In her latest Eye? ah. In this column, Julie Seal speaks with one of our favorite people in AI video, Casey Byrd, to explore where technology, taste, and ethics stand as brands begin to use this technology.
My third eye on this? Oh. In this column, we interviewed the wonderful Casey Bird, founder of Studio Ru. She’s doing some really great things and I can’t wait to talk about it.
Please tell us about Studio Ru, as we speak to “non-Adi humans”.
I’ve spent my career coming up with ideas that get used on Instagram, YouTube, TV, radio, and more. Over 16 years, we’ve worked with brands like Channel 4, Nike and Adidas to learn what makes content work commercially and creatively.
Studio Ru applies the same creative thinking to the world of AI.
We hear from brands, develop ideas, and create AI-powered content. We still start with an outline and pitch ideas. But instead of capturing everything on camera, we use AI tools to bring it to life. Our saying is that we love working with brands that dream big and work smart.
We also host workshops to help creative and marketing teams understand these tools without losing energy or work. What is important is judgment rather than technology.
Anyone can press the button.
It takes years to know what to press for.
Tell me about the “oh” moment when you realized AI video was serious.
I was on maternity leave with my second child in 2024-2025, so I started experimenting with some of the early image and video tools.
I had the idea in my head for months. What happens when Santa starts ingesting Munjaro and a massive luminescence occurs?
What would Mrs. Claus think?
Which fashion brand will sign him first?
I wrote the script, storyboarded it, and made the entire one-minute movie over three days in my living room during my nap time.
It would cost tens of thousands of pounds to manufacture using traditional methods. But it wasn’t a revelation.
The revelation was that ideas that had previously existed only in my head suddenly existed in the world, with almost no barrier between imagination and execution.
About eight months later, I started Studio Ru.
What are the biggest misconceptions about AI video right now?
The difficult part is the output.
it’s not.
the hard part is knowing what make, how making it and why to make it.
At Studio Ru, we focus on ideas, creative direction, and the visual world before touching the tools. The client process hasn’t changed much. People still need to build confidence, pitch ideas, and make creative decisions.
The tool doesn’t provide that.
Speed and cost aside, what do you think is the real opportunity for AI video?
What I always come back to is the democratization of weirdness.
Weird and brave ideas that previously died in presentation materials because they were too expensive to produce can now be considered in the wild. The leap from “Let’s try this” to “Let’s see what it turns out to be” has become much smaller.
There is also great potential for personalization at scale and for creating content that is truly native to the platform it is displayed on.
But the most interesting thing for me is access. Production values that were previously only possible for companies with huge budgets can now be achieved by small brands.
Want to know more? ask the drum
At Channel 4, many small businesses couldn’t afford to do the kind of work we did. Now it’s possible. It’s really exciting.
What is the difference between a good job and an extraordinary failure?
I have a bit of a beef with the word “slop.”
Our industry has survived years of forgettable social content, long before AI.
To me, AI slop is content generated for AI. Good work happens when someone creates something, looks at it critically, and asks if it actually meets the point.
The best AI work has a clear perspective behind every decision.
At worst, it feels like someone typed in “luxury brand, cinematic, aspirational” and walked away.
You can always tell when no one was really in charge.
Is AI video a murder technique? Or where in it is the spaceship located?
I think craft is evolving.
Previously, it was within the camera, production technology, or VFX budget. It increasingly takes up a role in creative direction, taste, and decision-making.
The best creative directors I’ve ever worked with were able to have a vision that transcended departments, revisions, and client feedback, yet ultimately delivered consistency.
It’s still a craft. It’s just moving.
What different advice would you give to an experienced creative director leaving the workforce versus a new creative director entering the industry?
For experienced creative directors, it’s all about your sense of style.
Clients still want ideas, judgment, and vision. AI simply removes many of the production barriers that previously stood in the way. If ever there was a time to build something you can’t afford or build yourself, it’s now.
I always tell people in my workshops that “no one is behind”. We are learning new skills.
If you are just starting out, learn the tools properly and master them quickly. However, tools change, so don’t make it all about your personality.
The person who stands out five years from now will not become the best teleprompter. They’ll probably have something interesting to say.
At Studio Ru, we value expression, culture, and storytelling as much as we value technology. Interesting ideas still come from the world outside of AI.
What is still so frustrating about AI video?
Quite a lot.
Many models still exhibit bias. Video production often struggles with realistic depictions of black skin tones and women. It may take many tries to get truly human-like results.
Another complaint is legal uncertainty.
The rules are still evolving and brands don’t have enough clarity about commercial use.
A key part of our job is to help our clients navigate that uncertainty. We keep detailed records of prompts, models, and workflows, so our clients have a clear audit trail at the end of a project.
Where are the moral conflicts, if any, in this industry?
always.
I came from an industry full of illustrators, photographers, animators, and directors, and I really admired their work. I am well aware that AI is coming uncomfortably close to the industries it could disrupt.
What I came up with is that these tools are here regardless. I’d rather it be used by people who care about creativity, copyright, and people affected by changes.
We are thoughtful about the platforms we use and the way we work. For example, in a recent corporate project, we combined licensed stock images and photography. in front I also used AI because I wanted to be careful about face and rights.
We strive to be transparent about when and why we use AI, and to create work that feels additive rather than extractive.
Do we always get that balance right? Probably not.
But as this industry evolves, I think it’s important to keep asking questions.
