Image and video generation lived in apps. Claude could think about them. It couldn't make them. That gap closed today. Pushing-creation is the cinematic prompt methodology installed as a Claude Code skill. It teaches Claude to brief like a director of photography, not whisper at a model. v0.3.0 adds a keychain bridge. Provider keys live in macOS Keychain. Claude calls a CLI that reads them at runtime and passes them straight to the API. The key value never enters Claude's context. The result: every Claude Code session, in any workspace, can author style packs and generate frames end to end. The shift The methodology and the executor are in the same loop. Before: author a brief in Claude. Switch apps. Paste the brief. Generate. Switch back. Now: author the brief in Claude. Generate from the same session. The three steps Brief. `/frames-brainstorm` runs a DP interview. Claude reads your reference images and writes style.md live. STYLE_ blocks fight defaults. NEG_ blocks fight failure modes. Image. `/frames-gen --kind image --shot-n 1`. Claude reads the shot from your storyboard, calls Gemini or GPT-image. The PNG lands in `renders/`. Video, `/frames-gen --kind video --shot-n 1`. Same shot, video provider. Kling video lands in `renders/`. One session. One workspace. No app-hopping. The keychain mechanic. The OS holds the key. Claude holds the brief. Add each key once: `security add-generic-password -U -s "pushing-creation:gemini" -a "$USER" -w "your-key"` Claude calls `bin/frames-gen`. Inside that process, the key gets read into a Python variable, passed to the HTTP client, and never logged or printed. Claude's transcript stays clean. The OS guarantee: encrypted at rest, scoped to your user, accessible only with your authorisation. The unlock Every Claude session inherits this. Storyboard. Product shot. Social post. Personal portfolio. Same Claude. Same methodology. Different keys, but the keys were already there. Two repos clone once. From then on, every workspace is a generation studio.

🎟️ @Virgilio Robinson just won a free seat in The Lyceum. 🎟️ Pick your cohort, my guy. Technical, Business, or Creator. It's yours. Why @Virgilio Robinson won: Most entries built a calculator with Marcus's voice on top. Virgilio built a system. Check it out: https://areweok.netlify.app 🧠 Built around the person, not the spreadsheet. Most calculators ask for income and savings. Virgilio's intake starts with who relies on you, how decisions get made at home, and how the worry actually feels. That's the difference between a tool and a planner. 🎯 It actually solves Marcus's problem. A prospect fills it out before the call. They get a real read on where they stand. Marcus walks into the meeting already knowing the numbers AND the emotional context. Hour saved, conversation deeper. ✍️ The voice is Marcus. "Matthew, I can tell you're the kind of person who carries the weight of everyone else's financial security on your shoulders." That's not a calculator output. That's a planner who paid attention. 🎚️ The "what moves the needle" sliders. Three levers: save more, earn more, work longer. Live recalc against the target. This is exactly what Marcus asked for when he said "give them a path, not a verdict." 📅 It closes the loop. Email plus three preferred dates, sent straight to Marcus. The only entry that took the prospect all the way to a booked conversation. Real talk for everyone else. This was a tight one. There were several entries that could have won. The bar this week was higher than Week 1 and the work showed it. If you didn't win, that doesn't mean your entry was off. It means Virgilio went further. A lot of you built tools that nailed the voice. A lot of you built tools that nailed the math. Virgilio built one that did both AND thought about how Marcus actually runs his business. That's the lesson. The brief is never just the brief. The brief is a person trying to solve a real problem.

💰 $325 CASH PRIZE 💰 That's a full year of Premium. Win this and your membership pays for itself. 📋 THE CHALLENGE You just got hired again. Different client this time. Meet Sarah, a freelance copywriter who's drowning in context-switching. 📎 Download the full client brief attached to this post. Short version: She works with three types of clients (SaaS founders, ecommerce brands, local service businesses) and starts from scratch every project. She doesn't need another tool. She needs a system. Your job is to build her a folder-based AI specialist she can drop into any Claude project. The folder IS the deliverable. 🗂️ THIS WEEK YOU LEARN ICM Up until now, comps have been "build a thing." This week you utilize the methodology taught throughout the community. 🧠 Folders as architecture. That's it. That's the whole concept this week. Your specialist is a folder with five things: - 📄 identity.md (who they are) - 📐 rules.md (how they respond) - 💬 examples.md (what good looks like) - 📚 reference/ (source material) - 📖 README.md (how to use it) Drop the folder into a Claude project. Claude becomes the specialist. Reusable. Shareable. Portable. 🎯 PICK YOUR SPECIALIST Don't pick copywriting. That's Sarah's example. Pick something YOU would actually use. A few sparks to get you thinking: - A salary negotiation coach - A meal planner that knows your dietary restrictions - A code reviewer for your stack - A real estate market analyst for your city - A technical recruiter screener - A grant writer for nonprofits in your space The more specific, the better. "Marketing expert" is not a specialist. "B2B email expert for enterprise SaaS targeting CFOs" is. 💼 WHY THIS ONE LANDS ON YOUR RESUME Real talk. Winning a comp in a Skool community doesn't get you a job by itself. But shipping a working folder-based AI specialist with a clean README and a public repo? That's a portfolio piece.

So, yesterday I delivered a presentation to a family that requested a Wealth Development Analysis. I took 18 years of their Tax Returns to understand their past, and projected their next 25 years based on diferent economic scenarios. I've used Cowork, Code and Design. It went great, but this is not the main topic here. I've recorded the whole 100min meeting, transcribed it, uploaded to Claude, and asked it to analyze the whole meeting. I asked questions like: What is my style of presentation? Where did the storytelling worked and didn't work? What was the impact of my presentation on each participant? What didn't I see during the meeting? What a system's thinker would tell me about the meeting? The output was amazing. I got deep, lengthy feedback that will help me improve in my next preparation and presentation. It felt like closing the loop. So, don't stop at delivery, add another step of self-reflection in order to keep evolving!

Quick note about Skool’s bot protection: If your comment is just a few short words, you’re better off hitting the like button instead. What you probably don’t know is that the admins are getting absolutely blasted with anti-bot warnings — and Jake didn’t do me any favors by blowing up my notifications. We’re growing extremely fast (25,855+ and climbing), so we’ve got a massive target on our backs. Short, low-effort comments are triggering the system hard right now.Help us keep this community high-quality: Only comment when you have real value to add — sharp insights, innovative ideas, or meaningful experiences. Likes 👍 are there for quick appreciation. Save the comments for stuff that actually moves the conversation forward. Do your part. Let’s protect the space we’re building together. Thanks, legends. *** @Jake Van Clief has not approved this message, he's swamped ***