Long Live Imagination: Turn Contributions into a New Creative Brief

Read the campaign story

Canon launched Long Live Imagination and Project Imagin8ion in May 2011, inviting themed photographs to inspire a short film. The June announcement names Bryce Dallas Howard as director and Ron Howard as executive producer. Freestyle’s portfolio documents its production role and the later Project Imaginat10n expansion. The changing spellings and subsequent films are one family here.

Editorial interpretation: a photograph can be more than an entry displayed in a gallery; it can become a constraint that another person must interpret. The resulting project gives the contribution a visible destination. That destination also creates expectations about selection, attribution and the amount of influence participants will have. A useful invitation explains which decisions remain with the final creator and does not imply that contributing an input makes someone an equal author of every later choice.

The creator portfolio’s market-share, media-value and impression claims are not adopted as independently verified or campaign-caused outcomes. No historical submission agreement was audited. The study does not reproduce submitted photographs, film scenes or music. The proposed adaptation uses wholly invented prompts owned by the exercise organiser, with no open contest, public submission or transfer of a participant’s rights.

Specify the transformation between input and output

An invitation to inspire a project should explain what inspiration means in practical terms. Will a contribution determine a setting, suggest a mood or merely be considered among many references? A small writing group could show how an original abstract prompt informs a scene while leaving character and plot decisions with the writer. Compare that description with what participants think they can influence. If they expect literal inclusion but the process permits broad interpretation, clarify before asking for any contribution. The attractive destination is not enough; the route from input to finished work needs to be understandable and honestly bounded.

Separate fair participation from a guarantee of selection

A limited set of final inputs means many willing contributors will not be included. State the selection stages and who makes each decision in plain language. A small organisation should consider the burden of contributing relative to the probability and value of inclusion, without presenting attention as adequate payment for professional work. In a concept review, test whether readers understand that participation and selection are distinct. Avoid manufacturing urgency or suggesting that a famous reviewer can guarantee career benefits. A clear selection process may be disappointing to some people while still being more respectful than an ambiguous promise of collaboration.

Preserve the difference between source credit and final authorship

A finished creative work can involve many forms of contribution, from an initial prompt to writing, directing, editing and production. Describe those roles accurately rather than using one broad label that erases their differences. A small team can create a credit map before producing anything, then check it against the intended rights and responsibilities. If the output changes substantially during development, revisit the map rather than assuming the initial arrangement covers every later use. The objective is not to settle legal authorship through marketing copy. It is to prevent an invitation or credits line from overstating control, endorsement or ownership.

A small test for another brief

Proposed adaptation: a fictional writing workshop could show consenting adults a set of organiser-created abstract prompt cards and two invitations for a hypothetical story exercise. One vaguely promises collaboration; the other explains that a facilitator will select one setting prompt while a writer retains the narrative decisions. Show an original sample scene that interprets, rather than reproduces, the prompt. Ask reviewers what each role can decide and what selection does not guarantee. Do not request real creative submissions, names, photographs or public votes. This tests the clarity of the contribution contract without running a competition.

Record whether reviewers distinguish submitting from selection, inspiration from literal inclusion and source credit from final creative control. Ask what permission remains unresolved. Treat enthusiasm for the imagined project separately from understanding of its conditions or any likely commercial result.

Stop if the invitation implies guaranteed inclusion, unpaid professional work is disguised as participation, or the description leaves rights and final decision-making unclear.

• Create three original prompt cards and one short example scene.
• Map selection, interpretation, final approval and credit as separate decisions.
• Offer a plain role description alongside the illustrative creative journey.