Yes — a free plan lets you compose multi-scene motion graphics with voiceover and captions. Paid plans (Creator $29.90/mo, Pro $99.90/mo) add AI image, video, and sound generation and remove the watermark.

Can I edit the video after it's generated?

Yes. Onda produces an editable scene graph, so you can change any element — text, color, timing, layout — without re-generating the whole video.

Do I need video-editing or design skills?

No. You describe the video in plain language and an AI director composes it — there is no timeline to learn.

A finished MP4 in any aspect ratio — vertical, square, or widescreen — for social, ads, and product videos.

Is there a watermark?

Free exports include a small watermark; Creator and Pro plans remove it.

Onda vs Jitter: AI-from-a-prompt vs manual keyframes

Onda and Jitter approach motion design from opposite ends. Jitter is a browser-based motion-design tool where you build animations on a canvas with templates and manual keyframing. Onda is an AI motion-graphics generator: you describe a scene and an AI director composes it into an editable scene graph. Both produce on-brand motion graphics. The difference is whether you author the motion by hand or generate it from a prompt and refine.

This is a fair comparison, not a takedown. For some teams and some jobs, Jitter is the better fit. For others, Onda is. Here's how to decide.

The core difference: author by hand vs. generate then edit

Jitter gives you a direct-manipulation canvas. You place elements, set keyframes, pick from templates, and tune the timing yourself. The mental model is a designer's tool — you're in control of every property, and you do the work of making the motion.
Onda starts from a prompt. An AI director composes the video as a deterministic scene graph, and a source-available engine renders it to a real MP4. You don't keyframe; you describe, then refine the elements the agent produced.

Neither is "more powerful" in the abstract. They put the effort in different places: Jitter on hand-authoring, Onda on generation plus editing.

Starting point

With Jitter, you start from a blank canvas or a template and build up. That's familiar and precise if you think like a motion designer and have time to compose.

With Onda, you start from a sentence. "A 30-second feature announcement, bold kinetic headline, three callouts, brand violet." You get an editable first draft in one step, then change what's wrong. If you don't have a motion designer — or the time to be one — that's the faster road to a first cut.

Editing and control

Both tools keep things editable, but in different ways.

Jitter: you edit because you built it — every layer and keyframe is yours to adjust on the canvas.
Onda: the generated output is a scene graph of named, addressable elements, so you edit by changing one element at a time. Change one word and only that word changes; the camera move, colors, and timing hold. You refine by chatting with the agent or manipulating elements directly — the agent and UI are at parity. There's no timeline to learn.

If you want hands-on, frame-level control of the craft, Jitter's canvas is built for that. If you want to skip the building and go straight to refining, Onda's generate-then-edit loop is built for that.

Brand, formats, and consistency

Both handle on-brand work and multiple aspect ratios — motion design tools generally do. Onda's angle is that brand and copy are first-class editable elements in the scene graph, and the agent reframes the same composition to wide, square, or vertical for you. Jitter's angle is templates plus a canvas where you arrange brand assets yourself and resize across formats.

A quick decision guide

Choose Jitter when:

you (or a designer on your team) want to build motion by hand on a canvas
you value direct, frame-level control over every keyframe and property
you're comfortable composing from a blank canvas or a template
the craft of authoring the animation is part of the point

Choose Onda when:

you want to start from a prompt and get an editable draft in one step
you don't have a motion designer or the time to keyframe by hand
you need word-level editable copy, exact brand, and easy reframing
you'd rather refine what an agent composed than build from scratch

A useful test: if "I'll build it" sounds appealing, Jitter fits. If "I'll describe it and then fix it" sounds appealing, Onda fits.

They're not mutually exclusive

Some teams will keep a hand-authoring tool for bespoke, craft-heavy pieces and use an AI generator for the high-volume, recurring work — feature announcements, social cuts, demos. Use each where its strength lies: manual control where the craft matters, generation-plus-edit where speed and volume matter.

Onda at a glance

Onda Studio: describe a scene, an AI director composes it into a deterministic scene graph, and a source-available engine renders a real, editable MP4. Change one word and only that changes. Plans: Free, Creator $29.90/mo, Pro $99.90/mo — see pricing. Or browse the editable templates.

The takeaway

Onda vs. Jitter isn't a question of which makes better motion graphics — both can. It's a question of how you want to work: author by hand on a canvas, or generate from a prompt and refine the elements. Pick by the workflow that fits your team.

If generate-then-edit is your style, try it at studio.onda.video.