AI Tools for Academic Libraries: AI-Assisted Video Creation and Editing

Evaluating AI creation and editing tools for video content

Posted on April 20, 2026 in OCUL's AI Tools for Academic Libraries

AI Tools for Academic Libraries is a bimonthly series from the Ontario Council of University Libraries (OCUL) and Choice that explores specific categories of AI tools through concise, practical evaluations. Authored by members of OCUL’s Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning (AIML) Team, the series helps academic library staff understand, assess, and thoughtfully integrate AI into their workflows. Learn more about this series and read past installments.

---

This article examines a selection of online AI‑assisted video creation and editing tools through an academic library lens. Rather than providing exhaustive product comparisons, the goal is to highlight the types of functionality currently available, illustrate the range of tools on offer, and identify where these tools may help libraries save time and effort. The tools reviewed were tested using their free tiers, which generally provide sufficient access to evaluate core workflows. Where relevant, this article also notes which features are restricted to paid versions.

A primary motivation for exploring these tools is their potential to reduce the time required to create engaging video content. Libraries increasingly rely on video to communicate with students and faculty for outreach, promotion, and instruction. Students tend to respond well to short, visually engaging videos. At the same time, producing these videos using traditional editing software can be time‑consuming. Learning professional video-editing suites requires a significant investment of time, and even after developing proficiency, producing, revising, and updating videos remains labor‑intensive. With time already a scarce resource, this can limit how frequently libraries can create or refresh video content.

AI‑assisted video tools aim to reduce this effort by automating or simplifying parts of the video production workflow. Features such as script generation, automated narration, captioning, and text‑based editing promise to lower the technical barrier to entry while shortening production timelines. This article focuses on introducing these AI features and evaluating whether they meaningfully support faster, more sustainable video creation in a library context.

---

Key AI Features in Video Creation Tools

Across platforms, several common AI‑driven features emerge:

• Script and video generation from prompts. Many tools allow users to generate scripts and, in some cases, complete videos based on written prompts. More detailed prompts generally produce better results. This functionality is useful for creating a starting point, though editing and refinement are often required to ensure accuracy, tone, and instructional clarity.
  
  
• Content upload. Several tools support uploading existing materials, such as PowerPoint slides, PDFs, web pages, or text documents. The AI uses this content to generate a video, helping retain key information while reducing the need to recreate content from scratch.
  
  
• AI voice and avatar generation. AI‑generated narration and presenter avatars can save time and remove the need for recording equipment or on‑camera presence. However, quality varies between free and paid tiers, and features such as voice cloning raise privacy and consent considerations.
  
  
• Captions, transcription, and translation. These tools can quickly generate captions and transcripts that can be edited as needed, supporting accessibility and multilingual communication.
  
  
• AI‑assisted editing and repurposing. Some platforms allow users to edit videos by working directly with a transcript or issuing text prompts rather than manipulating a traditional timeline. Other features focus on repurposing longer videos into shorter clips for outreach or social media. Quality varies, particularly in free versions.

A notable gap across all platforms is the lack of clear accessibility documentation. While vendors emphasize accessible outputs, such as captions and multilingual support, there is little information about the accessibility of the tools themselves. Claims of WCAG compliance or VPAT availability are largely absent, and documentation on screen‑reader compatibility or keyboard navigation is minimal.

Similarly, there is little transparency around the environmental impacts of these cloud‑based, AI‑assisted tools. While they promise efficiency and reduced production effort, vendors rarely disclose information about energy use, data-center reliance, or sustainability practices, making it difficult for libraries to assess environmental considerations alongside accessibility and privacy.

AI-Assisted Tools

The review focuses on free versions of each platform, which typically impose limitations such as watermarks, limits on AI credits, and restricted exports. These constraints can usually be removed through paid subscriptions, with most tools incurring monthly fees of approximately $30.

Two primary use cases guide the evaluation below: short promotional or outreach videos highlighting library services or initiatives, and instructional videos designed to support teaching and learning.

Lumen5

Lumen5 is often positioned as an accessible entry point into text‑to‑video creation, particularly for users working from existing documents or web pages. Its primary strength lies in its ability to quickly transform long‑form text, such as PDFs, presentations, or web pages, into structured, scene‑based videos with minimal setup. For both instructional reuse and promotional content, this automated approach produces a strong initial draft that can be refined rather than built from scratch.

In addition to working from uploaded content, Lumen5 allows users to generate videos from prompts or by recording audio and asking the tool to match visuals to narration. This workflow tends to be more effective for promotional videos than instructional ones, as less contextual information is available to guide structure. Manual editing is often necessary to replace or refine visuals.

Lumen5 offers a limited selection of free AI voices for text‑to‑speech narration and supports basic translation into multiple languages. These features are useful for rapid prototyping, though additional editing is typically required to meet instructional standards.

Fliki

Fliki is best characterized as an easy-to-use, narration‑driven video creation tool. It excels at converting scripts, blog posts, presentations, and web pages into videos using natural‑sounding AI voices. Users can begin from prompts or uploaded content, making it easy to experiment across formats.

