KIMP sell unlimited video requests with two active at a time. We sell a published ceiling of 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos for $2,000. The difference is not the word unlimited, it is the throughput underneath it.
Everything below about KIMP comes from their own public pages, read on 24 September 2026. Check it yourself
KIMP run one of the better known unlimited subscriptions in this category, and I want to give them credit for something before I compare anything, which is that they publish their real capacity instead of hiding behind the word unlimited.
On their site, read on 24 September 2026, KIMP Video lists a regular price of USD 1397 a month, currently discounted to USD 698.50 under a promotion described as 50% off the first four months, and the plan includes unlimited requests, unlimited revisions, unlimited brands, no contract, a 24 hour turnaround, two active requests, a dedicated video team and a dedicated project manager. There is a seven day free trial and you can pause a subscription for a flat $19.95 a month.
Then, in their own FAQ, they say the part that actually matters, which is that your dedicated team keeps two tasks in progress at any time and allocates two to two and a half hours each business day to completing your requests, and that each extra subscription adds another two to two and a half hours.
That is an honest number and it lets you do real arithmetic, so let us do it, because it is the whole comparison, right. We publish $2,000 a month for up to 200 short-form videos and 30 long-form videos with thumbnails included, produced by close to 50 editors in-house in Dubai.
Their column is what KIMP publishes, ours is what we publish. Where they do not state something, the row says so instead of guessing.
| Pixel Samy Studio | KIMP | |
|---|---|---|
| Published pricing | $2,000 a month entry point | KIMP Video at USD 1397 a month regular, promoted at USD 698.50 for the first four months |
| How volume is defined | Up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos a month | Unlimited requests, with 2 active requests at any time |
| Throughput they publish | Capacity sized by a fixed in-house team, not by hours per day | 2 to 2.5 hours of editor time each business day per subscription |
| Turnaround | 24 hour turnaround on the podcast line, built around your calendar elsewhere | 24 hour turnaround |
| Revisions | Included, handled by the editors who know the account | Unlimited revisions |
| Where the team sits | Close to 50 in-house editors in Dubai | Not stated on their site |
| Scope beyond editing | Editing, packaging and thumbnails, not animation or motion design | Includes animation, motion graphics, GIFs and UI/UX animations |
Unlimited requests never means unlimited output, and the good news with KIMP is that you do not have to guess, because they publish the number themselves.
Two to two and a half hours of editor time each business day, on a month with about twenty one business days, is somewhere between forty two and fifty two hours of editing. That is the actual product. Everything else is queueing.
So what does fifty hours buy. A properly cut short-form video, meaning selected, trimmed, captioned, colour handled and checked, is rarely under thirty minutes of real work and often closer to an hour once revisions land. A long-form edit from a raw recording is several hours. Put a realistic mix through fifty hours and you land somewhere around fifty to seventy finished short pieces, or a much smaller number if long-form is in the mix.
That is a perfectly respectable amount of work for the money and I am not sneering at it. The catch here is only that it is a different order of magnitude from publishing every day on four platforms, and if that is your plan, the honest move is to compare hours to hours rather than the word unlimited to a number.
The two active request rule is the thing I would test hardest if I were buying, because it is invisible on a quiet week and decisive on a busy one.
On a normal week it barely matters. You send a request, it comes back, you send the next. Fine. On the week of a launch, when you want eight clips, two long cuts and a set of ad variants by Thursday, a queue that processes two things at a time becomes the whole story, and no amount of goodwill from the team changes the arithmetic.
KIMP have an answer for this and it is a fair one, which is to stack subscriptions, since each additional one adds another two to two and a half hours a day and another pair of active slots. So the model scales, it just scales in a way you buy in blocks.
Ours scales differently. There are close to fifty editors in the building, so a spike gets absorbed by putting more people on your account for a few days rather than by you buying a second plan, and that is really the argument for carrying a fixed team instead of matching cost to demand.
At the end of the day both are just ways of paying for capacity. One makes you decide in advance, the other makes us carry it.
