Three monthly budgets: what each one actually includes
The useful budget starts with accepted outputs, shot specifications and editing work. All three scenarios use the same original fictional adult character shown in the retained ledger. The numbers below are forecasts; our archived sample does not document running a monthly account.
A. Photo-First: 20 accepted photos
Target twenty 2K, 3:4 images using GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst and an approved identity reference. At 0.5 additional charged attempts per accepted image, 30 initial photo attempts use 150 credits. Starter supplies enough credits and one-account publishing for $19.00. The assumed 6 owner hours cover planning, prompts, selection, visible-detail checks, simple manual edits, captions, posting and account maintenance. Additional AI repair/upscale tasks are zero in this preset; add them when needed.
B. Photos + Short Videos: 20 photos and four finished 15-second edits
Keep the same photo target, then accept twelve 5-second Seedance 2 Mini, 720p shots. With 0.25 extra charged attempts per adopted shot, budget 15 shot generations. Editing three accepted shots into each video yields four 15-second pieces; there is no claim that one 5-second output becomes 15 seconds of AI motion. Reuse approved photos as starting frames. Starter plus its required whole top-up costs $28.00, with 10 assumed owner hours.
C. Product Promotion: 12 lifestyle photos, 8 product photos and four product videos
Product images are inside the twenty-photo target. Budget 1 extra paid attempt per adopted product image, 0.5 for lifestyle photos, 8 separately billed Sunburst repair attempts, and 18 generated 5-second product shots. This preset also budgets 6 paid attempts for four accepted 15-second talking overlays, using Kling Avatar Standard with synthesized speech and lip sync included. Composite these over the product footage: the video remains 15 seconds, though more footage was generated. It does not add a separate lip-sync fee again. Total: 780 credits and $39.00 with 16 assumed owner hours.
Product fidelity remains an acceptance gate. Our retained packaging samples needed repairs. This forecast includes time for source preparation, logo/label comparison and compositing; it does not prove an AI repair will keep every word unchanged. If the label still fails, revise the workflow or add real editing/outsourcing costs before promising delivery.
All presets exclude tax, currency conversion, advertising spend, agency retainers, physical product shipping, paid music, licensed stock and extra subscriptions unless entered. Owner-hour assumptions include planning and routine account upkeep; contractor hours already paid in outsourcing must not be added again as unpaid labor.
What you actually pay for
Cash paid this month, resources consumed and your time are three different measurements. A subscription buys an allowance and feature access. Using its included credits is not an additional cash invoice.
| Measure | What belongs here | What must not be added twice |
|---|---|---|
| Monthly Cash Spend | Subscription actually due this month + whole top-ups + paid external tools + paid outsourced work + selected first-month cash | Do not add an invented per-credit invoice for credits already included in the plan. |
| Production Usage | Observed posted debits minus posted returns; in a forecast, charged attempts × the correct workflow quote | Successful discarded outputs still count. A confirmed returned technical failure does not remain net paid use. |
| Cost Including Your Time | Monthly allocated software/production expenses + your unpaid owner hours × your supplied hourly value | Paid outsourced labor is already in expenses; annual fee allocation is not another payment. |
The calculator allocates used generation resources against the selected term’s subscription fee per included credit, then any purchased-pack use at the weighted purchased rate. Unused balance still costs cash but is not attributed to this batch. That allocation is not a fourth invoice. When carried credits have unknown acquisition cost, the dollar resource allocation is N/A. There is no supplier-to-user-credit or dollar conversion in the observed ledger.
Plans, full annual payments and whole top-ups
| Plan | Monthly payment / credits | Annual payment now / yearly pool | Monthly equivalent, not the upfront charge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | $19.00 / 300 credits | $190.00 upfront / 3600 credits | $15.83; yearly pool expires at annual term end |
| Professional | $39.00 / 800 credits | $390.00 upfront / 9600 credits | $32.50; yearly pool expires at annual term end |
| Advanced | $79.00 / 2000 credits | $790.00 upfront / 24000 credits | $65.83; yearly pool expires at annual term end |
Yearly pools arrive upfront rather than as twelve fresh monthly grants. A previously paid annual term is not charged or granted again in the calculator; enter its actual remaining valid balance. Professional and Advanced monthly renewal can retain credits within their caps. Monthly Starter credits expire at the end of each billing period. Professional rolls over unused subscription credits up to a 1,600-credit balance (2×); Advanced up to 6,000 (3×), on continuous monthly renewal. Annual plans receive their full yearly pool upfront, valid for that annual term. Purchased credit packs never expire and do not count toward these caps. Failed jobs return purchased credits; subscription-credit returns keep their original expiry.
