Review tool, or a searchable footage archive?
A review tool such as Frame.io is a cloud place to upload a cut and collaborate on it. A searchable footage archive indexes the library you already own, on the NAS or RAID it already occupies. They are different jobs. Many in-house teams use both, and neither one has to replace the other.
Updated
Two jobs that get compared as one
In-house teams are often handed a single question. Should we put the footage in a review tool, or should we make the library searchable? The question treats those as rival answers to the same need. They are not. Review is what you do with a version you are ready to show. Search is what you do with the library the edit already depends on.
A cloud review tool is built so media is uploaded, and so people can collaborate on what was uploaded. A searchable footage archive is built so the catalog is a reading of the NAS or RAID the team already uses, and the masters stay there. Many teams need both. Trouble starts when one of them is asked to do the other's job.
What Frame.io is
Frame.io is an Adobe-owned cloud platform for review and collaboration. Media is uploaded there. That is the public shape of the product: a place in the cloud where a team puts media so other people can review it with them. It is a clear example of the upload-and-review job, and it is a fair one. A cut, a select, or a proxy can go up. The people who will never mount the office share can still watch that version.
That is a different job from indexing camera originals that already live on a NAS. Expecting the review platform to become the system of record for every file on the RAID asks it to hold a library it was not handed as an upload. Expecting an in-place index to be the collaboration space for a cut you sent out asks the archive to be the review room. The wider tradeoff, hosted catalog against indexing the storage you have, is SaaS MAM versus keeping the files.
What a searchable archive is
Media Nexus is the archive Vaultline Solutions builds. It indexes a team's existing media storage in place, on the customer's own hardware. It reads the NAS or RAID you approve. It does not rename, move, or delete originals. It is not a SaaS MAM, not a backup, and it does not move media offsite. Search can use file names, tags, and transcripts. Proxies and frame grabs sit beside the masters so someone can find a moment and play it before an editor opens the original.
The path in the edit can remain the path on the RAID. You do not start by exporting a selection and waiting on an upload so the catalog can see the file the project already opens. Searching footage on a NAS is that job in practice. On-prem media asset management is where the system runs.
How the two sit side by side
| Question | Review tool, such as Frame.io | Searchable footage archive |
|---|---|---|
| What it is for | Review and collaboration on media you upload. | Finding footage in the library you already own. |
| Where that media lives | On the cloud platform, after you upload it. | On the NAS or RAID the edit already uses. |
| What you put there | A cut, a select, or a proxy you chose to share. | Nothing moves. The index reads the volumes you approve. |
| What happens to the camera original | It can stay on your storage. The upload is a copy. | It stays untouched, on the path the project already uses. |
| Someone outside the building | They review the version you uploaded. | You choose who can reach the system you own. |
| What it does not do | It is not, by that upload, an index of every master on the NAS. | It is not the collaboration space for a cut you sent out. It is also not a backup. |
A practical way to hold both: keep the review tool for the version you are ready to show, and keep the archive on the storage the masters already occupy. Uploading a proxy for that review is a normal handoff. What a proxy is, and why the original stays put while you do it, is proxy files for footage on a NAS.
How to choose, and how to try the archive
Choose the review tool when the work in front of you is a version, the reviewers will not mount your share, and collaboration on that upload is the point. Choose the searchable archive when the library is already on a NAS or RAID, the edit depends on those paths, and the question is which shot, which line, or which frame you already have.
You can see the second one on your real media before you pay. The Free Build builds the archive on the storage you already have, and you keep it only if you want it. Build before you buy is the intake for that build. The review tool you already use can stay the place a cut goes when it is ready for other people to see.
Asked plainly.
Is Frame.io a searchable archive of the footage on our NAS?
Frame.io is an Adobe-owned cloud platform for review and collaboration, and media is uploaded to it. That is a different job from an archive that indexes the NAS or RAID you already have. Many teams use a review tool and a searchable archive together.
Do we have to pick one and drop the other?
No. A review tool fits a cut or a proxy you choose to upload so people can collaborate on that version. A searchable archive fits the library that already lives on your storage. One does not have to replace the other.
If we have an archive, can we still upload a cut for review?
Yes. Indexing the masters in place does not stop you from uploading the version you want reviewed. The masters stay on the storage you approved. The upload is a copy you chose to send.
Does a review link replace search on the RAID?
No. A review link is for the file you uploaded. It does not, by itself, make every camera original on the NAS searchable. Search of that library is the archive's job, and the originals stay where they are.
Where do the masters live in a searchable archive?
On the NAS or RAID you already use. Media Nexus indexes that storage in place, on hardware you control. It does not rename, move, or delete originals, and it does not move the library offsite so the catalog can see it.