blender-composition-camera-planner

name	blender-composition-camera-planner
description	Provide detailed composition and camera planning for product hero outputs.

blender-composition-camera-planner

Purpose

Design high-quality composition/camera strategy for product hero scenes in plain, actionable language.

Quick start

• confirm this skill fits your goal
• provide required inputs first
• keep runtime claims evidence-bound
• follow suggested next-skill handoff

When to use

• composition quality is uncertain
• camera direction needs deeper guidance
• hero section framing must align with web usage

When not to use

• as proof of rendered output quality
• when subject intent is undefined

Trigger phrases

• “improve composition and camera”
• “choose hero framing”
• “set camera strategy for product hero”

Prerequisites / readiness

• subject and destination context available
• planning mode accepted when runtime unavailable

Input schema

Required inputs

• subject intent
• target output context (web/app/game/render)

Optional inputs

• preferred aspect ratio
• UI/copy overlay constraints
• cinematic vs neutral tone preference

Assumptions to confirm

• need for negative space
• focal detail priority
• camera motion vs static hero shot intent

Output schema

Primary output

• composition-camera plan

Secondary output

• alternative framing options

Evidence / caveat output

• unresolved visual assumptions
• Not Run caveat when no runtime validation

Required laws

• ../../laws/non-blender-user-language.md
• ../../laws/evidence-before-done.md
• ../../laws/official-runtime-only.md
• ../../laws/no-arbitrary-python-interface.md

Official runtime boundary

Planning-only skill; no runtime execution or render claims.

Operating procedure

1. Define focal hierarchy (primary/secondary/background).
2. Define hero-section objective and viewer attention path.
3. Select aspect ratio strategy.
4. Reserve negative space for UI/text overlays if needed.
5. Choose camera angle preset family.
6. Set focal length guidance by mood (dramatic vs neutral).
7. Define depth layering (foreground/midground/background).
8. Add silhouette/readability checks.
9. Produce fallback framing variant for uncertainty.
10. Translate plan into plain-language rationale.

Decision tree

• If copy overlay required → prioritize negative space and silhouette.
• If product detail priority high → tighter framing and controlled depth.
• If uncertainty high → provide two options and ask preference.

Playbooks

• Playbook A: text-only planning path
• Playbook B: runtime-ready path with evidence gating
• Playbook C: blocked runtime path with caveat-first reporting

Mode handling

Text-only mode

• provide planning options only
• mark visual validation Not Run

Runtime-ready mode

• include visual validation criteria for later runtime checks

Blocked runtime mode

• keep plan + caveats
• no visual success claims

Validation checklist

• focal hierarchy explicit
• hero framing objective explicit
• aspect ratio strategy documented
• negative space policy documented
• camera angle rationale documented
• focal length guidance documented
• depth layering documented
• silhouette criteria documented
• fallback variant documented
• plain-language rationale included

Pass / Warn / Fail rubric

Category	Pass	Warn	Fail
Focal hierarchy	Clear and prioritized	Partial hierarchy	Missing hierarchy
Framing strategy	Matches output context	Generic but usable	Mismatched framing
Camera rationale	Specific and actionable	Vague rationale	No rationale
Evidence boundary	No visual overclaims	Mild ambiguity	Claims rendered quality without evidence

Failure handling

• Conflicting goals: provide trade-off options.
• Missing constraints: ask targeted follow-up.
• Unknown destination: use conservative web-hero defaults + caveat.

Troubleshooting

• Subject lost in frame: increase focal contrast and framing focus.
• No room for copy: widen negative space and rebalance composition.
• Flat look risk: increase depth-layer contrast in plan.

Best practices

• optimize for clarity before stylization
• tie each camera choice to user outcome
• preserve fallback path for uncertain constraints

Good examples

“Primary subject occupies center-right with left negative space for hero copy; camera 3/4 angle chosen for silhouette and depth readability.”

Bad examples

“Use cinematic camera.” (no context, no criteria)

User-facing response template

• Composition summary
• Camera strategy summary
• Why this helps your goal
• What remains unverified

Anti-patterns

• skipping required laws or runtime boundary statements
• claiming runtime/artifact success without evidence
• using non-official runtime setup paths
• producing jargon-heavy final output without explanation

Cross-skill handoff

• Next: blender-lighting-material-planner
• Then: blender-scene-quality-checker

Non-goals

• runtime camera command execution
• render quality claims without runtime evidence

References

• https://www.blender.org/lab/mcp-server/
• https://claude.com/resources/tutorials/using-the-blender-connector-in-claude
• https://docs.blender.org/manual/en/latest/advanced/command_line/index.html