Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash fal Nano Banana Google

Settled by community votes across 19 shared challenges, with an AI judge weighing in on each.

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

27.1 arena score

#5 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

Nano Banana

23.9 arena score

#21 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

60.0%

win rate

Ties

0.0%

Nano Banana

40.0%

win rate

60.0% 0.0% ties 40.0%
Shared challenges 19

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana
50% wins 0% ties 50% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Perfect adherence to the prompt elements and spatial relationships.
  • + High photorealism with realistic glass reflections and table texture.
  • + Natural lighting that accurately matches the 'window light from the left' instruction.
  • The glass cube looks a bit more like a glass container than a solid optical cube, though this is minor.

Nano Banana

  • + Includes all requested elements: cube, sphere, book, and plant.
  • + The lighting effects and shadows on the table are aesthetically pleasing.
  • The blue sphere is levitating inside the cube, which feels physically unnatural.
  • The glass cube has strange internal refractions that make it look inconsistent with its shape.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a highly realistic and accurate image where all objects sit naturally in the scene. In contrast, Nano Banana depicts the blue sphere floating in the center of the cube and has less convincing glass physics, making FLUX.2 [dev] Flash the superior choice for both realism and prompt adherence.

Man and Car in California

Editing
Edit instruction

“Make a photo of the man driving the car down the California coastline”

Source
FLUX.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent preservation of the subject's face, hair, and unique clothing details.
  • + Highly detailed and realistic interior wood trim and dashboard.
  • + Dynamic perspective and great lighting consistency on the subject.
  • The car interior is a different model (classic style) than the source vehicle's modern Rolls-Royce aesthetics.

Nano Banana

  • + Successfully preserves the exterior of the specific car model from the source image.
  • + Correctly places the car on a highway consistent with the California coastline request.
  • + Good sense of motion in the background and wheels.
  • The person is significantly downscaled and loses almost all identifiable facial and clothing features.
  • The driver is positioned awkwardly low in the seat.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the superior edit because it successfully merges both source images with high fidelity, maintaining the man's distinct look and clothing. While Nano Banana preserves the original car model better, it fails to meaningfully incorporate the person, resulting in a tiny, blurry figure that doesn't respect the source persona.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'motion blur' requirement with realistic passing cars.
  • + Highly realistic skin textures and natural lighting on the subject's face.
  • + Accurate bike anatomy and tool placement on the ground.
  • The framing is a bit tight on the subject's head.
  • The rain effect is very subtle, almost difficult to see.

Nano Banana

  • + Atmospheric composition with good use of depth of field and Japanese street elements.
  • + Stronger visual storytelling through the use of props like the newspaper and tools.
  • + The 'imperfect framing' request is well-interpreted with the pole on the left.
  • The bicycle anatomy is broken, specifically where the frame meets the rear wheel and pedal area.
  • The motion blur on the car is less realistic and looks more like a static blur filter.
  • The lantern text is somewhat garbled.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a much more photorealistic image with excellent technical execution of skin textures and motion blur. Nano Banana created a more cinematic and moody atmosphere with better environmental detail, but its failure to render the bicycle's mechanical structure correctly makes it less successful as a realistic street photo.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'beads in hair' requirement
  • + Highly realistic skin textures and lifelike eyes
  • + Superb material rendering on the leather straps and weathered armor
  • The bokeh sparks appear a bit more like static dots than atmospheric particles

Nano Banana

  • + Strong composition with a classical heroic feel
  • + Intricate engraving details on the pauldrons
  • + Effective use of warm lighting and bokeh sparks
  • Missed the 'small beads' in the hair entirely
  • Skin marks look more like stylized digital painting than lifelike scars
  • Leather straps look slightly more generic in texture compared to Model A

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the clear winner for its superior realism and strict adherence to specific prompt details like the beads in the braids and the fine texture of leather. While Nano Banana produces an aesthetically pleasing image, it fails to include the beads and the skin textures look more illustrative than 'lifelike'.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Stronger use of vibrant color accents in the layout borders
  • + Realistic, high-quality pizza photography
  • Text consists of garbled, nonsensical characters
  • Mismatched section headers where 'Appetizers' contains images of pizza

Nano Banana

  • + Contains mostly legible and correctly spelled English text
  • + Excellent variety of food types matching the different menu sections
  • + Clean and balanced grid composition with a professional layout
  • Minor spelling error in the header 'APPETIERS'
  • Food photos are slightly lower resolution compared to Model A

Verdict: Nano Banana is the superior choice because it generates a functional menu with readable text and a logical variety of food photos corresponding to the sections. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produces higher fidelity images of food but fails completely on text legibility and consistency between section titles and images.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent text integration with a realistic fiery glow effect.
  • + Highly photorealistic textures on the patty and bun.
  • + Strong sense of depth with the use of smoke and embers.
  • The 'exploded' effect is quite conservative, with components mostly stacked vertically.

