6 Alternatives to Submittable for Creative Industries | Dapple

Introduction

Submittable has long been the default platform for managing submissions, applications, and awards. Founded in 2010, it built its reputation early within the literary magazine community and grew into a robust, comprehensive system that now dominates the market.

Over time, however, Submittable has shifted its focus away from the arts and toward corporate grants, CSR programmes, social impact initiatives, and large foundations. That shift has come at a cost: reduced flexibility, rising prices, and a move away from creator-first thinking. While the platform offers a wide range of enterprise-grade features, most are unnecessary for small-to-mid sized creative organisations—and they come with a hefty price tag. Today, Submittable is among the most expensive options available.

Put simply, if you work in the creative industries—arts organisations, prizes, awards, festivals, publishers, or small-to-mid sized cultural bodies—it's often no longer the right fit.

Below are six strong alternatives to Submittable, each with different strengths depending on your scale, budget, and priorities.

*All data in this article is based on publicly available information and reviews for these sites as of February 2026.

1. Dapple - The Creator's Choice

Best for: Modern creative organisations that want flexibility without enterprise bloat.

Ideal users: Creative-based calls for entry, awards, prizes, art programmes, exhibitions, fellowships, residencies, publishers and creative teams.

Dapple is a modern, sleek alternative in a sea of legacy software. It's built from the ground up for creative organisations—not retrofitted from corporate grants or academic admissions tools.

Where older platforms prioritise compliance and scale, Dapple prioritises creators, reviewers, and real-world creative workflows. The result is software that feels contemporary, flexible, and built for the creative user.

What Sets Dapple Apart

• Built with creatives in mind
  Designed around how artists, writers, photographers, and judges actually submit and review work—not how procurement teams think about forms.

• Enterprise-grade features at accessible pricing
  Powerful workflows, automations, and review tools without locking creative orgs into eye-watering annual contracts.

• Highly flexible setup
  Works well for:

  • Awards & prizes
  • Open calls
  • Exhibitions & showcases
  • Editorial or publishing submissions
  • Multi opportunity

• Visual-first experience
  Image-forward layouts and clean presentation make Dapple especially strong for:

  • Art & photography awards
  • Judge & reviewer experience
  • Design competitions
  • Image-based exhibitions and selections

• Modern, intuitive interface
  No legacy UI, no clunky admin panels. Easy for submitters, reviewers, and internal teams alike.

Things to Be Aware Of

• Not designed for public voting or popularity-based contests
• Best suited to juried, curated, or panel-led decision-making

Bottom line:

If Submittable feels expensive, bloated, or no longer aligned with the creative world, Dapple offers a genuinely modern alternative—one that balances power, flexibility, and fairness without losing its soul.

2. Zealous - The Arts Awards

Best for: Awards, competitions, and talent-led programmes

Ideal users: Creative awards, innovation prizes, talent discovery initiatives

Zealous has carved out a strong reputation in awards management, particularly in creative and innovation-led spaces. It offers polished workflows for submissions, judging, and shortlisting.

Pros

• Strong focus on awards and competitions
• Robust judging tools and workflows
• A discovery platform
• Good reputation among award organisers

Cons

• Pricing can rise quickly as you scale
• Less flexible for non-award use cases (e.g. open-ended submissions)
• Some creative orgs may find it slightly "process-heavy"

Bottom line:

A solid, professional choice for structured awards—but less flexible if your needs go beyond formal competitions.

3. Award Force - The Enterprise Awards

Best for: Large-scale, high-volume awards

Ideal users: National or international awards with complex judging panels

Award Force is one of the most established players in the awards software space. It's powerful, feature-rich, and built to handle scale.

Pros

• Robust and reliable
• Handles complex judging, scoring, and panel structures
• Trusted by major global awards

Cons

• Expensive compared to most alternatives
• Can feel overwhelming for smaller creative organisations
• Less emphasis on creator experience
• Legacy platform with dated UI.

Bottom line:

Excellent for big, high-budget awards—but often overkill (and overpriced) for smaller creative teams.

4. Evalato - The European Solution

Best for: Awards that prioritise feedback and scoring

Ideal users: EU based design, innovation, and professional competitions

Evalato positions itself around evaluation quality, structured scoring, feedback loops, and transparency in judging.

Pros

• Strong scoring and feedback features
• Intuitive judging interface
• Good analytics and reporting

Cons

• Less tailored to literary or arts submissions
• Customisation can be limited
• Pricing not friendly for small orgs

Bottom line:

A good fit for evaluation-heavy competitions, but not the most creative-industry-first platform.

5. SlideRoom - The Academic Solution

Best for: Academic and portfolio-based submissions

Ideal users: Universities, art schools, academic programmes

SlideRoom is widely used in education and admissions, particularly where portfolios are involved.

Pros

• Strong portfolio and media handling
• Familiar to many students and institutions
• Reliable infrastructure

Cons

• Not designed for awards or creative publishing
• Limited flexibility outside academic contexts
• Legacy platform with dated UI
• Charge fees for each applicant.

Bottom line:

Useful in academic settings—but not the best choice for independent creative organisations or prizes.

6. Submit.com - The Government Solution

Best for: Government bodies and public sector programmes

Ideal users: Councils, regulators, public agencies with strict compliance needs

Submit.com is fundamentally different from the other platforms on this list. It is built first and foremost to meet government and public sector requirements, with a strong emphasis on compliance, security, auditability, and risk management.

While this makes it a solid choice for highly regulated environments, it also means Submit.com is the least suitable option for creative industries.

Pros

• Strong compliance and security credentials
• Designed to meet strict regulatory and governance requirements
• Reliable for formal, process-heavy application workflows

Cons

• Not designed for creative submissions or awards
• Rigid workflows with limited flexibility
• Poor fit for visual, portfolio-based, or artistic work
• Creator and judge experience is secondary to compliance needs
• Typically over-engineered for small-to-mid creative organisations

Bottom line:

Submit.com excels in government and public sector contexts—but for creative organisations, its compliance-first design feels restrictive and out of step. If you're running arts awards, exhibitions, publishing submissions, or festivals, there are far better, more creator-friendly options available.

Quick Comparison

Choosing the Right Submittable Alternative

If you're deciding between these platforms, ask yourself a few key questions:

• Are we serving creators, or administering corporate programmes?
• Do we value affordability and transparency, or enterprise scale above all else?
• Is the submitter experience as important as admin efficiency?

For many creative organisations, the shift away from Submittable isn't about features—it's about values, trust, and sustainability.

If your work lives in literature, art, culture, or creativity, choosing a platform that understands that world isn't a nice-to-have. It's essential.

"Running our awards through Dapple was one of the best decisions we made in the whole process. They helped us get set up in a couple of hours, our entrants commented on how easy the process was, we found it so easy to manage and our judges loved it! Would highly recommend."

— Kayleigh M, Awards Manager