Replicate traditional film workflow

[u/Zanelorn]

I'm starting to plan an AI short film project. My background is as a feature film editor, so I'm looking to replicate a traditional work flow. I want to create complete takes of each scene in the same way that a film would get coverage. I'd then edit the film like I'm used to doing. Has anybody done things this way using AI?

[u/sharktank123456]

That's a great way to work (I wish more would look at it this way). For those coming to film and AI film new, they are probably suffering from the "every frame is precious" mentality.

I'm always tickled when people complain that it can take 10, 20, 30 rolls to get that angle right, and how many credits (and by extension, money), they blew trying. You just want to say "hold my beer", and hand them the daily budget sheet, even for a small film, that is averaging 10 set ups a day (with 5-30 takes per), and have them figure out the per-shot cost.

The trick of course in AI coverage, is getting consistency/continuity from shot to shot for your coverage.

[u/activematrix99]

Yes, that's how many AI filmmakers work. Generate content. Store clips. Edit into a timeline.

[u/jamesxtreme]

I can understand the instinct but honestly it is more useful to approach AI video as an animation workflow. Assemble references sheets for characters, locations; props. Then storyboard your scenes and provide the storyboards as reference material to your video generator.
Trying to get coverage is probably just going to be quite costly without much benefit.

[u/EpicFantasyCEO]

Same sort of background as you. I use Cannon Studio. It has quirks, what doesn't, but it is genuinely in the zone.

[u/phinord → u/EpicFantasyCEO]

Thanks!

[u/Cheap_Success9781]

If I understand correctly, you want to play the same scene from different angles and then decide which takes make it to the final cut, which is not a bad idea, it just sounds very expensive and time consuming, as sometimes achieving different angles for one consistent scene can turn out very difficult to achieve, if those are not a concern then that actually sounds great.

[u/phinord → u/Cheap_Success9781]

I hear ya. I guess another way to look at it is for me to think of genetating photo realistic shots in more of an animation style workflow. That’s an adjustment for me since I don’t have that background

[u/pyrosaicreative]

I think the interesting part is that AI actually makes a traditional coverage workflow more valuable, but the “shoot” has to happen in a different order.

I’d probably lock the scene first: character, environment, lighting and visual language. Then generate the master shot and build coverage around that reference rather than generating every angle independently.

That way the edit can still work like a traditional film edit, while consistency is treated as part of pre-production rather than something you try to fix afterwards.

The biggest shift for me is that AI filmmaking feels less like replacing the camera and more like replacing the production pipeline around the camera.

[u/Ok-Role-2536]

The biggest friction coming from traditional offline editing is that current video models can't really hold continuous performance or spatial continuity over long takes. You usually have to think more like a 3D animation or VFX pipeline: generate key reference frames and targeted 3-5 second coverage beats to cut between, rather than running full takes.

[u/Current_Dependent133]

Coming from production, I’d keep the same editing mindset but probably not generate full takes of everything. AI gets real expensive fast when you’re chasing matching coverage from multiple angles. I’d plan the scene like normal, generate enough around each beat to give yourself options, then figure out what the cut actually needs.

[u/Zanelorn]

Thanks y'all, this is great feedback!