Nano Banana

  • + Dynamic composition with a more energetic 'exploded' layout.
  • + Clean, legible text that follows all prompt instructions.
  • + Creative ground texture showing lava cracks.
  • The lighting on the text feels more like a 2D overlay than an integrated fiery effect.
  • The lettuce and tomatoes appear slightly more plastic/less detailed than in the competitor.

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt exceptionally well, including all required text elements and specific pricing. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a more cohesive and photorealistic image where the fire and smoke feel integrated into the physics of the scene, while Nano Banana offered a more creative, dynamic arrangement of the burger ingredients.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent chalk texture throughout all text elements.
  • + Strict adherence to the handwritten prompt with natural variations in spacing and size.
  • + High level of photographic realism in the café background and lighting.
  • The third menu item repeats the price '$9' on two lines unnecessarily.
  • The 'Today's Specials' heading is less 'elegant cursive' than requested, appearing more like print-script.

Nano Banana

  • + Successfully captured an elegant cursive style for the header.
  • + Good chalk smudging effects on the board surface for realism.
  • + Accurately completed the partial third item prompt based on context.
  • The text includes a digital font artifacts, particularly in the dates and numbers which look too uniform.
  • Some character rendering in the list items is less clear than Model A.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a more convincing chalkboard texture where every stroke feels like physical chalk, whereas Nano Banana's text looks more like a digital overlay in some areas despite having better cursive for the title. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash followed the 'natural variation' requirement much better, creating a more authentic cafe atmosphere.

Pose & Character Mashup

Editing
Edit instruction

“Use Image 1 as the exact pose reference and Image 2 as the character reference. Recreate the person/character from Image 2 in the exact dynamic pose and body position from Image 1. Keep the exact face, hair, clothing style/details, and expression from Image 2. Match the lighting and environment of Image 1. The final image must show the character from Image 2 performing the precise action/pose from Image 1 with perfect anatomy and natural integration.”

Source
FLUX.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Successfully integrated the man's identity including face, hair, and sunglasses
  • + Includes the specific scarf and clothing details from the character reference
  • + Matches the lighting and yellow background of the source environment
  • Serious anatomical failure with a second head and hair appearing behind the main subject
  • The pose is significantly altered from the source, losing the specific balance and leg crossing
  • One foot appears to be floating above the red ottoman

Nano Banana

  • + Perfectly maintains the exact pose and body position from Image 1
  • + Correctly applies the clothing color change and adds the scarf detail
  • + Maintains high anatomical consistency and image cleanliness
  • Failed to change the character's gender/identity, keeping the woman's face and long hair
  • The sunglasses are poorly blended and look like a flat overlay over the woman's eyes

Verdict: This is a trade-off between character identity and pose accuracy. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash successfully identifies and renders the man from Image 2 but creates a horrific anatomical glitch by leaving part of the original woman's head behind. Nano Banana maintains the exact dynamic pose perfectly but fails the character transplant, essentially just dressing the original woman in the man's clothes and sunglasses.

Outfit Transfer Challenge

Editing
Edit instruction

“Use Image 1 as the base person. Dress them in the exact elaborate outfit from Image 2 (including all layers, accessories, jewelry, and shoes). Carefully adapt the clothing to the body shape and pose in Image 1 while maintaining realistic fabric behavior, correct proportions, and perfect lighting/shadow matching. Keep the person’s exact face, hair, and background completely unchanged.”

Source
FLUX.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Successfully applied the coat and scarf textures from Image 2
  • + Captured the general aesthetic of the clothing including some jewelry layers
  • The subject's face is horrifyingly distorted with three eyes and mismatched features
  • Failed to keep the person's face 'completely unchanged' as requested
  • Introduced a floating phantom head behind the main subject

Nano Banana

  • + Kept the subject's face, hair, and background completely unchanged
  • + Correctly identified the scarf pattern from Image 2
  • + Maintained the high resolution and skin texture of the source image
  • Failed to dress the subject in the coat, merely draping it behind him
  • Missed many layers of the outfit including the shirt and jewelry

Verdict: Both models struggled significantly with the complex instruction of transferring a full outfit from one image to another. Nano Banana is the clear winner because it preserved the identity and anatomical integrity of the subject in Image 1, whereas FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a grotesque facial distortion and a ghost-like head, rendering the image unusable despite capturing more of the outfit.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent photorealism with sharp textures on the capybara fur and jacket.
  • + Strong prompt adherence, placing the female passenger clearly in the back seat as requested.
  • + Effective use of lighting and 'bokeh' city background to convey the New York night atmosphere.
  • The passenger appears to be in the front passenger seat rather than the back seat due to the depth and framing.
  • One of the capybara's paws has an anatomical deformity (extra finger-like protrusion).