| Pack | Credits | Whole-pack price |
|---|---|---|
| Quick top-up | 100 | $9.00 |
| Creator top-up | 300 | $24.00 |
| Studio top-up | 800 | $59.00 |
Credit-pack checkout requires a signed-in account; its route does not require an active subscription to buy a balance. Buying a pack does not unlock paid-plan generation or publishing features. The optimizer compares whole pack combinations with plan upgrades, at full-period prices. Mid-cycle Stripe proration and a specific account’s existing commitments must be checked at checkout.
Which actions use credits?
| Action | Billing basis / required input |
|---|---|
| Image generation and AI edits | GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst: 5 credits per 2K request here. Editing is another request. Other model/resolution choices use their own catalog quote. |
| Image upscale | 12 credits per fixed 2× source-image upscale; not a free part of every image. |
| Generated video | Seedance 2 Mini: 16 credits for each selected 5s, 720p shot. Native audio and model/mode differences use the same resolver as Studio. |
| Talking overlay with synthesized speech | 47 credits per 15s Kling Avatar Standard attempt in this preset; package includes speech and lip sync. It is additional generated footage, not a free voice track. |
| Source-video lip sync | 40 credits per supported source-video workflow attempt, with your own usable audio. Chosen separately from the talking package, never billed twice for the same function. |
| Captioning, editing and scheduling | The budget assumes you write captions and edit with existing tools. Add external fees only when actually used. Website publishing uses plan deliveries, not generation credits. |
Some video models require audio; unsupported combinations are rejected instead of assigned a made-up rate. The planner covers generated speech only inside the verified talking package. It does not invent a standalone voiceover price. For separate recording, TTS, music or audio editing, enter your actual external fee and owner time.
Worked example: 20 photos and four videos
Our core scenario calculates 30 photo generations and 15 video-shot generations, not twenty-four interchangeable outputs. The four finished videos contain 60 seconds total, with 75 seconds of generated base footage once paid retries are included.
| Line | Calculation | Website credits |
|---|---|---|
| Accepted photos | ceil(20 × (1 + 0.5)) = 30 attempts × 5 | 150 |
| Accepted motion shots | 4 videos × ceil(15s / 5s) = 12 shots | Count before retries |
| Charged shot attempts | ceil(12 × (1 + 0.25)) = 15 attempts × 16 | 240 |
| Existing photo as first frame | Reuse an already accepted photo; no additional still request | 0 |
| Monthly generation requirement | Photos + shots; no speech/upscale/setup selected | 390 |
| Subscription and credit shortfall | Starter: 300 credits; shortfall 90 | $19.00 subscription |
| Whole-pack purchase | 1 × Quick top-up, 100 credits | $9.00 |
| Cash this month / owner time | $28.00 before tax; 10 assumed unpaid hours; no external fees | Credit usage is not an extra charge |
The photo retry input means additional paid generations per final adopted image. The video input applies per adopted generated shot, because that is the unit you replace during editing. Technical attempts are excluded from this forecast only when their charge is actually returned. There is no separate usable-rate multiplier layered on top of retries.
Each 15-second piece still needs selection, timing, sound decisions, captions and export. For a 16-second edit made from 5-second shots, the planner buys four shots, not 3.2 shots, and keeps the full billed duration. If you choose a supported direct 15-second variant, it makes one shot; it does not inherit a guessed five-second price.
Photos, posts and cross-platform deliveries are separate counts
Twenty photos at one photo per post plus four videos means 24 distinct posts. Four photos per carousel would instead make five image posts plus four videos: nine posts. Publishing those to two destination accounts creates eighteen deliveries. The website counts successful destination deliveries and reserves in-flight deliveries against a UTC calendar-month allowance. Starter permits one connected account and up to 30 deliveries; extra packs do not remove those limits. The calculator checks plan gates as well as credit quantity.
Our production ledger: what we can actually verify
This is a retained small-batch editorial archive, not a real month of account operation. It contains 18 accepted supplier requests producing 15 final photos, of which 9 passed the original strict review and 6 needed repair. Three input-processing failures reported zero supplier usage. No photographed result is omitted from the source record.
