Asset provenance and publication review

Learning outcome: Keep a usable record of where creative material came from.

An asset handover should identify the source material, generation or editing steps, permitted use information and approved final version. This helps a team avoid publishing the wrong file or forgetting a restriction. It does not replace checking the applicable licence or obtaining necessary permissions.

Review the final asset in context: text accuracy, accessibility, visual defects and whether the presentation could mislead viewers. Label illustrative or synthetic material where that distinction matters. Avoid claiming a generated depiction is evidence of a real event. Keep editable source files and a clear approval record so later revisions can be traced.

Worked example

A fictional campaign folder contains draft images, an approved banner and an exported copy with the wrong date. Without a manifest, a colleague chooses the newest file. A simple record names the approved version, links its editable source and records that the people shown are fictional illustrations.

Try it yourself

Create an asset manifest with filename, purpose, source, edits, permission-check status, accessibility text and approval status. Include one file that must not be published.

You can do this exercise on paper. If using an assistant, keep to the fictional material and an approved tool.

Check your understanding

Which file should a publisher select?

1. The largest export in the folder
2. The version explicitly approved for that use
3. Whichever file was modified most recently

Workbook

Download the course workbook to record your answer and compare it after the knowledge check.

Further reading

• Hugging Face: Diffusers
• Hugging Face: inpainting
• W3C: images