Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] Black Forest Labs Seedream 4.5 ByteDance

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

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

17.2 arena score

#54 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

Seedream 4.5

26.1 arena score

#9 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

0%

win rate

Ties

0%

Seedream 4.5

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent photographic realism and texture details.
  • + Logical refraction and reflections on the sphere and glass surfaces.
  • + Cohesive and vibrant color palette.
  • The glass cube has an unusually thick, mirrored base that wasn't explicitly requested.
  • The sphere is quite large, pushing the definition of 'small' relative to the cube.

Seedream 4.5

  • + Perfectly adheres to the scale requested with a truly 'small' blue sphere.
  • + Accurately places the plant behind the glass with realistic distortion.
  • + Correct lighting direction with sharp shadows.
  • The book's placement is slightly physically impossible, appearing to float or lacks a resting shadow on the glass.
  • Slightly less crisp texture on the wooden table compared to Model A.

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt instructions perfectly. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a more aesthetically pleasing, high-contrast image with better surface textures, while Seedream 4.5 handled the relative scale of the objects (specifically the 'small' sphere) more accurately and placed the plant more clearly 'behind' the cube.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent anatomical detail on the man's face and hands
  • + Very clean rendering of the bicycle structure
  • + Beautifully rendered reflections on the wet asphalt
  • Fails to include motion blur for passing cars as requested
  • The man is posing with/riding the bike rather than repairing it
  • The composition feels a bit too balanced and staged for a 'candid' prompt

Seedream 4.5

  • + Captures the 'repairing' action and 'candid' feel perfectly
  • + Includes dynamic motion blur from passing cars as requested
  • + Excellent use of shallow depth of field and 'imperfect' street photography framing
  • The man's hands are slightly muddled/distorted upon close inspection
  • Artificial-looking rain droplets on the raincoat that don't match the environment rain density

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 followed the prompt much more accurately, capturing the 'repairing' action and the technical request for motion blur which FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] ignored. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] has higher raw detail on the subject, it produced a static portrait of a man standing with a bike rather than a candid scene of a man fixing one.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent metallic engraving details
  • + Strong, cinematic dramatic lighting
  • + Good interpretation of battle-worn skin via small scars
  • Missed the request for hair braided with beads
  • Leather straps and cloth layers are less visible compared to armor
  • Slightly more artificial skin texture

Seedream 4.5

  • + Perfect adherence to specific details like braided hair with beads
  • + Very realistic skin texture with visible dirt and faint scars
  • + Excellent depth of field with prominent bokeh sparks and leather/cloth textures
  • The torch flame in the foreground is a bit distracting
  • Upper hair braids look slightly repetitive

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 followed the prompt much more closely than FLUX.1 Kontext [dev], successfully including specific details like the beads in the braids and the layered textures of leather and cloth. Seedream 4.5 also achieved a more lifelike skin texture and realistic depth of field, making it the superior image for this specific set of instructions.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent high-resolution food photography that looks appetizing.
  • + Dynamic grid layout that feels modern and professional.
  • + Very clean, stark white background as requested.
  • Text is mostly gibberish with several character glitches.
  • The layout is a bit cluttered with redundant text blocks.

Seedream 4.5

  • + Perfect adherence to all requested sections (Appetizers, Pizza, Mains).
  • + Clear use of vibrant color-coded accents for different menu categories.
  • + Text is much more legible and formatted like a real menu with prices.
  • The 'grid' is a simple vertical list rather than a tilled photo grid.
  • Food photos have a slightly lower fidelity/artificial look compared to Model A.

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 followed the prompt instructions perfectly, including the specific menu sections and price formatting, though its layout is quite basic. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced significantly higher quality imagery and a more creative layout, but it failed to include the specific sections requested and the text is illegible. Seedream 4.5 is the winner for better instruction following and functional design.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent typography rendering with clean, professional-looking fonts.
  • + High-contrast colors and sharp, photorealistic burger textures.
  • + Bold and clear secondary text that is easy to read.
  • Failed to create an 'exploded' view; the burger is fully assembled.
  • The starburst for the price is a flat graphic rather than an integrated fiery effect.
  • Typography has a minor spelling error in 'ONLY' (rendered as 'LNHLY').

