Watch your own footage back and count the sentences.
The first one is throat clearing. The second sets something up. The third is usually the one where you forgot the camera and said the thing you actually meant, and it is sitting where almost nobody will reach it.
That single observation is worth more than any editing technique, and it is the beginning of the only rule that matters here.
Editing UGC is subtraction
Every other kind of video editing is a craft of addition. You build a sequence, you layer sound, you design the look. UGC is the one format where the work runs the other way.
What adding signals
Music under the whole thing. A transition between every shot. Text on screen for every sentence, in a font you chose. Each of those is a reasonable creative decision, and together they broadcast one message: somebody worked on this.
That is the problem. The format's entire value is that it looks like a person telling somebody something, and effort is the visible difference between a person and an advert. Not quality, effort. A rough video that somebody clearly made in one take is more persuasive than a smooth one, and the smooth one costs you more hours to produce.
So the first pass should remove rather than build. Cut the throat clearing, cut the second run at the same sentence, cut the part where you explain what you are about to show, and see what survives.
Move the best line to the front
The convention that the opening decides everything is repeated so often that it has stopped being useful advice. Here is the useful version: you already have a strong opening, it is just in the wrong place.
Take the sentence you would quote if somebody asked what the video says, and put it first. Then let the context follow. Viewers accept explanation after a strong statement and abandon explanation that comes before one, which is exactly backwards from how people naturally speak, and that gap is where most footage is lost.
| What you added in the edit | What it was meant to do | What it actually signals |
|---|---|---|
| Music under everything | Set a mood | This was produced |
| A transition between shots | Look finished | Somebody had software |
| Text for every sentence | Aid comprehension | Nobody trusts the speaking |
| A logo at the end | Close it properly | The advert admits itself |
| Burned in captions, plain | Make it watchable on mute | Nothing, this one is free |
The last row is the only addition that costs you nothing in credibility, and it is the one creators most often skip.
The Portuguese caption trap
Here is the local part, and it catches people who otherwise do everything right.
Automatic captions default to the wrong Portuguese
Most editing tools and platforms generate captions in Brazilian Portuguese unless told otherwise. The spelling differs, some vocabulary differs, and the result is a video shot here, spoken here, and captioned as though it came from somewhere else.
Nobody will complain. A Portuguese viewer simply registers, without being able to say why, that the video is slightly not theirs, and a brand reviewing it may not notice at all until somebody in their team does.
Read the captions before export, every time. It takes a minute, it is invisible when done and quietly damaging when skipped, and it is the single most common avoidable defect in delivered Portuguese UGC.
The same applies to any text you burn in yourself. Check the spelling conventions rather than trusting habit, particularly if you consume a lot of Brazilian content, which most people here do.
What to deliver
Deliver one clean version and say what it is.
A master with no music, no logo, and captions that can be switched off if the brand wants their own. If the brief asked for a version with music, deliver both and name them clearly, because a brand that receives one file with music baked in has lost the ability to use it in any context where music is wrong.
Keep the unused takes for a month. The most common request after delivery is not a change to the edit, it is a different sentence from the same afternoon, and creators who deleted everything have to reshoot for a request that should have taken five minutes.
Keep reading
- August Will Look Like Your Business Is Failing
- In Portugal, Your Price Is Public
- The Only Thing You Cannot Fix Afterwards
- Most UGC Briefs Are a Mood Board and a Deadline
- The complete UGC guide for Portugal
Publish your creator profile →
Frequently asked questions
Should I ever use music?
When the brief asks, or when the video has no speech. Under a talking video it competes with the only thing you were paid to capture.
How long should the finished piece be?
As long as the useful part, and no longer. Cutting to hit a duration is how the good sentence gets trimmed for the sake of the format.
Do brands want the raw files?
Some do, and it is worth asking rather than assuming. Sending raw footage unasked implies the edit is negotiable, and sending none when they expected it delays the whole thing.
Is it worth learning a proper editing tool?
For UGC, only slightly. The skills that matter are choosing which sentence goes first and being willing to cut your own good material, and neither of those lives in the software.