'AI video editing is here.' That was the headline of a podcast I listened to recently, from a big industry name. The guest ran through a full stack of AI tools, one for each stage of the edit, and explained how video editing is now an AI job. I'm familiar with every tool he mentioned. They each do a part of the workflow, if you choose to use them. I've added up roughly what those subscriptions cost, and in reality I don't use all of them, because they're often more faff than they save.

Then came the bombshell

Right at the end, he dropped this: full disclosure, he still has an editor he sends work to, because as great as AI is, filming a video and handing it off entirely to someone is simply quicker.

There it is. After a whole episode on how AI replaced the editor, the punchline is that he still uses one.

AI is a tool, not a replacement yet

I don't say this to knock AI. I love using it in video editing, it has made more things possible, and I use it daily. I also believe it's only a matter of time before AI takes over much of the traditional editing role, and that role will look different when it does. But it isn't there yet, and pretending otherwise costs brands money and quality.

How I actually use AI in editing

Use the tools to get your first draft or rough cut. Give your editor a clear time and cost expectation against the quality you want. Decide together which tools genuinely help the workflow, and which create rework. Weigh the cost of the software against the time it actually saves. As an example, a tool that makes rough cuts by editing off the script sounds great, but hand that to a skilled editor and it often makes life harder, because they end up undoing it and working across an extra piece of software outside their edit suite.

AI is daily practice in how we work. It just isn't a replacement for judgement, taste, or a good editor. The brands getting value from it are the ones using it to remove the grunt work, not to remove the people who make the work good.