If you include 'unlimited revisions' in your video editing quotes, you have made a financial commitment whose value you cannot calculate at the time of quoting. You've agreed to an open-ended liability. And if you include 'reasonable revisions' without defining what reasonable means, you've agreed to the same thing — with an argument built into the contract.
Why revision rounds destroy margins
For a standard video edit quoted at 3 days, each additional revision round adds roughly half a day to the total time — client feedback assimilation, changes, re-export, quality check. Two quoted revision rounds is 3 days plus 1 day = 4 days. If a client takes 4 rounds instead of 2, that's an extra day of work, approximately 25% of the original quote, with no additional billing. On a project with a 30% gross margin, that turns a profitable job into a break-even.
The professional standard is two rounds
Two rounds of revisions is the industry standard for most video projects. The first round covers structural feedback: story, timing, major cuts, tone. The second round covers fine-tuning: colour notes, audio tweaks, minor trims, title corrections. Both rounds should be stated explicitly in the brief, the proposal, and the project confirmation. 'Two rounds of revisions are included; additional rounds are charged at £X per round' is a professional standard, not an aggressive clause.
Structure feedback to reduce round count
A significant proportion of additional revision rounds are not caused by client dissatisfaction — they're caused by feedback that was too vague in the earlier rounds. 'The pacing feels slow' addressed in round one produces a different result to '01:23–01:47 feels 15 seconds too long and the cut at 01:38 doesn't work'. Structured, specific feedback produces better revisions in fewer rounds. Tools that allow clients to leave timecoded, pinpoint comments directly on the video reduce the round count by making feedback more precise.
Change orders are not confrontational
When a client requests additional revision work beyond the agreed limit, issuing a change order is not a confrontation — it's a professional boundary. The conversation is straightforward: 'We've completed the two revision rounds included in the project scope. The changes you've requested would be a third round, which we'd quote as a change order at £X. Would you like to proceed?' Clients who don't accept this were likely going to be difficult throughout the project anyway. Clients who do accept it — the majority — appreciate the clarity.
Track every feedback item and every round
A revision tracker that logs every feedback item by round, with status and priority, gives you a complete record if a scope dispute arises. It also makes it obvious to both parties how many rounds have been completed — which prevents the 'but this is just a small tweak' conversation that erodes round limits over time.
“The clearest signal that scope creep is being tolerated is when an editor completes round 4 without raising a change order. By that point, the precedent is set and the conversation is much harder.”
Revision round management essentials
- State the round limit in the brief, proposal, and project confirmation — three places
- Two rounds is the professional standard; define what each round covers
- Log every feedback item with round number, status, and priority in a tracker
- Issue a change order when round limits are exceeded — every time, without exception
- Structure client feedback: a feedback form or video annotation tool reduces vague notes and round count
- Keep a complete revision history as your scope reference if a dispute arises
Related resources
FileFeedback
Struggling with client feedback on your projects?
FileFeedback lets clients leave frame-accurate, timestamped comments directly on your videos and images — no more email chains, no more confusion about which version they mean.
Try FileFeedback free