Observed: 150 KIE supplier credits reported across all attempts, no website-balance debit, and no posted-month performance. Calculated: reproducing fifteen successful 2K Sunburst requests at today’s website quote would use 75 website credits before further edits; this is not an observed customer bill. Assumed: the monthly targets, retry inputs and owner hours elsewhere. These three labels are deliberately separate.

Both eyes are readable in a near-frontal chest-up portrait; curls, warm streak, nose and complexion remain compatible with the reference. Visible pores, small facial marks and leather creases avoid a uniformly smoothed finish; body score concerns shoulders and neck only.

Both boots, grounded legs and two separate relaxed hands are present in a complete head-to-foot frame. The source face, curl pattern, burgundy bomber and charcoal jeans remain recognizable; no material visible body-build contradiction.

Face, curls and original jacket remain recognizable in warm/cool night light; the foreground arm gives a readable selfie perspective. Wet pavement and mild low-light texture support the phone-photo brief without a visible extra adult or anatomical contradiction.

Face, curls and clothing remain recognizable with natural visible skin detail. The far eye is clearly visible: the camera remains at three-quarter rather than the assigned near-profile angle. Needs an angle correction.

The new jacket silhouette and pocket seams are coherent and the can retains its prominent 150ml marking. Fingers cover a substantial part of the central wordmark despite the unobstructed-label brief, and the vertical small wording is not a clean exact match. Packaging needs inspection/repair before use.

Face, curls and leather remain readable in dim warm window light, with plausible rain reflections and phone framing. Two visible café patrons add extra adults behind the foreground creator, conflicting with the shared one-adult instruction; this is an adherence issue, not face drift.
A real 15-second edit, with its production method visible
This new file is exactly three 5-second still-photo shots: frontal portrait, full-body image and low-light selfie, encoded as a silent 720 × 1280 H.264 edit. It reuses those accepted assets; incremental AI generation usage is zero. It is a photo-based edit, not an AI motion-video test, and is not counted as proof that our generated-video preset works at the forecast cost. It demonstrates reusing a paid asset without paying for it twice.
We did not export historical gross supplier debit/refund transactions or time the original owner work. Those fields remain “not recorded”; reported supplier net usage is preserved. Website debit, return and net are all zero because this archive came from a direct supplier experiment. The calculator prices a future website workflow separately. A truthful monthly plan-versus-actual chart requires a comparable completed ledger; we do not manufacture one from these different units.
View all 19 retained production records
| Date / attempt | Task / specification | Debit / return / net | Supplier reported net | Adopted? / owner minutes | Preview / reason |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Both eyes are readable in a near-frontal chest-up portrait; curls, warm streak, nose and complexion remain compatible with the reference. Visible pores, small facial marks and leather creases avoid a uniformly smoothed finish; body score concerns shoulders and neck only. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Near-frontal eyes, a mild head lean and recognizable curls, nose and gold hoops preserve the reference identity. Natural pores and under-eye detail remain visible; the original burgundy jacket and black neckline are coherent. Body assessment covers visible neck and shoulders. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Direct gaze, near-frontal framing and recognizable curls and facial proportions follow the brief. Original clothing and visible shoulder build remain coherent; skin retains pores and ordinary texture rather than a uniform beauty-filter surface. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Near-profile has the far eye mostly hidden, with recognizable nose, jaw, curly bob and gold hoop. Visible neck/shoulder build, black neckline and burgundy leather remain coherent in the same softly lit brick-street setting. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Face, curls and clothing remain recognizable with natural visible skin detail. The far eye is clearly visible: the camera remains at three-quarter rather than the assigned near-profile angle. Needs an angle correction. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Face and hair remain recognizable, but the far eye is still clearly visible: this is a three-quarter view rather than the requested near-profile. Skin and leather look plausible; needs an angle correction before satisfying this assigned brief. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Both boots, grounded legs and two separate relaxed hands are present in a complete head-to-foot frame. The source face, curl pattern, burgundy bomber and charcoal jeans remain recognizable; no material visible body-build contradiction. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Curly bob, profile features and visible build remain recognizable; both boots and two separate relaxed hands are shown. Burgundy jacket seams, black tee and charcoal jeans remain coherent; feet sit on the pavement without a visible anatomical contradiction. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ The complete body and both boots are visible, with a relaxed hand on each side and a grounded stance. Face, curly bob, jacket construction and body build remain recognizable; hidden finger surfaces are not certified. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 0 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | 1013 file processing failed; zero reported supplier credits. Byte-identical product reference rehosted, not a quality reroll. |
