I make AI films. I write a screenplay, often by hand in ink on paper initially, then revise, rewrite and format it over many iterations until I get the result I want. I draw the characters and refine them and then have AI refine and standardize them. I create a storyboard using the characters, script and original prose, which I had to write, yes, manually. I use these manual inputs to generate 3/5/10 second scenes. I manually edit these scenes into a film to match the screenplay as closely as possible to create a story. I voice record the dialogue using my physical human mouth and then use AI to filter those recordings to sound like male, female or animal characters. I manually compose, record and generate music scores and spoken word effects. I manually edit everything together into a cohesive whole and render the output into a cohesive film that is the real world interpretation of my creative vision and human labour augmented with some AI tools. And Ms./Mr. Herring, the final authority on the use of AI in creative work, comes on X to let me, the artist, know that I had no creative input into my work because AI pushed it out at the press of a button and I must needs label the final work as AI generated because I am a fraud. Methinks you think AI is more capable than it actually is. I'm kind of impressed that these Anti AI warriors have more faith in AI than I do as an artist who actually uses it and has to overcome its current limitations.