I would rather point this out myself than have you find it later. KIMP Video includes animation, motion graphics, GIFs, template customisation and UI/UX animations, and their graphics plans cover a whole separate world of design work.
We do not do that. We are a production studio for founder-led and podcast content, which means footage, edits, clips, captions, titles and thumbnails, and if your next three months are mostly explainer animation and product motion, we are simply the wrong studio and you should go and buy the thing that does it.
What we do instead is narrower and deeper. Every clip gets packaged as a piece of published content, with the title and the thumbnail treated as one decision, because our sister studio ClickTheory does nothing but packaging for other people's channels all day, and that combination is what turns a good edit into something that actually gets clicked.
So the honest way to read this section is as a scope question, not a quality one. Broad and design-led, or narrow and volume-led. Pick the one that matches what is actually in your content calendar.
Let me put the two side by side using the published figures, and use their regular price rather than the promotion, because promotions end and you will be living on the regular price by month five.
KIMP Video at USD 1397 a month buying roughly forty two to fifty two editor hours. If that produces, say, sixty short pieces in a good month, you are at about twenty three dollars per finished piece, and you also have access to animation, which the number does not capture.
Ours at $2,000 with the ceiling genuinely used, so thirty long-form pieces and a hundred and fifty shorts, lands under twelve dollars per finished piece, with thumbnails included and no animation at all.
And the caveat I put on every one of these pages applies here too, which is that a ceiling you do not use is just a bigger number on an invoice. If you publish twenty pieces a month, our price per asset is worse than theirs and I am not going to pretend otherwise, so the only real question is what your calendar actually looks like, not which page sounds more impressive.
Four questions, and they work on any studio in this category, not just these two.
How many hours of editing do I actually get in a month. KIMP answer this openly, which is to their credit, and plenty of agencies will not.
What happens when I send a week of work in a day. Ask for the specific mechanism, whether that is stacking a plan, a queue position or extra people on the account.
Who edits my videos in month six, and are they employed by you. We say close to fifty editors in-house in Dubai. Some studios do not publish a location at all, which is not sinister, it is just a question you should ask directly.
And who decides the title and the thumbnail, because a perfect edit that nobody clicks is an expensive way to feel productive, and this is the part most subscriptions quietly leave to you.
The useful version of this page, because a comparison where the other studio never wins is a comparison nobody believes.
Go with KIMP when your video work is varied rather than voluminous, and especially when a decent share of it is animation, motion graphics or design-led rather than talking-head footage, because that scope is genuinely broader than ours and we would be the wrong call for it.
They are also the better fit if your requests arrive unpredictably, one week a product animation, the next a set of social cutdowns, since a flat fee with unlimited requests absorbs that unevenness comfortably and you never have to count anything.
Come to us when the bottleneck is volume, plainly, and when what you need every month is a lot of finished talking-head and podcast content rather than a steady trickle of varied design work.
Two active tasks with roughly fifty hours of editor time a month is a real constraint once you are trying to publish daily, and our answer to that is a published ceiling of 200 short-form and 30 long-form pieces for $2,000, backed by a team large enough to actually hit it, which is the model behind our content flywheel.
Vidchops publish $495 and $995 a month in credits, where one credit is one long-form video or four short-form videos. We publish $2,000 for up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form. Here is how those actually compare.
Video Husky publish the clearest spec sheet in this category, from $849 to $2,749 a month with weekly editor hours stated. We publish $2,000 for up to 200 short-form and 30 long-form videos. The split is cleaner than usual.
Vidpros sells you a dedicated editor's hours every workday. We sell a finished content operation with a volume ceiling on top. Here is the honest split, with both sets of published numbers.
Tasty Edits publish a clear price for every single video. We publish a monthly ceiling. The maths flips somewhere around fifteen pieces a month, and here is exactly where.
If you are comparing an unlimited plan against a ceiling, count what you actually published last month and we can work out which model fits in about five minutes. So yeah. That's my way of saying it.