Start with the files you send for review. Video teams need comments on the clip itself, design and print teams need side-by-side version comparisons, and web teams need clients to point at a live page. Match the tool to the file first, then check how approvals are recorded, because that record is what you'll need when a sign-off is disputed.
Video is only one of the things creative teams send for sign-off. Wipster built its name on sharing video projects and collecting feedback on them, but plenty of teams now review banners, packaging, PDFs and live web pages in the same week, often with the same client.
The nine options below are in no particular order, sorted by the kind of file each one handles best. Every description reflects what the vendor says about its own tool.
What decides a proofing switch
Two things matter more than anything on a feature grid: how reviewers leave comments, and how approvals are tracked.
How reviewers comment
Your reviewers aren't all designers. Clients, account managers and legal teams need to leave a comment without learning new software or creating an account they'll forget. Test whether a guest can open a link, click on the exact spot or moment they mean, and write a note, all on a phone if that's how your clients work. If it takes more than a minute, they'll go back to email, and your new tool becomes a filing cabinet.
How approvals are tracked
The second test is the record. When a client says they never approved the third version, you want to show who approved what, on which version and when. Look for clear version history, a named approver per round and a status that can't be changed quietly. Automated workflows that route a file to the next reviewer help larger teams, but even a small studio needs that audit trail.
Sorted by the file under review
Video and creative files
Frame.io, Ziflow and ReviewStudio cover the ground closest to what you had before: creative files of many kinds, with feedback and approvals in one place. They suit agencies and in-house teams who review video alongside other assets.
Artwork and design
Approval Studio and Markup.io focus on visual files. One is built for artwork sign-off with version comparison, which packaging and print teams will recognise; the other is a lighter tool for marking up screenshots, PDFs and designs.
Live websites
BugHerd, Marker.io and Pastel let reviewers comment directly on a web page. They're the obvious pick if much of your review work is landing pages and site builds, where a screenshot never shows the real problem.
Proofing inside a project tool
ProofHub is a project management tool with proofing built in. It makes sense if you'd rather have one tool for tasks, messages and reviews than a separate proofing app.
Nine review tools, A to Z
Alphabetical and in no particular order.
Approval Studio
Best for: Packaging and print teams marking up artwork, comparing versions and proofing online with clients, with AI producing the reports, per the vendor.
BugHerd
Best for: Web agencies whose clients leave feedback and bug reports by pointing and clicking on the page itself, as the vendor describes it.
Frame.io
Best for: Video and creative teams keeping files, feedback and collaborators on one secure platform from first cut to delivery, says the vendor.
Marker.io
Best for: Web teams sending site feedback and bug reports straight into Jira, Trello, Asana or GitHub from the page being reviewed, per the vendor.
Markup.io
Best for: Designers and marketers annotating screenshots, PDFs and designs with teammates in real time, which the vendor pitches as simpler visual feedback.
Pastel
Best for: Designers, developers and agencies collecting visual comments directly on live websites before client approval, as the vendor describes it.
Want AI doing the heavy lifting in your marketing?
I build the systems that handle the boring 80 percent, so you get your week back. Done properly, with the human kept in.
ProofHub
Best for: Teams who want proofing alongside project management, with tasks, people and messages kept in one central place, per the vendor.
ReviewStudio
Best for: Creative teams wanting a single review and approval process across all their workflows, which the vendor calls online proofing software.
Ziflow
Best for: Marketing and agency teams running automated review workflows across many file types, with integrations, as the vendor describes its proofing.
Proofing tools in one table
| Tool | Type | Good for |
|---|---|---|
| Approval Studio | Artwork approval | Packaging and print artwork sign-off |
| BugHerd | Website feedback | Clients pointing and clicking to comment on sites |
| Frame.io | Creative collaboration | Video and creative files with feedback in one place |
| Marker.io | Website feedback and bug reporting | Sending site feedback into developer trackers |
| Markup.io | Visual feedback | Annotating screenshots, PDFs and designs together |
| Pastel | Website annotation | Visual comments on live websites |
| ProofHub | Project management with proofing | Reviews inside a wider project tool |
| ReviewStudio | Online proofing | One review and approval process across workflows |
| Ziflow | Online proofing | Automated review workflows across many file types |
Advice for agencies and in-house creative teams
Pick the tool your least technical reviewer can use, not the one your designers like best. Designers will adapt to almost anything; a busy client with a phone and five minutes won't. If your work spans video, artwork and websites, you may end up with one proofing tool for files and a second, lighter one for web pages, and that's fine as long as approvals land in one place.
It's also worth checking how a new tool fits the rest of your stack, from file storage to task boards. My list of essential tools for an online business is a useful reminder of what else needs to connect, and if you review work in several languages, see translation services for small businesses.
What to tell clients before the switch
Clients don't care which proofing tool you use, but they notice when the review link looks different or asks them to sign up. Send a short note before the first project goes through the new tool: what the link will look like, whether they need an account, and how to leave a comment and approve.
Finish any live reviews in the old tool rather than moving them halfway, and export the approval history for recent projects so you can find it if a question comes up. Then run the first few rounds yourself, checking that comments and approvals come through as expected, before you hand the process back to the team.
Do you make online proofing or creative review software? Tool makers can ask to be considered for a featured place on this list.
Want your tool on this list? Featured spots and reviews here are paid partnerships. Here's how to partner with me.
Frequently asked questions
What is online proofing software?
It's software for sharing creative work, collecting comments on the file itself and recording approvals, so feedback doesn't get lost in long email threads.
Do clients need an account to leave feedback?
It depends on the tool. Many let guests comment through a shared link, which is worth checking before you switch, because extra sign-ups put clients off.
Can one tool handle video, artwork and websites?
Some cover several file types, but website feedback often works better in a dedicated tool that comments on the live page. Plenty of teams use two tools side by side.
How do I keep a record of approvals?
Choose a tool with version history and named approvals for each round, then export that record at the end of each project in case a sign-off is questioned.
Should proofing live inside my project management tool?
If your team already plans every job in one tool and reviews are simple, built-in proofing saves a step. For heavier creative review, a dedicated proofing tool usually does more.
