Approve a memorial video proof by checking the complete video, returning one clear list of corrections and confirming the exact revised version you accept. Funeral-home staff should first compare the proof with the production brief. The family then checks personal details, image choices and tone. Approval is separate from testing the final file at the venue.
1. Make sure the proof is ready for meaningful review
A proof is the version shown for checking before final delivery. It needs a clear identifier and a statement of what is complete. If the soundtrack, titles or image treatments are unfinished, say so before asking anyone to approve those elements.
The provider should deliver a proof that lets reviewers see the actual sequence, captions and proposed framing. A list of thumbnail images cannot show whether text is readable at normal speed or whether a transition hides a face. Ask for a playable version suited to the review task.
Use the video provider selection checklist to agree proof expectations before the first live order. Decide how corrections are submitted, which changes are included and when a revised proof will be supplied.
2. Complete the staff check before family review
-
Match the order reference and version to the correct family.
-
Compare the displayed name and dates with the approved brief.
-
Check that selected images are included and rejected images are absent.
-
Inspect crops for missing faces or meaningful details.
-
Verify that agreed restoration or animation limits were followed.
-
Check runtime, opening, ending and obvious sound faults.
-
Confirm that the review link opens for the intended recipient.
Correct production mistakes before asking the family to spend time on them. If the title misspells a name that was clear in the brief, staff should return it directly to the editor. If the family supplied two different spellings, the coordinator needs a decision from the contact instead of choosing one.
Keep this check within your actual knowledge. Staff can verify that image 014 was included, but cannot know whether its caption identifies the right cousin unless the family has provided that information.
3. Give the family a short, ordered review task
Proof review message
Please review the identified video proof for [name] by [date and time]. First watch it from beginning to end. Then check names and dates, the photographs selected, any cropped details and the overall tone. Please send one combined list of changes using the playback time or image number. If you are happy with this version, reply to confirm that it is approved. Tell us if you cannot open or review it.
Give reviewers enough information to recognize the file they are approving. Put the version identifier in the message and the proof name. Avoid sending a link that silently changes to a different video while the family is discussing it.
Ask the family to watch once without pausing, then return to specific details. The first viewing tests the experience; the second tests accuracy. The photo storytelling guide helps explain questions about balance and sequence when the images are individually correct but the story feels incomplete.
4. Turn feedback into an exact correction list
| Unclear comment | Usable correction | Why it works |
|---|---|---|
| The name is wrong | At 00:12, replace the displayed name with the spelling supplied in this response | Identifies the location and replacement |
| Use the other photo | Replace image 018 with approved image 024; keep the existing caption | Names both files and retained text |
| This feels too quick | At 01:40, allow more reading time for the group caption | Describes the viewing problem |
| Remove that effect | Use the still version of portrait 003; retain the other approved transitions | Limits the change to the intended treatment |
Preserve the family’s exact spelling rather than retyping it from a phone conversation if a written response is available. Read back sensitive changes when discussion happens by telephone, then record the instruction.
Separate factual corrections from changes to the agreed scope. Adding a new sequence or replacing the music after the edit is complete can affect more than one moment. Explain the production consequence before promising a new delivery time. The photo deadline wording helps staff explain a cutoff without blaming the family.
5. Resolve disagreement before sending the editor instructions
Route conflicting comments through the agreed contact. If one relative asks to remove a photograph and another asks to retain it, the editor should receive a resolved decision. Do not invite the editor to judge the relationship or choose whichever message arrived last.
For a hypothetical proof, two relatives disagree about a work photograph. The coordinator asks the approver whether to keep it, replace it or omit that section. The approved response is then added to the single correction list. No parallel version is circulated as a way of avoiding the conversation.
Use the same approach when feedback concerns generated effects. A description such as “the expression feels unlike them” is a valid reason to review or remove a treatment. The family does not need technical vocabulary to reject it.
6. Record approval and release the final file
Approval confirmation
The agreed family approver has reviewed [name]‘s tribute in the version identified with this response and confirms it is approved for the agreed service use. The coordinator will now arrange final delivery and venue testing. Any later change must be reviewed before a replacement file is used.
Retain the response or a properly recorded verbal approval according to your process. “Approved with changes” means another version is required. Identify what remains outstanding and avoid labeling that proof as final.
Deliver the accepted file to the operator with its identifier and cue. Follow the chapel playback test before the service. If a new export is produced after testing, the replacement needs its own check even when the visible change is small.
Check locally: Confirm who is authorized to approve through the funeral home’s arrangement process. Use approved sharing and record-retention methods, and ask the venue about any presentation restrictions.
For funeral homes coordinating proofs through an external production team, discuss tribute review and delivery with LifeTribute.
Frequently asked questions
Does silence mean the family has approved?
No. Ask for an explicit response identifying the proof. If the deadline is approaching, contact the agreed approver and explain the options remaining. Keep the service coordinator informed rather than converting a lack of response into assumed consent.
Can several relatives review the proof?
Yes, if the family wants that. Ask the agreed contact to combine their comments and resolve disagreements before sending instructions. The editor needs one clear decision about each image or caption, not several conflicting messages from different reviewers.
Should the family check technical export settings?
No. Staff and the venue operator should handle file compatibility, volume and playback testing. Ask the family to check names, photographs, story and tone. They can report anything that looks or sounds wrong without needing to diagnose its technical cause.