. The file name follows the pattern and the sheet row is complete.
10. The send note says exactly what you want from the client and by when.

Record final approval outside the tool

The approved record should be a reply email that names the exact file and version, or a signed approval form. Write the request like this:

"Attached: client_campaign_v03_2026-11-03_DRAFT.mp4. Please reply 'Approved v03' by Friday 5 pm if it is ready for use. If we do not hear back, we will treat v03 as not approved and will not publish."

The last sentence matters. Silence is not approval. Comment threads inside a generator or review tool can be lost when a plan changes or ends, and what happens to your content after you cancel depends on each vendor's terms, so do not rely on the tool as your only record. Save the approval email to company storage with the final file.

Revision rounds and credit cost

With AI drafts, every retry costs credits. A credit is the unit a tool charges for each image or video. Put a cap in the contract: for example, two rounds of changes are included, and extra rounds are billed. Write it in terms the client understands, such as extra rounds at an hourly rate, not credits. The credit math for your own account is in the credits guide, and the cost of a retry shows on the Generate button before you spend. Count how many retries a typical approved clip needed in your sheet, then set the cap from that.

A 7 day trial with pass and fail

A plan you can run on one real client draft:

1. Day 1. Set up the sheet and the filename rule. Agree the reviewer and approver.
2. Days 2 and 3. Make the draft. Run the pre-send checklist.
3. Day 4. Send it through the review tool you chose, or a shared link.
4. Days 5 to 7. Collect comments in one place and get the approval email.

Pass if the client approves with one filename and one reply, nobody used a side channel to send feedback, and the sheet row is complete. Fail if feedback arrives in more than two places, or if anyone cannot say which version was approved. A fail means tighten the send note or move to a review tool with link based comments.

Who should skip a review tool

• You send fewer than about 10 deliverables a month. The sheet and email are enough.
• Your clients are happy to reply by email with a file name.
• You are one person and the client is one person. A review tool adds a step.
• You need comments tied to a moment in the video and do not want a new subscription. A short timestamped list in the email does this for free: "0:07, change the logo size".

How I'd approach this

I would start with the sheet and the filename rule this week, because they cost nothing and fix most of the confusion. I would add a link based review tool only when comments start to arrive in many places, and I would choose it for the client's convenience (no account to create) before features. I would keep the approval email as the legal record every time.

For making the drafts, I would price the cost per approved clip first and then decide on a plan; the Higgsfield plans are one option, and the Runway comparison shows another. If you have many clients and the sheet is getting heavy, Blur Studio builds the repeatable creative workflow, client approval portal or shared asset library around these tools. You can read more at our business page, with no hard sell.