| 2026-10-22 · Input-delivery retry | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ The new jacket silhouette and pocket seams are coherent and the can retains its prominent 150ml marking. Fingers cover a substantial part of the central wordmark despite the unobstructed-label brief, and the vertical small wording is not a clean exact match. Packaging needs inspection/repair before use. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 0 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | 1013 file processing failed; zero reported supplier credits. Byte-identical product reference rehosted, not a quality reroll. |
| 2026-10-22 · Input-delivery retry | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Recognizable face, natural seated posture and separate hands; the indigo jacket retains contrast seams and chest flaps. The can has recognizable branding and a plausible grip, but its small vertical wording is altered and the wordmark is partly covered. Packaging needs repair rather than an exact-copy claim. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 0 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | 1013 file processing failed; zero reported supplier credits. Byte-identical product reference rehosted, not a quality reroll. |
| 2026-10-22 · Input-delivery retry | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Face, curls, denim structure and seated body remain coherent with the assigned references. The grip partly covers the wordmark; small lettering does not provide a clean exact match to the source. Needs packaging review before commercial use. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Recognizable face and jacket survive the mixed warm café and cool street light; the extended arm makes the selfie framing clear. Wet pavement, dim-light texture and an empty café support the one-adult scene without a visible anatomical contradiction. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Face, curls and original jacket remain recognizable in warm/cool night light; the foreground arm gives a readable selfie perspective. Wet pavement and mild low-light texture support the phone-photo brief without a visible extra adult or anatomical contradiction. |
| 2026-10-22 · Initial | Reference-guided photo · GPT Image 2.5 Sunburst · 2K requested, 3:4; 1776×2368 final pixels | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 10 supplier credits; historical gross/return not recorded | No; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ Face, curls and leather remain readable in dim warm window light, with plausible rain reflections and phone framing. Two visible café patrons add extra adults behind the foreground creator, conflicting with the shared one-adult instruction; this is an adherence issue, not face drift. |
| 2026-10-22 · First local encode | Local photo-to-video edit · FFmpeg / H.264; no AI video generation · 720×1280, 24fps, 15s, silent, 3 × 5s photo shots | 0 / 0 / 0 website credits | 0 supplier credits; historical gross/return 0 / 0 | Yes, original brief; owner minutes not recorded | Open actual output ↗ A photo-based social edit, not AI-generated motion and not evidence for the generated-video budget. Owner review/setup minutes were not timed; local render wall time is not human labor. |
Download sanitized production ledger JSON · Download full ledger CSV · Read the original 30-image comparison and review criteria. No email, account ID, credentials, payment receipt or temporary private media URL is published.
AI influencer monthly cost calculator
Replace the targets and retry assumptions with your own workload, then compare feasible full-plan and top-up options. Prices come from the same plan, model, video-mode and entitlement modules as the product. Calculation stays in your browser; it neither signs you up nor buys anything.
Calculated · live product catalog · verified 2026-10-23
Advanced: edits, speech, existing credits & distribution
First-month setup costs
Includes the current two-stage custom character quote, plus only the extra cash and owner time you enter. Source creation in our archive was not newly charged for this article.
Your calculated monthly budget
20 photos · 4 × 15s finished videos · 24 distinct posts · 24 destination deliveries
- Monthly Cash Spend
- $28.00 Actual subscription due + whole packs + entered tools, outsourcing and selected setup. Before tax.
- Production Usage
- 390 AIIG credits Forecast net charged usage. Not an extra bill on top of included subscription credits.
- Monthly allocated expenses
- $28.00 Annual subscription allocated over 12 months. This is not the annual payment due.
- Cost Including Your Time
- 10 owner hours; rate not entered Add your own hourly value to calculate labor.
30 initial photo-generation attempts + 0 AI edits + 0 upscales + 0 new first frames. 15 × 5s base-video attempts (75s generated, 60s accepted before trimming, 60s finished). 0 additional speech-overlay renders; 0 source-sync renders.