Nano Banana

  • + Features a classic chauffeur-style cap that adds a professional touch.
  • + The texture of the capybara's fur is very realistic.
  • + Good cinematic side-profile composition.
  • The passenger is clearly sitting in the front passenger seat, which contradicts the 'back seat' instruction.
  • The capybara's eye is significantly distorted and melded into the hat's structure.
  • Overall image is softer and less detailed than its counterpart.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the superior image due to its much higher level of detail, better lighting, and more accurate depiction of the capybara's face. While both models struggled to place the passenger in the back seat (instead opting for the front passenger seat), FLUX's overall composition and texture quality are more convincing for a photorealistic scene.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent typography with a cohesive gothic font choice
  • + Complex and detailed border combining thorns, webs, and scrollwork
  • + Moider and more atmosphereic lighting on the pumpkin and background
  • Includes a line of gibberish text before the time field

Nano Banana

  • + Accurate rendering of all requested text without additions
  • + High contrast with a bright moon that helps the central pumpkin stand out
  • + Good placement of the scroll banner above the main subject
  • The parchment texture and background clouds look a bit flat and digital
  • Lower resolution detail in the thorn branches compared to Model A

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt well, but FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a much more professional and 'vintage' looking design with intricate details in the border and trees. However, Nano Banana correctly rendered the text without including the hallucinations found in FLUX, which added a random line of characters to the date/time section. FLUX is the winner for its superior artistic quality and more polished cinematic look.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Before After
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent preservation of the facial features and original lighting
  • + Clear, high-quality hair texture with fine detail
  • + Strong adherence to the 'thick head of hair' prompt
  • The hairline transition is slightly too sharp and straight
  • The chosen hairstyle (large afro) may not perfectly match the existing beard texture

Nano Banana

  • + Natural-looking hairstyle that complements the existing facial hair
  • + Realistic, messy texture that fits the rugged environment
  • + Soft, organic-looking hairline
  • Slightly altered the shape of the glasses frame
  • Small artifacts where the hair meets the temple on the right side

Verdict: Both models handled the edit well, preserving the background and clothing perfectly. Nano Banana provided a more stylistically cohesive look that better matched the subject's beard, though FLUX.2 [dev] Flash technically adhered more strictly to the 'full, thick' request with its large afro style. Nano Banana is slightly preferred for a more plausible integration of the new hair with the original facial structure.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana
67% wins 0% ties 33% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent rendering of textures, particularly the grain of the fish and the wood grain of the diorama base.
  • + Perfect adherence to text placement and formatting requirements.
  • + Superior lighting and soft shadows create a high-quality 3D render feel.
  • The sushi rolls have a slightly odd anatomical structure with fish on top of a roll that already has fillings inside.

Nano Banana

  • + Good variety of sushi types including nigiri and maki.
  • + Clean isometric perspective and solid background adherence.
  • + Clear, legible text.
  • The textures appear a bit more 'plastic' and less sophisticated than the requested PBR materials.
  • The Japanese flag icon is placed to the left instead of with the text as requested.
  • The rice grains look somewhat uniform and lack the realism found in Model A.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the winner due to its superior lighting and material rendering, which perfectly captured the 'realistic PBR materials' requested in the prompt. While Nano Banana provided a nice variety of sushi, its textures were flatter and it failed to integrate the flag icon into the text block as accurately as FLUX.2 [dev] Flash.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent character likeness preserved while applying a caricature style.
  • + Perfectly integrates all requested elements into a cohesive scene.
  • + High-quality rendering with vibrant colors and clear details.
  • The text on the desk is generic compared to the other model.

Nano Banana

  • + Clever humorous details like the 'Dogs 5 - Cats 0' scoreboard and 'Puck News Network' signage.
  • + Great expression that matches the original subject's smile.
  • + Creative use of background with an audience of dogs.
  • The caricature style is a bit more 'grainy' or illustrative than polished.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash and Nano Banana both successfully followed the prompt, but FLUX.2 [dev] Flash maintained a much stronger facial resemblance to the source image. Nano Banana excelled in humor and creative detail, such as the Puck News Network branding and the dog-filled stadium, but the likeness to the original subject was slightly more generalized.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent depiction of dew sparkles and realistic fur textures.
  • + High level of dynamic interaction with characters looking at butterflies.
  • + Accurate count of animals according to the prompt.
  • Includes an extra fifth animal (a second bunny-like creature) not requested in the prompt.
  • The 'god rays' are a bit diffuse compared to Model B.

