Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] Black Forest Labs FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo fal

Settled by community votes across 17 shared challenges, with an AI judge weighing in on each.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

17.1 arena score

#54 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

27.9 arena score

#3 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Top 3 in Text-to-Image
Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

0%

win rate

Ties

0%

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

0%

win rate

Shared challenges 17

Challenge by challenge

The strongest take from each model on every shared challenge, with the AI judge's read.

Geometric Composition

Text-to-Image

“A glass cube on a wooden table. Inside the cube is a small blue sphere. On top of the cube sits a red book. A green plant is behind the cube, partially visible through the glass. Soft window light from the left.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Features a vivid, high-saturation color palette.
  • + Includes clear reflections on the base of the glass cube.
  • + Follows all spatial instructions including lighting direction.
  • The glass cube appears to have an open front, lacking a visible pane on the near side.
  • The wood grain on the table is somewhat generic.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Exceptional realism in the texture of the wooden table and the book cover fabric.
  • + Captures the 'small' scale of the sphere relative to the cube better than Model A.
  • + Accurately renders the plant through the glass with realistic distortions.
  • The plant arrangement in the background is slightly messy compared to Model A.

Verdict: Both models followed the complex spatial prompt perfectly. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the winner due to its superior texture work and more realistic material rendering, particularly on the wooden surface and the glass cube's structure. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a very clean image, but the cube lacks a front face and the overall aesthetic feels more digital than photographic.

Candid Street Photography

Text-to-Image

“A candid street photo of an elderly Japanese man repairing a red bicycle in light rain, reflections on wet pavement, shallow depth of field, 50mm lens, natural skin texture, imperfect framing, motion blur from passing cars, cinematic but realistic, no stylization.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent wet pavement reflections
  • + High resolution and clean edges
  • + Followed 'red bicycle' requirement clearly
  • The man is posing with the bike rather than repairing it
  • Missing requested motion blur from cars
  • Composition feels too centered and artificial for a 'candid' prompt

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Perfect adherence to the 'repairing' action and 'motion blur' request
  • + Extremely realistic skin texture and candid street photography aesthetic
  • + Accurate environment with Japanese-style street details and tools
  • Minor artifact where the front tire meets the puddle
  • Lower overall resolution compared to Model A

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo significantly outperformed FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] in terms of prompt adherence, successfully capturing both the 'repairing' action and the 'motion blur' of passing cars which FLUX.1 entirely ignored. While FLUX.1 has higher clarity, FLUX.2 better captured the raw, candid, and non-stylized aesthetic requested in the prompt.

Fantasy Warrior

Text-to-Image

“Close portrait of a battle-worn paladin in ornate engraved plate armor, hair braided with small beads, faint scars and dirt on the skin, warm torchlight reflecting off metal, shallow depth of field, bokeh sparks, lifelike eyes, highly detailed texture on leather straps and cloth underlayer.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent dramatic lighting and high-contrast skin textures
  • + Ornate and intricate engraving details on the chest plate
  • Missed the braids and beads requirement in the hair
  • Armor looks a bit like cast plastic/resin rather than heavy metal

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Followed all prompt details including the braided hair with beads and visible dirt/scars
  • + Realistic metal texture with believable wear and chainmail underlayer
  • + Clear bokeh sparks and a visible torch added context
  • The character has a slightly younger, less 'battle-worn' facial expression compared to Model A
  • Metal engravings are slightly less crisp than Model A

Verdict: While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a more cinematically lit portrait, it failed to incorporate the specific hair styling requested. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the prompt much more accurately, successfully depicting the beaded braids, the dirt, and the complex layers of the paladin's gear.

Modern Clean Menu

Text-to-Image

“Modern minimalist restaurant menu design, white background with colorful food photos in grid, sections for appetizers/pizza/mains, bold sans-serif fonts, vibrant accents, clean professional layout for casual dining.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Strong high-contrast layout using modular blocks
  • + Excellent food photography with vibrant colors
  • + Clean, bold typography that creates a high-end editorial feel
  • Text is largely nonsensical and features heavy artifacts in the font rendering
  • Grid layout is slightly chaotic with inconsistent spacing

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Excellent adherence to the section requirements (Appetizers, Pizza, Mains)
  • + Professional use of vibrant accent colors along the footer
  • + Text is much more readable and structured like a real menu with prices
  • The food photos are repetitive, showing too many pizzas for a general menu
  • Lower resolution in the background texture of the food images compared to Model A

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the winner because it follows the specific layout instructions much better, creating distinct sections for appetizers, pizza, and mains while maintaining legibility. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] has more striking photography, its text is illegible and it fails to create a practical menu structure.