Photo production: 150 credits (7.50/accepted photo). Video production including new first frames/speech: 240 credits (60.00/finished video). Setup: 0 credits. Monthly allocated expenses / destination post: $1.17. These are different denominators.
Allocated generation resources: $27.10 of the subscription/pack fees attributed to this usage. This accounting allocation is not another payment.
300 new term credits + 0 valid pre-owned credits; shortfall before packs 90. Whole packs: 1 × Quick top-up (100 credits), $9.00. Projected remaining balance: 10.
| Plan | Subscription due | Packs | Software cash | Feasible? |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Starter | $19.00 | $9.00 | $28.00 | Yes |
| Professional | $39.00 | $0.00 | $39.00 | Yes |
| Advanced | $79.00 | $0.00 | $79.00 | Yes |
Lowest software-cash option for these full-period assumptions: Starter plus whole packs, $28.00. Entered tools, outsourcing and setup add to that amount. Mid-cycle upgrade prorations and existing contractual commitments are not calculated.
Calculated preset scenarios, monthly billing, before tax, no external fees. Green = cash; violet = unpaid time at your entered hourly value. No hourly value entered, so time is shown as hours only. These are planning examples, not a measured month.
Calculated, one factor changed at a time. “Photo” varies both lifestyle and product-photo extra paid attempts; “Video” varies shot and optional speech/sync retries. Other inputs stay fixed. No success-rate multiplier is added. Bars show user credits, not dollars.
Estimates, not observed monthly results or a promise of accepted outputs. USD base prices; tax, currency conversion and local checkout totals excluded. Only select an external editor/scheduler fee if you actually need one.
This selection funds the task counts above under your assumptions. Compare Plans and Credits ↗ · Create My AI Influencer ↗
How to reduce cost without sacrificing consistency
Reduce avoidable paid attempts before cutting the acceptance standard. Our sample does not establish a fixed percentage saving for any tactic, so we make no numerical saving claim.
- Approve the static reference before motion. Check face, outfit, hands and product labels first; animating a defective frame buys a harder problem.
- Reuse approved photos as first frames. Charge a new image only when a new frame is actually generated. Record crop or manual editing time separately.
- Set an acceptance rule and revision boundary. Keep rejected paid results in the ledger. Escalate exact packaging work to a verified composite or qualified editor when repeated generation cannot retain the label.
- Price the storyboard. Decide whether a video needs one continuous shot, three short shots, or a photo edit. Include every generated second, speech layer and rejected shot.
- Compare subscription plus whole packs with an upgrade. A cheaper credit refill cannot unlock higher resolution, source lip sync or extra publishing accounts.
- Remove unused external subscriptions. Keep a separate editor, scheduler or voice tool only if its specific work is needed. Include captions, review and account upkeep in your owner-hour budget.
For character workflow quality, start with the AI Influencer Image Generator. For motion, use the actual Image to Video tool or AI Influencer Video Generator. For brand assets, use AI Product Image Generator and the UGC workflow guide. Tool access still depends on the selected plan and model.
First month versus ongoing monthly cost
Character setup is a separate first-month line; it is not a monthly training subscription. The calculator’s first-month switch adds the current two-stage custom character quote (10 website credits at this check), plus the one-time cash and extra owner hours you enter. It does not re-charge the archived reference for this article.
Month one may also require an identity brief, wardrobe/product reference preparation, visual approval and account setup. Later months can reuse those approved assets, but still require creation, selection, checks, edits and maintenance. Do not automatically reuse our first-month retry assumption forever; update it from your own charged-and-returned task ledger.
An annual subscription has a different cash schedule: the entire yearly amount is paid at the start or renewal, while dividing by 12 describes a monthly allocation. The full pool is not twelve independent monthly pools. Unused annual credits expire at the term end; purchased top-ups have their own non-expiring balance. A tax-inclusive or localized Checkout total can differ from this USD base-price model.
Frequently asked questions
Can I run an AI influencer for free?
You can test some image work with the one-time 30-credit welcome balance. That is not a recurring monthly allowance, and it does not unlock paid video or website publishing. A free manual posting workflow still uses your time. This budget does not subtract signup credits from a continuing monthly plan.
How much do 20 photos and four videos cost?
