Muse studies a video you admire, extracts its Design Genome — the reusable craft — then builds something new toward your goal with your subject. Every artifact on this page is real: extracted by the live extract_design_genome, rendered on the Livepeer network, and graded by the verdict of the live check_distinctiveness.
reference → genome → your creationinspired-by, not copied — provenrendered live · ~$0.85
Step 1 — the reference
A cinematic product film
A calm, minimal product film (Livepeer Agent-generated, rights-clean). We admire its craft — but we want to make our own thing, not copy it.
the reference · 48.5s · Livepeer Agent-generated
🧬 The extracted Design Genome
Pacing
13 shots · avg 4.04s · accelerating cut rhythm
Grade
clean / minimal
#c0c0c0 · #f4f4f4
Motion
close-up, intimate framing
Sound
contemplative VO ~40 wpm — “It doesn’t ask for much. A corner, a hum you’ll never hear…”
Grammar
13 beats, extracted:
0–6sA silver music player sits in a dark room.
6–8.5A woman plays the device with headphones.
8.5–10Hands play the keyboard of the device.
12–18The woman looks at the screen while playing.
22–24Close-up of hands playing the keyboard.
24–30The woman looks up and speaks in the dark.
36–42A man sits at a desk with the device.
48.5–55The device is shown on a white surface.
This is the point. The reference is now a structured, editable spec — not a black box. Dial any gene up or down (slow the cuts, warm the grade, drop the VO) before a single new frame renders.
Step 2 — your creation
A different product. The same craft.
We kept the genome — clean minimal grade, close framing, an accelerating tempo — and pointed it at a new subject we chose: a premium running shoe. Three shots generated on the Livepeer network (kling-v3-turbo-t2v), stitched (ffmpeg-concat) and graded to the genome (ffmpeg-colorgrade).
your creation · 3 shots · rendered live · ~$0.85 all-in
Style ⊗ Content
The reference supplied the style layer (grade, framing, tempo). We supplied the content layer (the product, the subject). Muse composited them — so the result is unmistakably ours, wearing the reference’s craft.
Bring your own footage instead of generating, and the reel gets cheaper and more yours — generation only fills the gaps.
The Anti-Brief. Tell Muse what you don’t want (“no jump cuts, no stock-looking b-roll”) and those become negative prompts, hard plan rules, and an auto-reject rule at the critique gate — taste, enforced.
Step 3 — the Inspiration Firewall
Inspired by, not copied — proven, not promised
Muse extracts a genome from the finished reel too, and check_distinctiveness scores it against the reference. Borrow the abstract grammar, never the footage — and measure it.
verdict
DISTINCT
Similarity 0.386 — well below the 0.65 borderline and 0.85 clone-risk thresholds. The creation shares the reference’s minimal-product spirit, but diverges in rhythm and motion. Not a clone.
palette
0.50 · neutral
pacing
0.62 · similar tempo
rhythm
0.00 · diverged
motion
0.00 · diverged
A heuristic (palette / pacing / rhythm / motion), not a forensic similarity model — it flags clone-risk, it doesn’t certify originality. The real firewall is the discipline: Muse borrows grammar, never assets.
How it works
The Muse loop
Phase 1 · Deconstruct
Reference → genome
extract_design_genome — marlin-video + transcribe read the reference into the five genes. A rights acknowledgment gates it.
Phase 2–3 · Direct
Intent → Shot Ledger
Say your goal, what to emphasize, what to avoid, and bring your materials. Approve a plan — every shot, source, model, cost — before any spend.
Phase 4–6 · Build → prove
Render → firewall → kit
Generate + grade in the genome, critique against the Anti-Brief, then check_distinctiveness. Save a reusable Style Kit for the next project.