Magic Burger Explosion: Fiery Photorealism Challenge

Text-to-Image

“Ad for 'Magic Burger'. Dynamic, exploded burger with all components (bun, patty, cheese, lettuce, tomato, sauce) suspended in mid-air. Emphasize photorealistic detail and a sense of motion. Dark, fiery background with glowing embers. Integrate text: 'MAGIC BURGER' as a prominent title, 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' as a secondary message, and '€6.99' in a starburst, all rendered with a fiery, glowing effect.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Strong, high-contrast colors that pop.
  • + Excellent legibility for the 'MAGIC BURGER' title.
  • Failed the 'exploded' instruction; the burger is fully assembled.
  • Minor spelling error in 'ONLY' (rendered as 'LNHLY').
  • The starburst is a simple 2D graphic rather than a fiery effect.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Perfectly follows the 'exploded burger' prompt with all components suspended.
  • + Excellent adherence to the 'fiery, glowing effect' for all text elements.
  • + High-quality textures on the meat patty and fresh vegetables.
  • The 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' text is slightly small compared to the layout.
  • The sauce droplets have a slightly unnatural, worm-like shape.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the clear winner as it successfully followed the complex instruction for an 'exploded burger,' whereas FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] generated a static, assembled burger. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo also perfectly captured the fiery aesthetic for the text and starburst, while maintaining correct spelling.

Chalkboard Menu

Text-to-Image

“Handwritten-style chalkboard menu in a cozy café, all text rendered in the exact same realistic chalk handwriting style with natural variations in letter size, slight slant, and chalk texture — no printed or digital fonts anywhere on the board. Title at the top in elegant cursive chalk handwriting: ‘TODAY’S SPECIALS – APRIL 30, 2026’. Below it, three menu items also in the same handwritten chalk style: ‘Truffle Mushroom Risotto – $24’, ‘Grilled Octopus with Lemon & Herbs – $28’, ‘Brown Butter Chocolate Chip Cookies – $9’. At the very bottom, smaller text in the identical handwritten chalk style (slightly smaller but still clearly legible with the same handwriting characteristics): ‘All items made fresh daily • Ask about our gluten-free options’. Warm ambient café lighting, visible chalk dust and smudges, realistic handwriting imperfections, no clean printed text anywhere.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Features a clear wooden frame layout.
  • + Good contrast between the board and the background.
  • Numerous spelling errors including 'Mashroom', 'Risoktso', and 'Octpus'.
  • Repeats words like 'with with' and includes garbled text for the date.
  • The chalk texture looks more like a digital marker than realistic chalk.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Excellent adherence to the requested chalk texture, including realistic smudges and dust.
  • + Perfect spelling of all menu items and the requested date.
  • + Captures the 'cozy café' atmosphere with a depth-of-field background.
  • The cursive for the title is relatively simple rather than 'elegant'.
  • The bottom line of text is slightly crowded at the edge of the board.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the clear winner as it followed all textual instructions perfectly and provided a highly realistic chalk texture. In contrast, FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] struggled significantly with spelling, repeating words and failing to render the requested date correctly.

The Reversed Rodeo

Text-to-Image

“Horse riding astronaut in space — horse on top, not vice versa. Surreal, highly detailed, cinematic.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Successfully followed the difficult logic of the horse being on top of the astronaut
  • + Clean, high-fidelity character rendering with clear facial features
  • The 'riding' aspect is a bit ambiguous as the horse is just floating behind/above the man
  • Background is relatively empty and lacks the requested cinematic scale

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Excellent cinematic lighting and complex background details
  • + Dynamic composition with a sense of motion
  • Failed the primary prompt instruction by placing the astronaut on top of the horse
  • Anatomical issues where the astronaut's leg merges strangely with the horse

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] is the winner because it successfully followed the specific and 'surreal' instruction to place the horse on top of the astronaut, whereas FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo defaulted to a standard astronaut-riding-horse trope. Although FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo has more impressive textures and lighting, it failed the fundamental logic test of the prompt.

