Brief before generation
Creative intent and success criteria are agreed before production begins.
Explore. Create. Refine. A clear decision at every stage.
Not sure which AI video model to choose? Explore the options, then let your brief guide the decision.
Catalog scope: models listed by Magnific, including specialist motion and talking-image tools. Availability depends on the platform and plan.
View the provider’s current catalog ↗Dialogue and ambience? Explore Veo or Kling. A reference-led story? Explore Seedance. A recorded performance? Look at Motion Control or Act Two. An illustrated image that should move? Try Live Illustrations.
These are starting points for a test shot, not a ranking. We select the final workflow around your style, continuity requirements, budget and deadline.
Best-use suggestions are Adrilyn’s editorial guidance based on published capabilities, not comparative benchmarks. A model generates shots; direction, editing, sound and quality checks turn them into a finished film. Credits, retries and finishing all affect the final quote.
Let us help choose your production workflow ↗Ten stages, with scope and reviews agreed around your brief.

Objectives, audience, platform, references, deliverables, budget and timeline.
Concept routes, narrative approach, style, tone and visual strategy.
Script, shot list, storyboard and animatic where required.
Characters, environments, keyframes, styleframes and reference packs.
The right video, image and audio tools for each shot and quality class.
Controlled production, iteration, version tracking and shot approvals.
Narration, original music, sound effects and atmosphere built to the edit.
Assembly, timing, sound mix, grading polish, upscaling and mastering.
Continuity, visual artefacts, brand accuracy, technical specifications and revisions.
Final exports, platform variants, agreed source assets and project archive.
AI can help explore possibilities and produce visual material. It does not replace the need for a clear idea, thoughtful direction or careful review.
We discuss the intended use of assets, references and any brand restrictions at the start. Timelines and review rounds are defined around the actual project, not a one-size-fits-all promise.
Creative intent and success criteria are agreed before production begins.
Stills and draft motion prove composition and movement first.
Hero shots use premium models; routine shots do not carry premium cost.
Characters, products and environments are fixed early to keep them consistent.
Technical flaws are corrected at no cost; changes to approved creative are scope revisions.
Decisions, versions and scope changes are recorded so production stays under control.
Characters and people, worlds and objects, motion, brand accuracy, audio and technical delivery are checked against a written standard before you see a single frame.
You choose a quality class: Efficient, Studio, Cinema or Flagship. We choose the right tool for each shot by output quality, commercial terms and cost.
For an independent team, AI assistance can make early exploration more accessible. For a large studio, it can help selected tasks move through an established pipeline. The meaningful comparison is the same brief, the same delivery standard and the full cost of getting there.
A study of 5,172 support agents found a 15% average increase in issues resolved per hour with AI assistance. This measures a support workflow, not animation output.
Brynjolfsson, Li & Raymond · revised 2024 ↗A 2023 field experiment reported faster completion on consulting tasks within AI’s capabilities. This is evidence for task-level potential, not a forecast for film delivery.
Dell’Acqua et al. · 2023 working paper ↗Neither result establishes an animation cost-saving rate. Run a comparable pilot, count rejected generations and artist cleanup, and retain the workflow only if approved output improves.
Discuss a production pilot ↗Potential applications include pitch visuals, alternative treatments, rough storyboards and temporary voice tracks. Measure time to an approved concept, cost per approved asset and how many usable directions fit the development budget.
Potential applications include previs exploration, assisted cleanup, asset search and localisation drafts. Measure throughput, review queues and integration costs. Preserve artist control, continuity checks and production approvals.
| Production KPI | Conventional baseline | AI-assisted comparison |
|---|---|---|
| Cost per approved second | Total production spend ÷ approved final seconds | Include tools, generation retries, artists, sound, review and cleanup in the same calculation. |
| Time to approval | Elapsed days from brief to approved delivery | Count generation, queue time, revisions and sign-off—not just render time. |
| Creative exploration | Usable concepts reviewed per development hour | Count distinct, brief-compliant concepts; exclude duplicates and unusable drafts. |
| Throughput | Approved shots per artist-week | Use comparable shot complexity, resolution and review criteria. |
| First-pass acceptance | Shots approved on first review ÷ shots reviewed | Check whether faster generation increases correction work or continuity errors. |
| Versioning & localisation | Cost and hours per approved language or format | Include translation, performance, lip-sync, layout and human review. |
| Production readiness | Assets passing agreed technical and usage checks | Apply the same checks to AI-assisted output; track failures and remediation time. |
Assume a conventional task takes 100 hours at ₹1,000/hour: ₹1,00,000. An AI-assisted version takes 70 hours including review and cleanup, plus ₹10,000 in incremental tool and generation costs: ₹80,000.
Illustrative net cost reduction: 20%.
Labour time falls 30%, but cost falls 20%. Another 20 cleanup hours would erase the saving entirely. Released staff time becomes capacity; it is not automatically a cash saving.
Suggested pilot: compare matched shots against the same brief and quality criteria. Record labour, tool spend, retries, approval time and final usable output. Agree success thresholds before starting. These are proposed measures, not Adrilyn client results; no independently verified Adrilyn production benchmark is presented here. Research reviewed 20 September 2026.
Bring the idea. We’ll build the next step together.