Look at AI-assisted creative work through five questions: what was the intention, what did the maker choose, how was it edited, what does the process reveal, and what stays with the audience? This is an editorial discussion framework, not a festival judging policy.
1. What was the creative intention?
Describe the idea without naming a tool. A film might aim to create unease; a design might explore belonging. Ask what the maker wanted someone to notice or feel.
Write that intention in one sentence, then return to the work. Does the experience support the intention? A gap between intention and effect can be a useful starting point for discussion.
2. Which decisions shaped the result?
Ask about references, composition, selection, and rejected directions. Instead of asking only how many outputs were produced, ask why one was kept.
An attractive image is not automatically the right image for a project. The explanation of a choice can reveal the relationship between the maker’s taste and the piece’s purpose.
3. What happened during editing?
Look at sequence, rhythm, sound, and omissions. In a moving-image piece, a striking shot is only one part of the experience. What happens when it sits beside another shot?
For design or image series, ask which variations serve the idea and which distract from it. Consistency is a decision to examine, rather than a rule to apply without context.
4. What does the process explanation clarify?
A useful process note distinguishes generated material, filmed or photographed material, manual editing, sound, and collaboration. It gives the audience a clearer account of what it is encountering.
For makers, keep a brief record of major decisions while working. It is easier to explain a process when those decisions are available to revisit.
5. What stays with the audience?
After discussing the process, return to the experience. What image, feeling, or question remains? Can a viewer without specialist knowledge find a way into the work?
Use these questions in a studio critique, a classroom, or a conversation after a screening. They reflect this journal’s interest in human decisions around AI and creativity.