The Capybara Taxi Driver

Text-to-Image

“Photorealistic scene inside a yellow New York taxi at night. A capybara is driving, wearing a yellow taxi driver cap and a dark jacket. It has a calm, professional expression and both front paws on the steering wheel. In the back seat sits a human businesswoman in a coat, looking at her phone with a completely normal, bored expression (as if this is just another normal ride). Through the windows you can see the streets of Manhattan at night with blurred lights. Realistic taxi interior, photorealistic, detailed fur and fabric, 35mm lens, night lighting with reflections, shallow depth of field.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent fur texture on the capybara
  • + moody and cinematically appropriate lighting for a night scene
  • + High facial detail on both the capybara and the passenger
  • Failed the negative constraint: only one paw is on the steering wheel, the other is on its lap
  • The passenger is in the front seat or the car scale is anatomically incorrect
  • The yellow cap looks more like a modern baseball cap than a traditional taxi driver hat

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Perfect adherence to the prompt with both paws on the steering wheel
  • + Realistic depiction of a traditional chauffeur/taxi hat
  • + Better sense of the 'New York taxi' atmosphere with the roof sign and urban background
  • The passenger's hands and phone interaction have slight AI artifacts
  • The composition is a bit flat compared to the cinematic depth of Model A

Verdict: Model B (FLUX.2 Turbo) captures the requested scene much more accurately by placing both paws on the wheel and portraying the passenger in a more convincing 'ride' context. While Image A (FLUX.1 dev) has superior textures and more dramatic lighting, it fails specifically on the positioning of the capybara's paws and the spatial logic of the car interior.

The Halloween Invitation

Text-to-Image

“Vintage gothic Halloween party invitation. Dark parchment poster, spooky border with webs and thorns, central glowing jack-o-lantern, bats, twisted trees, moody night sky. Add elegant gothic title text saying "Halloween Party Invitation", a small scroll banner saying "You are invited to a night of frights", and event details at the bottom: Date: 30.10.2026 Time: 7pm Location: The Arches, NYC Spooky but polished, cinematic lighting, square format.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Strong, clean main title typography
  • + Bold jack-o-lantern illustration
  • Severely garbled text in the scroll banner and location address
  • Missed elements like the parchment texture and spiderwebs

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Perfect text rendering for all requested details including the small banner
  • + Excellent gothic atmosphere with parchment, webs, and detailed trees
  • + High visual quality with cinematic lighting and a professional layout
  • The jack-o-lantern is slightly lower on the canvas, leaving large negative space at the top

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo significantly outperforms FLUX.1 Kontext by accurately rendering every specific text detail, including the date, time, and address. While FLUX.1 Kontext struggled with gibberish text and failed to include background details like the parchment, FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the prompt's aesthetic and content requirements perfectly.

Bald man challenge

Image Editing
Edit instruction

“Give the person a full, thick head of natural hair with realistic texture, density, and a natural hairline. Preserve facial features and lighting.”

Before After
FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
Before After
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Successfully added thick, styled hair that looks volumetric.
  • + The hair texture matches the Groomed aesthetic of the beard.
  • Significantly altered facial features, making the person look younger and different from the source.
  • Changed the eyewear to thick black frames, failing to preserve the original glasses.
  • The face looks overly smoothed and lacks the grit of the original image.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Excellent preservation of the original facial features, skin texture, and lighting.
  • + Perfectly preserved the original eyeglasses and clothing.
  • + The hair texture looks realistic and matches the existing beard hair perfectly.
  • The hairline on the forehead is slightly harsh and lacks transition hairs.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the clear winner as it successfully applied the requested edit while perfectly preserving the source identity, glasses, and skin texture. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] failed the primary requirement of preservation, effectively generating a new person who looks significantly different from the original subject.

