| 0 |
| 1 |
| Match Graph | 0 | 0 |
| Pricing | Free | Free |
| Capabilities | 7 decomposed | 13 decomposed |
| Times Matched | 0 | 0 |
Provides a unified repository for storing, organizing, and retrieving video assets, footage, and project files with hierarchical folder structures and custom metadata tagging. Assets are indexed by searchable attributes (resolution, duration, codec, creation date, custom tags) enabling rapid discovery across large production libraries. The system maintains version history and asset relationships, allowing teams to track which assets are used in which projects without manual cross-referencing.
Unique: Implements production-specific metadata schema (frame rate, resolution, codec, color space, aspect ratio) rather than generic file attributes, with custom tag hierarchies designed for video workflows. Asset relationship mapping tracks dependencies between source footage, proxies, and final deliverables.
vs alternatives: More specialized for video production than generic cloud storage (Google Drive, Dropbox) because it understands video-specific metadata and maintains asset lineage, but lacks the AI-powered auto-tagging that newer tools like Frame.io are adding
Enables distributed team members to view video timelines, scrub through footage, and leave frame-accurate comments and annotations without requiring all parties to have the same editing software installed. Comments are anchored to specific timecodes and can include text, emoji reactions, and file attachments. The system uses WebSocket-based real-time synchronization to push comment updates to all viewers instantly, with conflict resolution for simultaneous edits.
Unique: Uses frame-accurate timecode anchoring (not just generic comments) with WebSocket-based real-time synchronization, allowing multiple reviewers to see comments appear instantly without page refresh. Implements conflict resolution for simultaneous annotations on the same frame.
vs alternatives: More specialized for video review than generic collaboration tools (Slack, Asana) because it understands timecode and frame-level precision, but lacks the deep editing integration that Premiere's native review tools or Frame.io's plugin ecosystem provide
Provides a structured interface for creating and organizing shot lists with visual storyboard layouts, allowing production teams to plan shots before filming and track completion status during production. Each shot can include metadata (shot type, duration estimate, location, talent, equipment needed), reference images, and production notes. The system generates visual storyboards from shot list data and allows drag-and-drop reordering to experiment with sequence changes.
Unique: Combines shot list metadata (type, duration, equipment) with visual storyboard layout in a single interface, allowing bidirectional sync between text-based planning and visual sequencing. Implements drag-and-drop reordering that updates all dependent shot numbers and timings automatically.
vs alternatives: More integrated than separate tools (Google Sheets for shot lists + Pinterest for storyboards) because it keeps planning and visuals synchronized, but lacks the AI-powered shot suggestions or motion preview that newer tools are experimenting with
Implements granular permission management at the project level, allowing producers to assign roles (viewer, commenter, editor, admin) to team members with specific capabilities tied to each role. Permissions control who can view assets, edit timelines, approve changes, and manage project settings. The system maintains an audit log of all permission changes and file access, enabling accountability for sensitive client work.
Unique: Implements production-specific roles (viewer for clients, commenter for reviewers, editor for post-production staff) rather than generic admin/user/viewer, with audit logging of all asset access and permission changes. Maintains role-based capability matrices that define exactly what each role can do.
vs alternatives: More specialized for video production than generic cloud storage permissions because it understands production workflows (clients need view-only, editors need full access, colorists need folder-specific access), but lacks the enterprise SSO and fine-grained file-level permissions of dedicated DAM systems
Provides a project-level timeline view showing key milestones (shoot date, rough cut due, color lock, final delivery) with deadline tracking and team notifications. The system calculates critical path dependencies (e.g., color correction can't start until rough cut is locked) and alerts team members when deadlines approach or slip. Integrates with team calendars to show when key personnel are unavailable.
Unique: Implements production-specific milestone types (shoot date, rough cut lock, color lock, final delivery) with sequential dependency tracking, allowing teams to understand which tasks are blocking others. Sends role-specific notifications (editor gets rough cut deadline, colorist gets color lock deadline).
vs alternatives: More specialized for video production than generic project management tools (Asana, Monday.com) because it understands production-specific workflows and sequential dependencies, but lacks the advanced critical path analysis and resource leveling of dedicated project management suites
Offers a free tier allowing small teams to use core features (asset storage, basic collaboration, shot lists) with constraints on project count (typically 2-3 active projects), team size (5-10 users), and storage (50-100 GB). Paid tiers remove these constraints and add advanced features (extended audit logs, priority support, integrations). The freemium model uses feature gating at the application level, with tier checks before allowing project creation or user invitations.
Unique: Implements feature gating at the application level with clear tier limits (2-3 projects, 5-10 users, 50-100 GB storage) that trigger upgrade prompts when exceeded. Free tier includes core collaboration features (comments, shot lists) but excludes advanced features (audit logs, integrations, priority support).
vs alternatives: More generous free tier than some competitors (allows 2-3 projects vs. 1 project on some platforms) but more restrictive than others (Figma allows unlimited projects on free tier), positioning KrockIO as accessible to small teams while encouraging upgrade to paid for growing studios
Provides basic integrations with popular tools (Slack for notifications, Google Drive for asset backup) but lacks native plugins or APIs for deep integration with professional editing software (Adobe Premiere Pro, DaVinci Resolve, Final Cut Pro). The system can export project data (shot lists, feedback) as files but cannot directly read or modify timelines in external editing software. Integration points are limited to webhook-based notifications and file export/import.
Unique: Offers basic webhook-based integrations (Slack, Google Drive) but explicitly lacks native plugins for professional editing software, positioning KrockIO as a standalone collaboration platform rather than an editing suite extension. Integration architecture is file-based (export/import) rather than API-based.
vs alternatives: Simpler to set up than platforms requiring deep software integration (Frame.io requires Premiere plugin installation), but less powerful than editing-native tools because feedback and annotations don't exist in the editing software itself, requiring editors to context-switch between KrockIO and their NLE
Search, filter, and browse a catalog of 500K+ community-created AI models including Stable Diffusion variants, LoRAs, embeddings, and checkpoints. Users can view model details, ratings, training data transparency, and commercial usage rights before downloading.
Download model files (checkpoints, LoRAs, embeddings, VAEs) directly from Civitai with no usage limits, rate caps, or subscription requirements. Supports batch downloads and version selection.
Organize and curate collections of models for specific projects, workflows, or themes, and share collections with other users for collaborative discovery.
View download counts, usage trends, community engagement metrics, and performance data for published models to understand adoption and impact.
Engage in comments, discussions, and Q&A on model pages to ask questions, share tips, report issues, and build relationships with creators and other users.
Create model cards, upload trained models (checkpoints, LoRAs, embeddings), set licensing terms, and publish to the Civitai marketplace for community discovery and use.
View and compare different versions of the same model side-by-side, including training data, parameters, performance metrics, and community feedback to identify the best version for a use case.
Civitai scores higher at 56/100 vs KrockIO at 44/100.
Need something different?
Search the match graph →© 2026 Unfragile. Stronger through disorder.
Submit ratings, written reviews, and usage feedback on models to help the community identify high-quality, production-ready models and flag problematic uploads.
+5 more capabilities