Nano Banana

  • + Beautifully rendered god rays and golden hour lighting.
  • + Perfect adherence to the requested animal count (4 specific animals).
  • + The composition captures the 'tumbling' and 'playful' aspect very well.
  • The fox's tail is positioned oddly, appearing to sprout from its side.
  • Slightly more 'digital' or illustrative look compared to the photorealism of Model A.

Verdict: Both models followed the complex prompt well, but Nano Banana adhered more strictly to the specific animal list, whereas FLUX.2 [dev] Flash added an extra creature. However, FLUX.2 [dev] Flash achieved a higher level of textures and realistic detail, particularly with the fur and dew, making it the more visually impressive masterpiece.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the Ghibli art style with authentic linework and color palette.
  • + Successfully transforms the urban background into a dreamy, flower-filled meadow as requested.
  • + Preserves the iconic composition and specific poses/expressions of the meme perfectly.
  • The transition to a dreamy background loses the original street setting entirely, though it fits the prompt's 'dreamy background' request.

Nano Banana

  • + Perfectly preserves the layout and content of the source image.
  • Completely failed to apply the requested edit; the style remains photographic.
  • No evidence of pastel colors, hand-painted textures, or Ghibli inspiration.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash successfully translated the 'Distracted Boyfriend' meme into a high-quality Studio Ghibli illustration, capturing the specific aesthetic requested while maintaining the core recognizability of the figures. Nano Banana failed the edit entirely, returning an image that appears identical to the source with no stylistic changes.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Before After
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'windy' hair instruction with dramatic, symmetrical movement.
  • + High density of falling leaves consistent with a lively feel.
  • + Maintains very horizontal consistency with the original background and figure.
  • The hair edit looks slightly artificial and overly stiff in its symmetry.
  • Some leaves appear to be overlapping the woman's torso in a messy way.

Nano Banana

  • + Natural look to the hair movement, appearing more realistic than Model A.
  • + Leaves are varied in color and size, adding to the visual appeal.
  • + Excellent preservation of the original subjects while adding motion.
  • Fewer leaves across the scene makes it feel slightly less 'energetic' than requested.
  • A leaf is awkwardly superimposed directly over the dog's leash.

Verdict: Both models successfully interpreted the request for motion and wind. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash went for a more dramatic approach with very high-volume hair movement and many leaves, though it looks a bit more 'edited.' Nano Banana provided a more naturalistic hair flow and varied leaves, which feels more integrated into the original photo's lighting and style.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent typography with a clean, classic serif font.
  • + Perfect adherence to the 'banner' and 'steam' requirements.
  • + Strong vector emblem style with effective shading and texture.
  • The placement of 'Est. 1720' is slightly below the banner rather than integrated into it as its own banner.

Nano Banana

  • + Elegant ornate circular composition.
  • + Accurate text rendering for both the name and the date.
  • + Good use of monochromatic brown tones on a cream background.
  • Failed to include the specific 'steam' element requested in the prompt.
  • The 'Est. 1720' banner is quite small and lacks the visual weight of the main text.
  • The cloche dome is very simplified, bordering on abstract.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the clear winner as it included every specific detail of the prompt, including the steam and the large banner style. Nano Banana produced a beautiful logo but missed the 'steam' requirement and had a less balanced composition for a vector emblem.

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.2 [dev] Flash
Nano Banana

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Successfully includes almost all requested text labels with accurate spelling.
  • + Features high-detail illustrations of the Saturn V and Lunar Module.
  • + Includes creative additions like the crew names and silhouette portraits.
  • Layout is cluttered and redundant, with multiple icons for the same step.
  • Text spills over in the 'Saturn V' section (hallucinated 'Sataurr' Iccòn').
  • The 'Translunar' trajectory lines are messy and cross over other elements.

Nano Banana

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'modern vector' and 'consistent iconography' style requirements.
  • + Very clean, linear composition that is easy to read as an infographic.
  • + Perfect spelling on all labels and a professional NASA-inspired aesthetic.
  • Missing the specific step 'Descent' inside the circle icon flow (it combines it or uses a placeholder moon icon).
  • The 'Landing' illustration at the bottom is slightly more abstract than the other icons.

Verdict: Nano Banana is the clear winner as it perfectly captures the 'modern vector infographic' style with clean icons and a logical flow. While FLUX.2 [dev] Flash provides more detailed illustrations, its layout is chaotic, repetitive, and fails the stylization requirement by including noisy, non-vector textures.

Next steps

Explore each model