Multi-format video campaigns

The working approach

Choose a common promise.
Select footage appropriate to each viewport.
Review text and controls at actual placement size.

Share a promise, adapt the evidence

Create one campaign-level statement about the product’s value, then decide which evidence each format can show clearly. A wide view may support a comparison between several columns. A portrait view may need a single detail and a shorter headline. The common statement keeps the assets recognisably related while the composition adapts to the viewer’s actual screen.

Do not require equal durations or identical shot lists merely for symmetry. Different reading distances and navigation patterns may justify different pacing. Keep a small asset matrix with audience, placement, source viewport, message, duration and destination. Review each file in its intended context. A campaign is consistent when the promise and product identity agree, not when every export is a resized duplicate.

A concrete example

Use a wide comparison view on desktop and a single-column mobile detail on vertical, both proving the same saved-item workflow.

Before recording this scenario, write down what the starting screen contains and what should be different at the end. This gives the reviewer an observable result to check, rather than asking them to approve a general impression.

The mistake to avoid

Resizing the master export can leave tiny text or cropped controls.

If the source cannot support the intended message, narrow the claim or capture the missing evidence. A transition, caption or voiceover can explain a real change; it should not manufacture one.

Put it into a production brief

Replace the bracketed fields before using this brief. The scenario is illustrative; keep only the actions your product actually supports.

EDITABLE PRODUCTION BRIEF

Purpose: Multi-format video campaigns.
Audience: [specify the viewer and their familiarity with the product].
Decision: [what should the viewer understand or do next?].
Approach: Formats share a message but need different composition. A wide demo and a vertical ad should not compete for the same amount of interface detail.

Required evidence:
1. Choose a common promise. Show the relevant entry state, action and completed result.
2. Select footage appropriate to each viewport. Show the relevant entry state, action and completed result.
3. Review text and controls at actual placement size. Show the relevant entry state, action and completed result.

Reference scenario: Use a wide comparison view on desktop and a single-column mobile detail on vertical, both proving the same saved-item workflow.
Avoid: Resizing the master export can leave tiny text or cropped controls.

Deliverable: [duration], [format], [placement].
Use only recorded product behaviour. Preserve the full original.
Acceptance: check each claim against its visible scene, review at actual viewing size, and test the final file.

Review before delivery

Evidence: can a new viewer identify the result described in the example without being told where to look?
Reading distance: are the relevant controls and labels understandable at the intended placement size?
Continuity: does each cut preserve the relationship between the action and its result?
Accuracy: does the final caption describe the visible product state, including any limits?

Using this with Demovela

The automatic URL workflow currently supports Postraid and Adfolio. Other product scenarios on this page are production-planning examples, not compatibility claims. Adapt the brief to your own recorder or editor. Demovela preserves originals and creates separate outputs; review the resulting file before publishing.

Check the current preview scope →

Keep the workflow moving

Choose the next resource based on the decision you still need to make.

Browse the complete resource library →