Seedream 4.5

  • + Successfully captured the 'exploded' motion with ingredients flying outwards.
  • + Highly creative fiery typography that matches the prompt's aesthetic perfectly.
  • + Dynamic starburst that looks integrated into the scene's lighting and embers.
  • The 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' text is slightly less crisp compared to the main title.
  • One ingredient (the cucumber/pickle slice) looks slightly detached from the rest of the realism.

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the clear winner as it successfully interpreted the 'exploded' burger instruction and the 'fiery, glowing effect' for the text, whereas FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a static assembled burger with flat, non-fiery graphics. Seedream 4.5 also achieved perfect spelling and a much stronger sense of motion.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent chalk texture on the 'TODAY SPECIALS' title.
  • + Good framing of the chalkboard.
  • Numerous spelling errors including 'Mashroom', 'Risoktso', and 'Octpus'.
  • Failed to render the date correctly with garbled characters for 'APRIL'.
  • Repeated text and symbols randomly in lines.

Seedream 4.5

  • + Near-perfect spelling across the entire menu including the complex items.
  • + Excellent adherence to stylistic requests like chalk dust, texture, and cursive title.
  • + Rich, atmospheric background showing a cozy café setting.
  • Redundant line for the first item repeating the price.
  • Slightly inconsistent chalk weight between the top and bottom text.

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 delivered a much higher quality output with near-perfect spelling and a beautiful, atmospheric cafe background that matched the prompt's 'cozy' description. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] struggled significantly with text rendering, producing multiple spelling errors and garbled characters in the date.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Successfully followed the specific role-reversal instruction of the horse being on top/riding the astronaut.
  • + Maintains a clean, high-resolution subject with sharp details in the face and spacesuit.
  • + Distinct surrealist composition that stands out as unique.
  • The horse's position is a bit ambiguous, appearing more alongside or floating behind the astronaut rather than physically 'riding' him.
  • The background is somewhat sparse compared to the cinematic prompt.

Seedream 4.5

  • + Beautiful cinematic lighting and vibrant nebular background.
  • + Excellent horse anatomy and dynamic posing.
  • + High level of detail in the textures of the horse's coat and spacesuit.
  • Completely failed the negative constraint/role-reversal instruction by placing the astronaut on top of the horse.
  • Adheres to a common trope rather than the specific prompt request.

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] is the winner because it successfully interpreted the difficult logical constraint of having the horse 'on top' of the astronaut, creating a truly surreal image. While Seedream 4.5 produced a more visually stunning and traditional 'cinematic' scene, it completely ignored the core instruction of the prompt, resulting in a standard astronaut-riding-horse image.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent texture on the capybara's fur and the jacket fabric.
  • + Realistic lighting and shadows within the car interior.
  • + Successfully captures the specific bored expression of the passenger.
  • The capybara only has one paw on the steering wheel, failing the 'both front paws' instruction.
  • The capybara's face is slightly stylized, leaning towards a marmot or groundhog appearance.

Seedream 4.5

  • + Adheres perfectly to the prompt by having both front paws on the steering wheel.
  • + The capybara facial anatomy is highly accurate and life-like.
  • + The composition through the windshield provides a better sense of a New York street scene.
  • The 'TAXI' text on the hat is a bit generic/flat compared to a real patch.
  • Slightly less 'professional' looking jacket compared to Model A.

