FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] Black Forest Labs vs Seedream 4.0 ByteDance

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent adherence to lighting instructions with a clear window source on the left.
• + Highly detailed textures of the book pages and plant leaves.
• + Very realistic reflections and refractive qualities in the glass cube.

• − The sphere is slightly large for the requested 'small' sphere.
• − The plant is very dominant in the background, making it less 'partially visible through the glass' and more around it.

Seedream 4.0

• + Perfectly captures the scale of the 'small' sphere.
• + Accurately places the plant directly behind the cube so it is primarily viewed through the glass.
• + Natural and aesthetically pleasing composition.

• − The sphere appears to be floating slightly above the floor of the cube.
• − The light source, while soft, is less defined as specifically coming from the left compared to Image A.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent skin texture and realistic rendering of the person's face.
• + High resolution and clarity in the subject's clothing and the bicycle frame.

• − The subject is clearly just sitting/standing with the bike rather than 'repairing' it.
• − Failed to include motion blur for passing cars; the background traffic is static.
• − The rain effect looks like a digital overlay rather than a natural atmospheric condition.

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully captures the action of 'repairing' the bicycle with tools on the ground.
• + Accurately depicts motion blur in the passing vehicle as requested.
• + Authentic candid feeling with imperfect framing and a more natural-looking environment.

• − Slightly lower overall resolution compared to Model A.
• − Some minor anatomical blurring in the hands during the repair action.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Ornate engraved plate armor is highly detailed and structurally sound
• + Naturalistic lighting with subtle warm tones

• − Missed the request for braided hair with beads
• − Skin texture appears somewhat plastic and lacks the requested dirt and grit

Seedream 4.0

• + Excellent adherence to the 'braided hair with small beads' and 'dirt on skin' prompts
• + Stronger sense of 'battle-worn' through weathered textures on leather and metal
• + Realistic lighting interaction from the visible torch

• − Armor engravings are slightly less sharp than model a
• − Dynamic fire/sparks create more visual noise

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Features a more professional and complex layout
• + Uses high-quality, vibrant food photography
• + Includes detailed text blocks that mimic real menu descriptions

• − Text is largely illegible gibberish
• − The grid layout feels a bit cluttered

Seedream 4.0

• + Excellent text rendering for the main section headers
• + Clear, clean white space enhances the minimalist aesthetic
• + Strong adherence to the requested pizza, appetizers, and mains sections

• − The grid structure is uneven and unconventional
• − One image of pizza is stretched into a narrow vertical format

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent high-resolution texture on the patty and bun.
• + Very clean and readable typography for all requested elements.
• + Vibrant and well-balanced use of color and lighting.

• − Failed to create an 'exploded' view; the burger components are mostly stacked.
• − Minor spelling error in 'ONLY' which appears as 'LNHLY'.

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully captured the 'exploded' and dynamic motion effect requested.
• + Text effects perfectly match the 'fiery, glowing' prompt description.
• + Highly creative composition with motion trails and swirling embers.

• − Incorrect price displayed (€5.99 instead of €6.99).
• − The burger components feel slightly disconnected or duplicated rather than a single deconstructed burger.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent chalk texture on the 'TODAY SPECIALS' text
• + Maintains a clean even layout within the frame

• − Numerous spelling errors including 'Mashroom', 'Risoktso', and 'Octpus'
• − Severe text artifacts for the date and the middle section of the menu

Seedream 4.0

• + Perfect text rendering with zero spelling errors across all menu items and the date
• + Highly realistic chalkboard texture with smudges and chalk dust for a natural look
• + Better adherence to the 'cozy café' setting by including an out-of-focus background

• − The perspective makes the sign slightly tilted compared to the vertical frame

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent adherence to the logical constraint of the horse on top of the man.
• + Clean, clear visual rendering and anatomy of the astronaut.
• + Good spatial depth and composition with planetary elements.

• − The transition area where the horse and man touch is a bit anatomically ambiguous.
• − The astronaut's hands are slightly distorted.

Seedream 4.0

• + Beautiful cinematic lighting and galactic background.
• + Dynamic pose for the horse and astronaut.

• − Completely failed the negative constraint; the astronaut is riding the horse.
• − Significant anatomical artifacts on the horse's front legs.
• − Low-quality rendering of the horse's tack and reins.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent fur texture and lighting on the capybara's face.
• + Captures the bored, deadpan expression of the passenger perfectly.
• + Very high resolution and cinematic color grading.

• − Failed the prompt instruction for both paws on the steering wheel.
• − The capybara's head is disproportionately large for the vehicle interior.
• − The taxi interior design is a bit generic and dark.

Seedream 4.0

• + Strictly followed the instruction for both paws on the steering wheel.
• + Better composition showing more of the taxi and the Manhattan street environment.
• + The capybara's scale feels more grounded in the physical space of the car.

• − Slightly lower fidelity on the passenger's facial features and phone.
• − The capybara's hands/paws look slightly like gloves or have ambiguous anatomy.
• − Text on the taxi and cap is somewhat garbled.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent readability for the main header text
• + Clean graphic design style suitable for a print invitation
• + Highly symmetrical composition

• − Serious spelling errors in the banner and location details
• − Lacks the atmospheric 'cinematic lighting' and 'moody sky' requested
• − The parchment effect is missing; it looks more like a modern flat illustration

Seedream 4.0

• + Superb atmospheric lighting and realistic textures
• + Accurately captures every prompt element including the moody sky, parchment, thorns, and webs
• + Perfect spelling of all event details and beautiful gothic typography

• − Text on the small banner is slightly crowded
• − The bottom corner parchment curl slightly obscures the web detail

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent hair texture and modern styling.
• + Matches the person's beard color well.