Isometric Miniature Diorama Scenes

Text-to-Image

“Create a clear, 45° top-down isometric miniature 3D cartoon scene of Japan's signature dish: sushi, with soft refined textures, realistic PBR materials, gentle lighting, on a small raised diorama base with minimal garnish and plate. Solid light blue background. At top-center: 'JAPAN' in large bold text, 'SUSHI' below it, small flag icon. Perfectly centered, ultra-clean, high-clarity, square format.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent 3D cartoon style with very smooth, soft textures
  • + Very clean and bold typography
  • + Solid adherence to the light blue background request
  • The flag icon is inaccurate and does not resemble the Japanese flag
  • The sushi anatomy is slightly abstract/bloated
  • Text layout is a bit scattered compared to the prompt's center-top request

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + High-quality PBR materials with realistic textures on the fish and rice
  • + Accurate rendering of the Japanese flag icon
  • + Strict adherence to the 45-degree isometric diorama perspective
  • The 'SUSHI' text is slightly off-center relative to the 'JAPAN' text
  • The background has a slight gradient/grain rather than being a perfectly solid flat color

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo provided a much more sophisticated interpretation of 'realistic PBR materials' while maintaining the diorama feel and accurately depicting the Japanese flag. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] captured the 'cartoon' aspect well, its failure to generate a recognizable flag and its overly simplistic sushi model makes it a less successful adherence to the full prompt.

Over-the-top cartoon caricature

Editing
Edit instruction

“Create a caricature of me and my job. Make it exaggerated and humorous, incorporating my profession as a tv show anchor and my love for dogs and hockey.”

Source
FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Successfully captures a cartoon/caricature aesthetic
  • + Includes a dog and a TV screen as requested in the prompt
  • Completely misses the 'hockey' requirement of the prompt
  • The representation of the TV job is very basic with just a desktop monitor in the background
  • The text 'JOB' and other letters are nonsensical and distracting

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Excellent prompt adherence, including hockey, dogs, and the TV anchor desk in a single scene
  • + Very high visual quality with a classic professional caricature style (big head, small body)
  • + Creative composition that places the subject in a dynamic hockey arena setting
  • Some minor artifacts in the background crowd and text rendering on the desk

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the instructions much more comprehensively by incorporating all three requested elements: TV anchor profession, dogs, and hockey. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] completely omitted the hockey requirement and provided a much simpler illustration. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo's caricature style is also more traditionally 'exaggerated and humorous' as requested.

Adorable Baby Animals in Sunny Meadow

Text-to-Image

“Hyper-photorealistic scene of fluffy baby animals—a golden retriever puppy, tabby kitten, baby bunny, and red fox kit—with big expressive eyes and ultra-detailed soft fur, playfully chasing butterflies and tumbling together in a lush wildflower meadow, warm golden sunrise light with god rays and dew sparkles, joyful wholesome vibe, 8K masterpiece.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Strong bokeh and warm lighting effects
  • + Playful, dynamic poses that convey action
  • Failed the prompt by including three animals instead of the requested four
  • Missing the baby bunny and red fox kit entirely
  • The central animal has anatomical oddities in the face

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Perfect prompt adherence, including all four specific animals
  • + Excellent rendering of dew sparkles and golden sunrise god rays
  • + High texture detail in the fur of each distinct species
  • The cat's front right paw is somewhat awkwardly blended into the fox's head
  • The transition between the puppy's paw and the rabbit is slightly cluttered

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the prompt perfectly, successfully including the puppy, kitten, bunny, and fox kit, whereas FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] only generated three animals and missed two of the requested species. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo also captured the specific lighting details like dew sparkles and god rays much more effectively, creating a truer '8K masterpiece' look.

Studio Ghibli Anime Style

Editing
Edit instruction

“Transform this photo into a Studio Ghibli–inspired illustration. Use soft pastel colors, hand-painted textures, gentle lighting, dreamy backgrounds, and a warm, nostalgic mood”

Source
FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent preservation of the original composition and poses.
  • + High image clarity and clean line work.
  • + Accurate translation of the distinct expressions of the three subjects.
  • The style looks more like generic modern anime than the requested Studio Ghibli style.
  • Lacks the soft pastel colors and hand-painted textures mentioned in the prompt.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Perfectly captures the Studio Ghibli aesthetic with soft watercolors and pencil-like textures.
  • + Follows the prompt for 'dreamy backgrounds' by adding cherry blossoms and greenery.
  • + Maintains high fidelity to the original meme's perspective and character placement.
  • The facial features are slightly less sharp than in Model A.
  • The background buildings from the source image are largely replaced by trees.