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the clear winner as it followed all specific prompt instructions, including placing both paws on the steering wheel and nailing the distinct facial structure of a capybara. FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a high-quality image with great textures, but failed on the paw placement and the capybara's face looks slightly off-model.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Includes the requested thorn border around the entire frame
  • + Matches the 'vintage poster' flat graphic aesthetic well
  • + Correctly captures the central glowing jack-o-lantern and bats
  • Text rendering is very poor with several misspellings and jumbled characters
  • Background lacks the 'moody night sky' requested, appearing as solid black
  • Composition feels cramped and lacks realistic cinematic lighting

Seedream 4.5

  • + Excellent text rendering with no spelling errors in any of the three sections
  • + Highly successful cinematic lighting and moody night sky atmosphere
  • + Strong visual quality with realistic textures on the jack-o-lantern and trees
  • Does not include the requested 'scrolled banner' for the specific invite text, using a flat banner instead
  • The 'border' is limited to corner elements rather than a full frame border

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the clear winner due to its superior text rendering and adherence to the cinematic lighting and moody atmosphere requested in the prompt. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] followed the border instructions more closely, several lines of its text are illegible and it failed to render a night sky background.

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
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Successfully adds a thick head of hair with high density
  • + Preserves the overall composition and background elements
  • Significantly alters the person's facial structure, making him look like a different person
  • Changes the style of the glasses and smooths the skin texture, losing the original's rugged detail
  • The hair texture looks slightly artificial and overly groomed

Seedream 4.5

  • + Excellent preservation of original facial features, skin texture, and wrinkles
  • + Adds a natural-looking hairline and hair texture that matches the man's age
  • + Maintains original lighting and glasses perfectly
  • The hair isn't quite as 'full and thick' as requested, appearing slightly recessed

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] fails the primary requirement of image editing by significantly altering the subject's face, making him unrecognizable compared to the source. Seedream 4.5 successfully adds realistic hair while perfectly preserving the identity, skin texture, and details of the original man.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent typography with clean, bold font rendering
  • + Smooth, minimalist aesthetic that follows the cartoon prompt well
  • + Centered composition with perfectly balanced negative space
  • The flag icon is abstract and does not represent the Japanese flag
  • Text colors are slightly mismatched with traditional Japanese themes

Seedream 4.5

  • + Accurate rendering of the Japanese flag
  • + Higher level of detail in the 'realistic PBR' sushi textures and rice grains
  • + Better adherence to the isometric diorama base requirement with the layered platform
  • The text placement is slightly crowded at the top
  • The depth of field blur is a bit aggressive for a clean isometric scene

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the winner as it accurately fulfilled all technical prompt requirements, including the specific flag icon and a more complex isometric diorama. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] had cleaner typography, it failed to produce a recognizable Japanese flag and the sushi model was overly simplified compared to the realistic PBR request.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Strongly adopts a classic comic/caricature aesthetic.
  • + Includes the TV anchor profession via a screen and a dog in the scene.
  • + Preserves the subject's outfit (denim shirt and black top) and basic hair color.
  • Completely misses the 'hockey' requirement.
  • The face only vaguely resembles the source image compared to the other model.
  • Contains random, nonsensical text elements.

Seedream 4.5

  • + Successfully incorporates all prompt elements, including the hockey stick, gloves, and puck.
  • + Excellent likeness preservation of the source subject's facial features despite the caricature proportions.
  • + High visual quality with a clear 'bobblehead' caricature style that feels more modern and polished.
  • The transition from the enlarged head to the neck is slightly uncanny and lacks an outline.
  • The desk setup feels a bit crowded.

