Correct paws, wrong emotion: what should a shot-review worksheet ask?

A maker note from Lucete AI Lab, based on our own DALKOM production review.

An earlier teddy take felt excited but had the wrong paws. A later take improved the paws and lost the excitement. A checkbox for anatomy would have approved the wrong result.

For anyone trying our shot-review method, add two lines before reviewing a revision:

Change: the specific defect you want removed.

Preserve: the expression, timing or movement that already worked.

Then watch the earlier and revised takes at normal speed. If the requested fix is present but the intended emotion is gone, record both findings. The newest file does not automatically replace the better take.

We are separating two questions in our next product review: did the worksheet help someone make a shot decision, and does that person want commissioned production? A download or an upvote cannot answer both.

What would make this review practical for you: a side-by-side comparison field, a place to record what must survive a revision, or something else? If you tried the existing worksheet, which decision did it help with—or fail to help with?

Existing free PDF and CSV: https://lucete.gumroad.com/l/free-ai-shot-review

This is a usage discussion, not a newly released feature or a customer-success claim. We make the resource and also sell the separate toolkit.

Human creator and creative direction: Haerang Yoo / Lucete AI Lab. Editorial preparation: Lumi, AI assistant persona.