Verdict: While both models successfully transformed the 'Distracted Boyfriend' meme into an illustration, FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the specific stylistic instructions much more effectively. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a standard digital anime look, whereas FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo captured the nostalgic, hand-painted, soft aesthetic characteristic of Studio Ghibli films.

Golden Hour Stroll

Image Editing
Edit instruction

“Add dynamic motion to this photo: make hair blow in the wind, add leaves flying, energetic and lively feel.”

Before After
FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
Before After
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Subtle and realistic hair movement
  • + Excellent source preservation of the face and clothes
  • + Clean background elements
  • The 'flying leaves' are barely noticeable and look like small artifacts
  • Lacks the high energy requested in the prompt

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Strong adherence to the 'energetic and lively' instruction
  • + Dynamic hair spread follows the motion request well
  • + Large number of flying leaves creates a sense of wind
  • Leaves overlapping the subject's face and body create visual clutter
  • The hair edit looks slightly unnatural and detached from the scalp

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] prioritized image quality and source preservation but failed to deliver a truly 'energetic' feel, barely including any leaves. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the prompt much more closely by adding significant motion to the hair and many flying leaves, though at the cost of some visual clarity due to the leaves obscuring parts of the subject. FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the winner for better following the creative intent of the edit.

Vintage Cafe Logo

Text-to-Image

“Vintage minimalist restaurant logo for "Caffè Florian", retro cloche dome with steam and "Est. 1720" banner, classic typography, warm brown and cream tones, subtle texture on light background, vector emblem style.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent typography rendering with the correct accent on 'Caffè'
  • + Strong minimalist vector style
  • + Clean and balanced composition
  • Failed to include a banner as requested
  • The cloche icon looks more like a building dome
  • Missing the requested subtle texture

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Followed all prompt details including the cloche dome, steam, and banner
  • + Applied a very effective 'subtle texture' for a vintage feel
  • + Classic woodcut/engraved illustration style matches the brand history
  • The accent on the 'E' in 'Caffè' is slightly misplaced/clunky compared to Model A

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo followed the prompt much more accurately by including specific elements like the banner and the textured background. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a very clean modern logo, it failed to incorporate the vintage texture and banner requested in the original prompt.

Apollo 11: Journey to Tranquility

Text-to-Image

“Create a clean, modern vector infographic poster about the Apollo 11 mission. NASA-inspired palette (navy, white, muted red, light gray). Flat-vector style, crisp lines, consistent iconography, subtle gradients only. Steps (stop at landing): 1. Launch (Saturn Vicon) 2. Earth Orbit (Earth + orbit ring icon) 3. Translunar (trajectory arc icon) 4. Lunar Orbit (Moon + orbit ring icon) 5. Descent (lunar module descending icon) 6. Landing (lunar module on the surface icon) Small supporting elements (minimal text): • Crew strip: three silhouette icons with only last names: Armstrong, Aldrin, Collins. • Landing site marker: Moon pin labeled "Tranquility" only. Layout constraints: generous margins, large readable labels, clean background with subtle stars. Vector-only, print-poster look, high resolution.”

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]
FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Successfully follows the requested flat-vector style with minimal gradients.
  • + Adheres strictly to the navy, white, and muted red color palette.
  • Numerous spelling errors including the main title 'APOLO' and illegible body text.
  • Icons are abstract and messy, failing to clearly represent the specific mission stages requested.

FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo

  • + Excellent text rendering with accurate spelling of 'Apollo', 'Armstrong', 'Aldrin', and 'Collins'.
  • + Highly logical layout that clearly visualizes each requested step from launch to landing.
  • + Crisp and recognizable iconography for the Saturn V and Lunar Module.
  • Icons like the Earth and Moon are more detailed than the requested 'flat-vector' style.
  • Includes yellow/gold in the color palette which was not part of the NASA-inspired color prompt.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Turbo is the clear winner as it provides a coherent, legible, and educational infographic that follows the complex sequence of events. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] followed the aesthetic style more closely, its inability to spell basic words and its disorganized icons make it failing as an infographic.

Next steps

Explore each model