Aspect

What do they actually do

Aspect provides a hosted platform that connects to a team’s media storage and indexes footage down to the frame, making it searchable and actionable. Its AI agents can find precise clips, assemble rough cuts from storyboards or scripts, run automated checks (e.g., dropped audio, missing frames, outdated graphics), export timeline XML for standard editing tools, and sync project metadata and status into Slack/Notion/ClickUp so assistants and editors don’t have to do that manual work aspect.inc, YC.

Teams typically connect their NAS/cloud libraries, give the agent a task (e.g., “assemble this storyboard” or “find these shots”), and receive a draft cut or issue flags; the agent also updates folders and project status across tools to keep work moving. Early users include post houses and in‑house video teams; the company says projects run on Aspect have reached “tens of millions of views” (company statements) YC.

Who are their target customer(s)

• Post‑production assistants at post houses: They spend hours locating clips, creating folders, exporting metadata, and updating PM tools—work that’s repetitive and error‑prone. Aspect aims to automate search, folder creation, and status sync so assistants avoid back‑office work aspect.inc, YC.
• Lead editors / post supervisors: They need fast, reliable rough cuts and confidence that revision notes and delivery checks were applied; otherwise creative time is wasted on preventable fixes. Aspect’s rough‑cut assembly and automated review checks aim to reduce rework and surface delivery issues earlier aspect.inc, YC.
• In‑house video teams (brand or corporate studios): Small teams are overloaded by volume and non‑creative tasks like syncing assets and status to Slack/Notion, which slows approvals. Aspect’s agents and integrations target those routine steps so staff can focus on creative decisions aspect.inc, YC.
• Media asset managers / storage/IT operators: They struggle to index large, siloed libraries and keep metadata current across NAS, cloud, and media managers. Aspect’s frame‑level indexing and cross‑tool sync aim to create a more searchable, actionable library aspect.inc, YC.
• Project managers at multi‑project post houses or VFX shops: Coordinating handoffs and catching late issues (audio drops, missing frames, outdated graphics) causes schedule slips and expensive fixes. Aspect’s automated QC checks and revision comparisons aim to catch problems before human review aspect.inc, YC.

How would they acquire their first 10, 50, and 100 customers

• First 10: Run hands‑on 4–6 week paid pilots with known post houses and in‑house teams, include live onboarding and deliverables (timeline XML into the customer’s editor), and measure one clear ROI metric (e.g., time saved on clip search/status updates) to convert aspect.inc, YC.
• First 50: Turn pilot wins into short case studies and targeted outbound to similar shops and corporate teams; host weekly demos for assistant/editor communities and lean on low‑friction integrations (Slack/Notion/ClickUp) plus a 1‑click onboarding playbook and standard pilot contract aspect.inc, YC.
• First 100: Add channel partnerships (MAM vendors, NAS/cloud providers, post‑house networks) and a light enterprise motion for multi‑team rollouts with volume discounts and implementation SLAs; pursue 1–2 high‑visibility NLE integrations or conference partnerships to drive inbound and enable self‑serve trials aspect.inc, YC.

What is the rough total addressable market

Top-down context:

Near‑term software TAM aligns with media‑asset/post‑production workflow software and is in the low‑single‑digit billions today, with multiple reports placing MAM/DAM around ~$6–8B in the mid‑2020s TBRC, MRF, R&M, GMI. The broader post‑production services market—the budgets that fund these workflows—is much larger (~$25B+) Market.us.

Bottom-up calculation:

Starting from ~3,700 U.S. post‑production businesses IBISWorld and extrapolating globally (plus in‑house brand/corporate teams), a working estimate of ~25–35k potential buying teams at $10k–$50k/year in workflow software implies a $0.3–$1.5B near‑term wedge TAM for Aspect’s current product, a subset of the broader ~$6–8B MAM/DAM market.

Assumptions:

• Global post‑production business count is ~3–4× the U.S. count; plus 10–20k in‑house brand/corporate teams with similar needs.
• Average annual software spend per team for indexing/search/QC/workflow is ~$10k–$50k, varying by size and library scale.
• This bottom‑up focuses on post‑production teams (Aspect’s wedge) and excludes adjacent DAM/MAM buyers in other industries.

Who are some of their notable competitors

• Frame.io: Cloud review, versioning, and approvals for editors and stakeholders; overlaps on keeping projects and comments in sync and exporting to editing tools, but centers on review/approval rather than frame‑level indexing or autonomous QC/rough‑cut assembly Frame.io.
• Avid MediaCentral: Enterprise media‑workflow and asset‑management platform used by broadcast/post teams to centralize media and metadata; heavy, end‑to‑end system rather than an AI agent layer that sits on top of existing storage Avid.
• CatDV (Squarebox / Quantum): Established MAM for cataloging, tagging, and workflow automation across large libraries; strong on orchestration and search, but not positioned as autonomous agents that assemble or review edits frame‑by‑frame CatDV.
• Veritone (aiWARE): AI platform for indexing/transcription and metadata extraction at enterprise scale; broad, multi‑industry analysis layer rather than a post‑specific agent that plugs into editors’ handoffs and PM tools Veritone.
• Descript / Runway: Creator‑oriented AI editing tools that speed early editing and can export timelines; geared to editors and small teams, not a storage‑level agent that indexes entire post libraries and automates project status and QC across enterprise tools Descript, Runway.