
6. Keeping Mara the Same Person
How to keep one character consistent across separately generated AI video shots, using a reference sheet, a one-page production bible and a targeted repair of a single failed shot. It closes with Vidu Q4's larger reference limit and how to test it on one shot. This episode is narrated by AI-generated synthetic voices. Episode page & show notes Visit website Continuity written down once Seven new shots of Mara will each be generated separately, and each is a chance for her to come back different: a darker coat, the bag on the wrong shoulder, light from the wrong side. The answer is a habit. Write the continuity decisions down once and feed them into every shot. The walkthrough is illustrative, and its numbers are examples. Runway splits the work into two stages. Gen-4 References makes a still from up to three tagged reference images. That still then becomes the first frame of a Gen-4.5 Image to Video generation. The video model anchors on one frame, so identity is locked in the still and motion comes second. The chapter also compares the free, Standard and Pro tiers on Runway's plans against the earlier estimate for the seven shots. Reference sheet and one-page bible The reference sheet has front, three-quarter and profile views of Mara, made under flat light on grey so the model doesn't learn a light direction as part of "Mara." Each view is checked against frames exported from the accepted clips. One profile is rejected because the hair is tied up. Close crops of the collar, bag and parcel label sit alongside the views. The bible covers appearance, exact wardrobe words, props, fixed lighting terms, screen direction and one fixed description line. That line goes only into first-frame prompts. Video prompts describe motion and camera alone. Four shots, then a cut that failed The phone close-up, the sign insert, the reaction close-up and the wide walk each get five checks: face, collar, bag, light and eyeline. On the Shotcut timeline the reaction shot breaks continuity, because the collar lies flat after the phone shot showed it standing up. Tracing and fixing one error Working backward shows the first frame was already wrong, so rerunning the video stage would have wasted credits. The cause was a collar crop cut from a front view where the collar sat low. Swapping in a crop from the three-quarter view fixes that one shot and leaves the others untouched. The bible gets a one-line note about the change. The log puts four accepted shots at roughly 63 credits each. It also shows that one rejected video take cost more than all the rejected stills combined. More references per generation ShengShu's Vidu Q4 preview accepts up to fifteen reference images and three reference audio files in a single setup. That would remove the three-image choice, though the sheet and bible would still be needed. The suggested next step is a single test: regenerate the failed reaction shot in Vidu Q4 and check its preview access and commercial licence terms. HiDream's vivago R1 and Higgsfield's reusable character assets also keep character consistency in one place.