The scene‑based editor is straightforward, allowing users to swap images, adjust narration, and make prompt‑based edits at the scene level. Fliki supports AI voices, optional avatars, and per‑scene captioning. Credits in the free version refresh monthly, making it easier to revisit the free version of the tool over time.

Visual customization is limited, branding features require a paid plan, and translation is not currently supported. Fliki is efficient for narration‑heavy explainers but less suited to visually complex productions.

HeyGen and Synthesia

HeyGen and Synthesia are avatar‑driven video creation platforms best suited for standardized, presenter‑style content, such as library instructional sessions and training modules. Both platforms support video creation from prompts, scripts, and uploaded materials, such as PDFs and PowerPoint files. They organize content into editable, scene‑based layouts.

Each tool combines AI voices and avatars with manual and prompt‑based editing. Script changes are reflected directly in AI‑generated narration, allowing for relatively quick iteration. Both platforms offer translation features, though free tiers impose strict usage caps.

Voice and avatar cloning, often positioned as major time‑saving features, are available only through paid plans. HeyGen distinguishes itself with its “mirror voice” feature, which captures pacing and tone from a recorded AI voice. While this can produce more natural‑sounding results, it adds setup time and limits script editing in the free version. Both platforms provide pre‑built templates, though custom branding requires paid subscriptions. Libraries considering voice or avatar cloning should review the privacy documentation carefully. HeyGen aligns with the EU–US Data Privacy Framework and provides a separate Biometric Information Privacy Notice, and Synthesia is compliant with GDPR.

Descript

Descript approaches video editing from a different perspective by treating video as editable text. Users upload media or generate transcripts and then edit the video by editing the text itself. This model can significantly reduce editing time, particularly when removing filler words or restructuring content.

Descript supports uploading videos, images, and presentations and includes an AI assistant called Underlord. Underlord can assist with script generation, editing suggestions, and extracting short clips, but it relies on consumable AI credits that are limited in the free version.

Compared to scene-based editors, the interface may feel less intuitive to users new to video editing. Descript offers flexibility and control, but it uses up credits quickly, limiting experimentation.

Key Takeaways

Several practical considerations emerged across tools:

• Prompt‑based video creation is effective for drafts but often relies on imagery requiring manual replacement.
  
  
• Most tools use scene‑based editing (similar to editing PowerPoint slides), which is more accessible for users unfamiliar with traditional timeline‑based editors.
  
  
• Script writing and image generation can consume AI credits. Drafting externally in a generative AI chatbot may preserve in‑tool credits.
  
  
• Voice and avatar cloning can save time but introduce privacy and data‑use risks.
  
  
• Automated translation can reduce production time, though dialect differences may affect authenticity.
  
  
• AI voices vary in quality and may be less appropriate for instructional contexts.

Summary of functionality

AI Functionality	Lumen 5	Fliki	HeyGen	Synthesia	Descript
Script and Video Generation from Prompts	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes, uses AI Credits.
Content Upload	PPT, PDF, TXT, web pages	PPT, web pages	PPT, PDF	PPT, PDF, DOC, TXT	PPT, videos
AI Voice and Avatar Generation	AI voice only	Both	Both	Both	AI voice only
Editing and Repurposing with AI	Both	Edits only	Edits only	Edits only	Both
Captions and Translation	Yes: captions  Yes: script and scenes	Yes: captions No translation	Yes: captions  Yes: limited to one minute	Yes: captions Yes: limited to one video	Yes: captions Yes: limited to AI credits
Templates and Branding	Basic templates only; branding requires paid version	Basic templates only; branding requires paid version	Basic templates only; branding requires paid version	Basic templates only; branding requires paid version	Basic templates only; branding requires paid version

---

Conclusion

AI‑assisted video tools streamline many aspects of content creation, from scripting and narration to editing and captioning. Free tiers offer sufficient functionality for evaluation but are typically limited by watermarks, usage caps, or export restrictions. Paid plans unlock more advanced capabilities, particularly for branding and large‑scale promotional use, and libraries planning to produce videos with these tools should expect to incur a recurring monthly cost. 

The accessibility of platform interfaces, privacy considerations around biometric features, and the largely undocumented environmental impacts of cloud‑based AI services remain important gaps. Ultimately, the most suitable tool will depend on a library’s goals, workflows, and risk tolerance. Thoughtful evaluation can help libraries determine where AI meaningfully saves time while aligning with institutional values, user expectations, and emerging concerns around digital sustainability.

Artificial Intelligence Disclosure Statement

Artificial Intelligence Tool: ChatGPT v.5 and Microsoft 365 Copilot (Carleton University paid institutional instance); 

Conceptualization: ChatGPT was used to discover and investigate various AI Video Editing tools

Writing—Review & Editing: Microsoft 365 Copilot was used in Word for consistent language and improved readability. 

Related Posts