u/siom_c

Hey everyone,

We’re an AI startup working with creators on short-form videos for TikTok, Reels, and YouTube Shorts.

You do not need a big following — nano creators are absolutely welcome. We care much more about creativity, authenticity, and good storytelling than follower count.

What kind of content? Short-form videos (usually 15–60 seconds) around AI tools, creator workflows, reactions, tutorials, demos, memes, screen recordings, or creative concepts in your own style.

We usually provide: • Product access • Hooks / creative ideas • Script suggestions (optional) • Example references

But creators are encouraged to make it their own — authentic content tends to perform best.

Who we're looking for: • TikTok / Reels / Shorts creators • UGC creators • AI / productivity / creator niche creators • Nano & micro creators welcome

Compensation: Paid collaboration (fixed fee and performance-based options depending on fit/content quality).

If interested, comment “Interested” or send me a DM with your profile and examples of content.

Looking forward to connecting 🚀

I keep seeing people try to build AI UGC systems that go all the way from research - script - generation - posting without much human review.

I get why. The daily content grind is annoying. If you are testing TikTok/Reels/Shorts ads the obvious dream is scrape what is working generate scripts make videos schedule them repeat.

But I think "fully automated" is the wrong goal at least for now.

The problem is not production. The problem is direction.

If the creative angle is wrong automation does not fix it. It just publishes the same bad assumption faster.

What seems more useful is a feedback loop

- research trends and competitor angles

- generate a batch of hook/script variants

- produce enough videos to test cheaply

- tag each video by hook pain point offer format CTA

- review retention comments saves CTR CPA after a few days

- feed the winners back into the next batch

That last step is the part people skip. They automate generation but not learning.

A simple example if 20 videos are posted and only the "problem-first" hooks work the next batch should not be another random mix. It should double down on that pattern and test narrower variations. If comments say the avatar feels fake the next batch should test real footage + AI voiceover instead of spending more on realism.

For AI UGC I think the useful system is not autopilot. It is a creative testing loop.

Human taste still matters but it should be used at the leverage point deciding what signal is real and what to test next. Not manually making every script from scratch.

Curious if others here are doing this already. Are you tracking hooks/angles in a structured way or mostly just generating and posting until something works

I've been testing a workflow for AI UGC-style beauty creatives, and the biggest improvement did not come from adding more prompt detail. It came from removing degrees of freedom.

The attached clip is a lipstick + hair color try-on test. The useful part is the structure: one motion-ready comparison board first, then a 15s video from that board. The board acts like a locked timeline, so the video model has less room to invent a new face, lighting setup, or shot order every few seconds.

The workflow:

1. Define the variables before prompting. In this case, only lipstick color and hair color were allowed to change. Face, pose, camera distance, outfit, lighting, and background stayed fixed.

2. Build a 9-12 panel board instead of asking for a finished video immediately. Include swatches, Look A/B/C/D, comparison, and final reveal. It sounds boring, but boring structure is what keeps these tests usable.

3. Keep text labels minimal. If the model starts making messy micro-text, remove the text and add labels later in the editor.

4. Send the board to image-to-video as a chronological guide. The prompt should say: animate panels in reading order, use match cuts, preserve identity, and prefer small camera movement over scene reinvention.

5. Judge failures by variable drift. If the face changes, the prompt allowed too many mutable things. If the product changes, the board did not anchor the pack/texture enough. If the video feels random, the board order was not obvious.

What I would change next:

- try a simpler 2x3 board to see if fewer panels improve motion quality

- add real product pack shots as references

- remove all generated text and overlay it manually

Disclosure: I'm working on Content Studio inside Reelsy, so this is partly a product experiment. No link here; mainly sharing the workflow because controlled variation feels like a real bottleneck for AI UGC.

Curious how others handle this: for try-on or product comparison ads, do you storyboard first, or go straight into image-to-video/text-to-video with a detailed prompt?

https://reddit.com/link/1t2hqie/video/f1ftkg3hfwyg1/player