• − Significantly alters facial features, making the man look younger and thinner.
• − Changed the eyeglass frames and eye area, failing to preserve the source identity.

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully preserves the subject's original facial features, skin texture, and glasses.
• + Maintains the grainy film aesthetic of the source image.
• + Fulfills the prompt by providing a full, thick head of hair.

• − The transition from the forehead to the hair is a bit soft and lacks fine detail.
• − The hair shape is slightly tall and looks a bit like a wig.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent 3D toy-like aesthetic with clean, soft surfaces
• + Very readable and bold text typography
• + Satisfies the minimal garnish and diorama base request perfectly

• − Flag icon is an abstract geometric shape rather than a recognizable flag
• − The sushi anatomy is slightly nonsensical with the nori wrap in the middle

Seedream 4.0

• + Shows a more diverse and recognizable set of sushi types
• + Includes an accurate Japanese flag icon as requested
• + Detailed textures on the rice and fish feel more like 'realistic PBR' materials

• − The text is less balanced and feels smaller relative to the image frame
• − The diorama base is more cluttered than the 'minimal' request

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Strongly preserves the user's likeness from the original photo in its drawing style.
• + Includes the dog and TV anchor elements clearly.
• + Matches the 'caricature' request through a bold, comic-book art style.

• − Completely misses the 'hockey' requirement.
• − The background is very generic and doesn't explicitly look like a TV studio or newsroom.
• − Text in the image is nonsensical gibberish.

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully incorporates all three elements: TV anchor desk/mic, a realistic dog, and a hockey stick/jersey.
• + Excellent use of caricature proportions (large head, small body) while maintaining a photographic style.
• + Good background preservation while adapting it to include the professional and hobby elements.

• − The facial likeness is slightly more distorted and less recognizable than the other model.
• − Minor anatomical issues with the hand holding the phone.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent anatomical consistency in the golden retriever puppy paws
• + Very clean composition and high resolution overall

• − Misses half of the requested animals (no bunny or fox kit)
• − Butterflies appear simplified and lack realism

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully includes all four requested animals: puppy, tabby kitten, bunny, and fox kit
• + Beautifully captures the 'god rays' and 'dew sparkles' requested in the prompt
• + Dynamic action poses that fit the 'tumbling together' description

• − The fox kit has three ears, which is a significant anatomical error
• − The kitten's front right paw is disproportionately large and blended with its tail

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent preservation of the source image composition and character poses
• + Consistent character designs that look like modern anime
• + High clarity and sharp lines

• − Does not accurately capture the requested Studio Ghibli art style, appearing more like generic digital anime
• − Lighting is flat rather than the requested dreamy, gentle lighting
• − Background feels like a simple filter rather than a hand-painted environment

Seedream 4.0

• + Perfectly captures the Studio Ghibli watercolor/hand-painted aesthetic
• + Follows all stylistic cues including soft pastel colors and dreamy backgrounds
• + Maintains the core narrative of the original image while fully transforming the medium

• − Loss of some fine details from the original faces (e.g., the specific expressions are slightly softened)
• − The man's hand has some minor anatomical blurring characteristic of watercolor rendering

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent source preservation, maintaining identical facial features and clothing.
• + Subtle and realistic hair movement that feels integrated with the subject.

• − The 'flying leaves' are tiny, sparse, and lack realism.
• − The overall 'energetic feel' is barely changed from the original static image.

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully added a large quantity of leaves with varying sizes for depth.
• + Created a much stronger sense of motion in the hair.
• + Added a warm, sunny glow that enhances the 'lively' mood requested.

• − Noticeable changes to the woman's facial features and expression compared to the source.
• − Slight loss in sharp detail on the clothing and dog compared to the source.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Excellent typography rendering with the correct accent on 'Caffè'.
• + Clean, vector-style lines suitable for a modern minimalist logo.
• + Perfect adherence to the requested color palette.

• − Missed the 'banner' requirement for the 'Est. 1720' text.
• − The cloche icon is very abstract and resembles a dome or crown more than a kitchen cloche.
• − Lacks the requested 'subtle texture' on the background.

Seedream 4.0

• + Successfully included all elements, including the steam and the banner.
• + Great use of 'subtle texture' on the background, giving it a paper-like vintage feel.
• + More descriptive and recognizable cloche illustration.

• − The 'f' in 'Caffè' is stylized strangely, looking almost like a double 'f' or a ligature error.
• − The composition is a bit crowded compared to Model A's minimalist approach.

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

• + Stronger adherence to the flat-vector aesthetic style
• + Excellent color palette usage matching the navy and muted red request

• − Poor typography with significant spelling errors like 'APOLO'
• − Iconography is abstract and messy, failing to clearly represent the specific mission stages requested

Seedream 4.0

• + Accurately depicts all requested steps with clear, recognizable icons
• + Superior text rendering for names and mission stages with high legibility
• + Excellent composition that follows a logical chronological flow

• − Styling is a bit more illustrative and less 'flat-vector' than requested
• − Text contains minor typos like 'Descent Surfcce'