Most corporate video is commissioned, admired once, and then either buried on a page nobody visits or dropped onto a homepage where it destroys load speed. We produce video against a brief that names where it will run, and deliver it in formats and sizes that let it actually be used — indexed, marked up, and lazy-loaded rather than blocking the page.
Corporate, brand, product, and explainer video plus motion graphics, for US businesses. Produced by Maxima and shipped by Axiom into the site it was made for.
An autoplaying background film is the single most common cause of a failing Largest Contentful Paint. Google publishes lazy-loading techniques for exactly this; the fix is in how the video is delivered, not in abandoning it.
Without a thumbnail, a transcript, and VideoObject markup, a video is invisible to search. Google documents what it needs to index video, and most corporate films are published without any of it.
Video made without naming the audience, the placement, and the action it should produce ends up beautiful and unusable. The brief decides the format, the length, and the aspect ratio before anyone books a crew.
A single three-minute film is one asset. The same shoot can yield the film, a sixty-second cut, vertical social edits, and stills — if that is planned before the shoot rather than requested afterwards.
Attention on a product page is measured in seconds. Motion graphics that explain the thing in thirty seconds usually outperform the film that explains it properly in three minutes.
Video for a landing page, a paid social ad, and a sales deck are different cuts with different aspect ratios and different first three seconds. Deciding that afterwards means re-editing or, more often, not using it.
From the brief through to the file formats that actually ship, in the places the video was made for.
Audience, placement, message, and intended action agreed first — the document that determines format, length, and aspect ratio.
Written and visualised before production, so the expensive day is spent executing rather than deciding.
Corporate, brand, product, and testimonial filming, scoped to what the brief actually requires rather than to a package.
Explainer and product animation for the cases where filming is the wrong tool — often faster, cheaper, and easier to update.
The main film plus short cuts, vertical social edits, and stills, planned into the shoot rather than requested after it.
Compressed, poster-framed, and lazy-loadable so the video can sit on a page without breaking its Core Web Vitals.
Captions for the majority who watch without sound, and transcripts that give search engines something to index.
VideoObject markup and placement handled with Axiom, so the video is discoverable rather than merely present.
The production is rarely the problem. The film is fine. What goes wrong is everything that happens once it is delivered as a single large file with no plan attached.
It gets dropped onto a homepage, where an autoplaying background video becomes the page's Largest Contentful Paint and the Core Web Vitals fail. Or it is published without a thumbnail, transcript, or VideoObject markup, so search engines cannot index it. Or it exists only as one three-minute cut, which means it cannot run as an ad, cannot run vertically, and cannot open a sales deck.
So we treat delivery as part of production. The brief names where the video will run before a crew is booked, the shoot is planned to yield several cuts, and the files arrive encoded, captioned, marked up, and ready to lazy-load. Video that cannot be deployed is an expense, not an asset.
Corporate and brand film, product video, explainer and testimonial video, and motion graphics and animation. Which one is right is a brief question rather than a taste one — animation is frequently faster, cheaper, and far easier to update than filming, particularly for anything explaining a product that changes.
It will if it is embedded badly, and that is the usual outcome. An autoplaying hero video is the most common cause of a failing Largest Contentful Paint. Google documents lazy-loading techniques for video specifically; we encode, poster-frame, and defer so the video loads without blocking the page. The fix is in the delivery, not in giving up the video.
A thumbnail, a transcript, and VideoObject structured data, plus a page whose content actually matches the video. Google publishes what it needs to index and display video, and most corporate films are published with none of it — which is why they get views only from people already on the page.
More than you will be offered by default. A single shoot can yield the main film, a sixty-second cut, vertical edits for social, and usable stills — but only if that is decided before the shoot, because it changes framing and coverage. Asking afterwards means re-editing within whatever was captured.
Yes. Most social video is watched without sound, captions materially improve completion rates, and the transcript gives search engines text to index. It is one of the few additions that improves accessibility, engagement, and discoverability at the same time.
Film when the value is in real people, real premises, or real craft — testimonials, culture, and physical work. Animate when you are explaining something abstract, something that changes often, or something that does not photograph well. Animation also costs less to revise, which matters more than it sounds for product content.
Quoted per project after the brief, because a single-location interview day and a multi-location brand film with a scripted narrative are different orders of cost. The brief is worth doing properly first — it is what determines nearly everything else about the number.
Tell us where you want to rank. We'll send back a free audit and a clear plan to get you there.