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the clear winner as it successfully incorporated every element of the prompt, whereas FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] completely omitted the hockey requirement. Seedream 4.5 also maintained a much higher degree of facial resemblance to the source image, making the caricature much more recognizable.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Natural lighting and depth of field
  • + Consistent movement and action in the poses
  • Failed to include the fox and the bunny
  • Included two cats instead of the requested animals

Seedream 4.5

  • + Perfect adherence to the prompt including all four distinct animals
  • + Exceptional use of 'god rays' and dew sparkles
  • + Highly expressive eyes and fur textures
  • Slightly crowded composition
  • Physics artifacts on the fox's front paw

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the clear winner as it successfully rendered all four requested animals (puppy, kitten, bunny, and fox) whereas FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] omitted the bunny and fox entirely. Furthermore, Seedream 4.5 better captured the specific lighting details like god rays and dew sparkles mentioned in the prompt.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent preservation of the source image's layout and character poses
  • + Clean, high-resolution line work and coloring
  • The result looks more like generic modern anime than the specific Studio Ghibli style requested
  • The lighting and background are quite flat and lack the requested 'painterly' feel

Seedream 4.5

  • + Perfectly captures the Studio Ghibli aesthetic with watercolor textures and soft pastel tones
  • + Effectively translates the background into a dreamy, hand-painted landscape while maintaining the scene's recognizability
  • + Captures the iconic Ghibli eye shapes and facial expressions
  • Minor distortion in the proportions of the foreground woman's arms

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the clear winner as it successfully delivered the specific 'Studio Ghibli' aesthetic with soft textures and nostalgic lighting. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] preserved the source image structure very well, its style was too close to generic digital art and missed the 'hand-painted' requirement of the prompt.

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
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent source preservation, maintaining the exact face and outfit of the original subject
  • + Subtle and natural wind effect on the hair
  • + Maintains the original lighting and background details perfectly
  • The added leaves are very small and sparse, barely visible against the background
  • The edit is almost too subtle to satisfy the 'energetic and lively' instruction

Seedream 4.5

  • + Stronger visual representation of the prompt with numerous flying leaves
  • + Higher energy feel with more dramatic hair movement
  • + Dynamic lighting and motion blur added to the foreground and background
  • Failed to preserve the original subject's facial features and body proportions
  • Significant changes to the background bridge and foliage compared to the source image
  • Generated a new image from scratch rather than performing a true edit

Verdict: FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] is the superior model for an image editing task as it perfectly preserves the identity and structural details of the source image while applying the requested changes. In contrast, Seedream 4.5 created a completely new image with a different person and background, failing the requirement to preserve the source image despite capturing the 'dynamic' theme effectively.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Excellent typography rendering with perfect alignment
  • + Clean minimalist aesthetic suitable for a modern vector logo
  • + Accurately follows the color palette requested
  • Failed to include the requested ribbon/banner for the 'Est. 1720' text
  • The cloche dome illustration is very abstract and looks more like a building or crown

Seedream 4.5

  • + Successfully included all prompt elements including the banner and steam
  • + Superior vintage illustration style with cross-hatching detail
  • + Good use of subtle paper-like background texture
  • Typography has slight kerning and font weight inconsistencies
  • The cloche handle is slightly off-center

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 is the winner because it followed the prompt instructions much more comprehensively, including specific elements like the banner and the visible steam from the cloche. While FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a very clean vector logo, it ignored the banner requirement and provided an overly abstract icon that doesn't strongly resemble a cloche.

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]
Seedream 4.5

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.1 Kontext [dev]

  • + Captures the navy and muted red color palette well
  • + Icons have a consistent hand-drawn vector feel
  • Significant spelling errors ('APOLO', 'TRANGULIITY', 'DESCNT')
  • Garbled and illegible secondary text
  • Iconography is abstract and does not clearly depict the Saturn V or Lunar Module

Seedream 4.5

  • + Excellent adherence to the requested steps and corresponding icons
  • + Clear, legible, and correctly spelled text throughout the graphic
  • + Highly professional layout with a logical left-to-right timeline
  • The descent icon (step 5) is a generic satellite rather than a descending Lunar Module
  • The background stars are somewhat simplistic dots

Verdict: Seedream 4.5 created a highly professional and accurate infographic that followed all six requested steps with perfect text legibility. In contrast, FLUX.1 Kontext [dev] produced a disorganized layout with numerous spelling errors and abstract icons that failed to clearly represent the specific mission phases.

Next steps

Explore each model