Our editable example needs 390 website credits: 20 accepted 2K photos and four finished 15-second videos assembled from three 5-second shots each. With the selected models and retry assumptions, Starter plus whole top-ups costs $28.00 before tax. It also assumes 10 unpaid owner hours. This is calculated capacity, not a guarantee of accepted creative output.
Do failed generations cost credits?
A confirmed failed website job returns reserved credits under the product’s rules, retaining the original subscription expiry. A successful image you dislike is still a paid result. For an actual ledger, subtract posted credit returns from posted debits; do not assume a pending, ambiguous or unattractive result was refunded. Our archive’s zero-usage supplier failures are a separate accounting system.
How much should I budget for retries?
Use your own retained attempts. Here, 0.5 additional paid attempts means three charged generations for every two adopted assets on average, rounded up for the batch. The photo examples assume 0.5; the product example assumes 1 for product photos and 0.5 for video shots. These are editable planning assumptions, not observed industry rates or a second success-rate adjustment.
Are annual plans actually cheaper for my workload?
Compare a complete year of demand and feature access, not only the annual price divided by 12. Annual pricing is paid upfront and its full credit pool expires at the term end. A first-month pool can cover work that would exhaust the year early. The calculator separately shows the amount due now, monthly allocation and a 12-times-workload credit gap; future top-ups and checkout proration are not silently assumed away.
Do I need separate editing and scheduling subscriptions?
Only if your chosen workflow needs capabilities outside the included tools. Supported website publishing uses a paid-plan allowance, not extra generation credits. Manual editing with software you already own may add no new subscription, while AI edits and upscales consume credits. Enter actual external software or outsourcing fees; do not invent a mandatory extra stack.
What is the difference between generation cost and cost per published post?
Generation cost follows every charged attempt, including rejected outputs and later edits. A post can contain several carousel frames, and cross-posting creates additional destination deliveries. This calculator shows photo credits per accepted image, video credits per finished edit and monthly allocated cash per destination delivery separately. It does not call a mixed photo/video average a price per photo.
Does a 15-second video cost three times a five-second clip?
Not automatically. This example deliberately buys three supported 5-second shots and edits them into 15 seconds. A model’s direct 15-second setting can have a different rounded quote; other models do not offer that duration. Change shot length in the calculator and compare the actual quote. A 5-second clip remains 5 seconds unless more footage or a clearly disclosed photo edit supplies the rest.
Sources, method and scope
This article owns the cost of operating your own creator, not the cheapest-tool ranking or a brand’s sponsorship quote. Use the cheapest AI influencer generator guide to compare tool choices, the brand pricing guide for what to charge a client, and the 30-day content plan for editorial cadence. An agency retainer or paid contractor fee belongs in your entered external/outsourcing expense if you actually use one; we do not substitute it for a solo workflow.
Pricing was checked against the live pricing/help pages and the project’s shared plan, credit pack, model selection, video creation, entitlement and publishing rules on 2026-10-23. The planner uses current available model variants; no unsupported duration or generic per-second rate is substituted. Defaults use an existing adult reference, no extra first frames and one destination account. Editing capacity and assumed owner hours are not time-tracked study results.
Our production evidence is the retained Sunburst half of an earlier two-model editorial test plus a clearly disclosed local photo edit. Original full-size files, prompts and hashes are retained in that source record. A single character and six rejected photos are not a population estimate of failure rates. No month-long publishing trial, paid-customer bill, independent cost audit or AI-generated-motion result is claimed.
- AI Influencer Generator: current plans and credit packs
- Official help: how credits work
- Official help: checking a generation quote
- Official help: unused credit rules
- InfluencerForge: a credit-based content calendar
- InfluencerForge: setup and recurring cost structure
- CreatorFlow: cost layers and published-post denominators
- EditClub: DIY versus managed-service scope
Competitor pages informed content organization and scope comparisons. Their currencies, credits, subscriber allowances and market claims are not inputs to our calculator. We quote no third-party dollar price without its own official price evidence. Calculated charts are planning tools, not an industry study.
Edited by the AI Influencer Generator editorial team. Updated October 23, 2026. Inputs, formulas, source URLs and verification date travel with the calculator CSV; observed task records have a separate download.
Then Compare Plans and Credits or Create My AI Influencer. Reading and calculation need no account.
Plan Content
Measure Engagement
Build Your Profile
Price Your Work
Write Post Copy
Brand Partnerships