Medeo's exports, read against the rules on how much AI a film needs
Medeo's page describes creating videos by chat, with an editor and collaborative editing tools, and footage drawn from generative models plus stock video. The register's rules for a film like that are stated as thresholds: one tool used in a significant way, at least two different tools, or half the picture or sound. From 8 source pages, read 2026-09-25; no maker pays to be listed.
1What this register already keeps
Ten readings from ten sets of rules, all of them about how much AI a film has to contain — the question a partly generated film is judged by.
- Film typesAI must be part of the creative process, not necessarily generative AI
- FAQThe film does not have to be fully AI-generated
- CategoriesAI as a creative tool, with storytelling and authorship led by people
- CategoriesA hybrid category for films mixing traditional and AI-assisted production
- Article 4At least half the picture or sound made or reworked with AI, using at least two AI tools
- Article 4At least two different AI tools used in production
- Competition rulesAt least three generative AI tools, one of them for images; hybrid live action welcome
- General requirementsAt least one generative AI tool used in a significant way
- RequirementsAny AI tool used in a significant way
- Submission criteriaAt least one generative AI tool in each of pre-production, production and post-production
2What Medeo's own page states
Medeo's page describes making videos by chat, with a video editor and collaborative editing tools, and lists its footage as generative models plus stock video. That is a different starting position from a model maker's: the film is assembled, and only part of what ends up on screen has to be generated.
For a festival entrant the page raises one question before any others. Most rules in the register are written for films that are wholly or mostly AI-made, and a film that mixes generated shots with stock has to be measured against the wording rather than against the spirit.
3The thresholds the register records
The readings on this page are all thresholds, and no two are the same size. The Reply festival asks that AI be part of the creative process and says in as many words that a film need not be fully AI-generated. Project Odyssey and the Chroma Awards each ask for one generative tool used in a significant way. The Bochnia festival asks for two different AI tools and at least half the picture or sound made or reworked with AI.
The larger thresholds count tools rather than footage. The World AI Film Festival in Cannes wants at least three generative AI tools, one of them for images, and welcomes hybrid live action. Artefact's festival asks for a generative tool in each of pre-production, production and post-production — a rule about phases, not about percentages.
4What a part-generated film meets at each threshold
Read side by side, the thresholds measure different things: how many tools were used, which phases they were used in, and how much of the finished picture and sound they touch. A film cut in a chat-first editor with stock inserts answers the first two questions on the entry form and the third only in rough terms, which is why the register keeps each organiser's wording rather than a verdict of its own.
Two rules here also reach into the other direction. Cinema Shift keeps a hybrid category for films mixing traditional and AI-assisted production and asks that storytelling and authorship stay led by people. The Reply festival's second reading says the same thing from the other end: eligibility turns on how AI was used, not on how much of the runtime it fills.
5What the counted material keeps about the question
The collection put one share figure against the family with the largest record in its material: Sora, named in 11.9% of the posts it read in one subreddit, with 2,157 posts counted behind that share. The posts are about the work — what gets made, and who is still making it — rather than about how a festival reads it.
SceneMixer's row below answers the part a threshold cannot: a feature screenplay can be read and generated sequence by sequence, so the length a festival asks for is not the wall the pipeline sets. The table quotes each reading with its date; what an organiser makes of a mixed file remains the organiser's call on the day the entry is read.
6What each maker says about its own files
| Maker | What it is built around | Footage it lists | Pages read |
|---|---|---|---|
| Medeo | Creating videos using chat, with a video editor and collaborative editing tools | Generative models plus stock video | 2026-10-13 |
| SceneMixer | “It can read a feature screenplay and generate it sequence by sequence, and nothing in the pipeline stops you at ninety minutes.” | Not carried on the pages read | 2026-10-13 |
Inclusion rule. Rows are the makers this page is about, each read on its own public pages, plus the drama pipeline whose readings this register keeps. A line a maker's page does not carry is written here as not carried on the pages read, which describes the reading rather than the product. Order. Alphabetical by maker name.
| Asked of each reading | Medeo | invideo AI | SceneMixer |
|---|---|---|---|
| What it is built around | Creating videos using chat, with a video editor and collaborative editing tools | AI agents and generative models plus an editing timeline, stock footage and your own footage | A drama pipeline of episodes, segments and takes |
| Footage it lists | Generative models plus stock video | Your own footage with 4K export; premium stock clips | Not carried on the pages read |
| Cutting it lists | A video editor and collaborative editing tools | A full editing timeline; colour, audio and 3D tools; multiplayer seats | Compositing joins an episode's segments into one file |
| Who owns the output | Not carried on the pages read | Not carried on the pages read | The user owns the generated results as far as the law allows |
Inclusion rule. Answers read from each maker's own pages as this register recorded them — the vendor pages on 2026-10-13, the register rows on 2026-09-25. A line the pages do not carry is written here as not carried on the pages read, which describes the reading rather than the product. Order. As the lines are listed above.
7What the collection put numbers against
Two readings below, both kept for the family with the largest record in the material: the counts for its posts, and its share of what one subreddit read.
| Family | Posts | Comment mentions | Positive | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sora | 11729 | 4662 | 1112 | 452 |
Inclusion rule. Families the collection counted that bear on this page's subject, from one subreddit. A thread can be counted on both sides. Order. Descending by posts.
| Model family | Share of posts | Posts counted |
|---|---|---|
| Sora | 11.9% | 2157 |
Inclusion rule. Model families the collection put a share against, counted from the posts it read. Order. Descending by share.
8When the other maker's pages fit better
- The first cut starts as a conversation — Chat is how a video is created here, which suits a rough assembly made in one sitting rather than a scripted pipeline.
- Stock is allowed to stand beside the models — Generative models plus stock video on the same page suit the rules that count AI as part of the creative process rather than the whole of it.
- Cutting and remarks happen in one place — A video editor with collaborative editing tools keeps the revision round where the film was made, which suits a team answering an organiser's questions late in the process.
The words behind this page are "Are AI feature films actually the future?" — the counts kept for the family below are the collection's own material on that question. Beside it: a contest for films made on one platform and what a file carries after its maker closes.