Asset Workflow Usability

Great to see you in the Community @Matt Driscoll! Thank you for taking the time to ask your question and share this with us. I look forward to seeing what other customers are doing with Asset Workflow. In the meantime, I wanted to clarify two points that might be helpful. 

1. The Zoom function only works for images that have a resolution larger than 2000 x 2000.
2. On the topic of PDFs, the system converts them to images so they can be previewed in the UI.

Hi Matt,

Nice to see that we’re not alone struggling with this module.

We've been trying to deploy Creative Workflow for a year, it's a total adoption failure, though we tried to set only 2 very simple processes to start with. Among the pain points:

• obligation to have Contributor licenses for external agencies or photographers. We have too many contacts/turnover to manage individual licenses each time
• we often have TIFFs as native formats that have a greater definition than supported by Bynder
• Interface/UX too complicated for users
• Confusions in the structure of workflows, between campaigns and projects users are lost
• Dashboard could be improved

The usability of the interface is a particularly off-putting point for creative teams.

Unless there are some improvements on the Bynder side by the end of the year, we will give up and move on to another tool for pre-prod validation of assets.

Hi @VeroniqueG 

It’s great to know we’re not alone with these frustrations.

It sounds like we approach the workflow from the opposite angle to you, as we are the agency/photographers but I completely agree with the points above. 

Having used other digital workflow / reviewing systems, it seems a shame that Bynder can’t invest some resource into bringing this module up to a similar standard.

Hi ​@Matt Driscoll and ​@VeroniqueG 

Thank you for sharing your experiences with the creative workflow. 

We have experienced a huge improvement of managing the review and approval process of our packaging, with a lot of both internal and external approvers. We have developed a customized 11 step approval process workflow that really gives a lot of transparency for everybody involved in the worksflow (and that is a lot of people) as well as management get a good insight on the project status. And we get a lot of good feedback from the involved approvers.

We though do also have a long list of needed improvements  - especially issues addressed by our auditors. 

We have similar issues that you guys address, so we really would support and are trying to push some improvement on this tool, as we use it a lot and are quite happy using it. Some of the issues we really need to have addressed are:

• Not possible to review and set comments precisely to specific words on packaging layouts
  • “Toggle zoom” do not help here! It is not possible to put an ANNOTATION when using “TOOGLE ZOOM”. “Toggle expanded zoom” does not solve the issue. When using “Rotate” – it is not possible to use ANNOTATIONS
• JOB ATTACHMENTS – sorting (by date) and folders needed. We have a lot of Job attachments in each job. We need a structure and sorting possibility for the uses to find the relevant attachments
• Several people need to approve an asset in the same STEP. A simple list with the approvals (date & time stamp & asset version) is needed – for example as part of the activity list – but only approvals
• PDF export of a specific job after its completion where I can see everything that I am able to see in your current annotation export but including the tasks ticked off with the assigned person and timestamp + the specific asset version
• The tasks in the Workflow should only be ticked by the assigned person - but everybody are able to tick of others tasks