Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash fal GPT Image 1 Mini OpenAI

Settled by community votes across 20 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

GPT Image 1 Mini

24.9 arena score

#13 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

60.0%

win rate

Ties

20.0%

GPT Image 1 Mini

20.0%

win rate

60.0% 20.0% ties 20.0%
Shared challenges 20

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
GPT Image 1 Mini
100% wins 0% ties 0% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent physical accuracy with the sphere resting on the bottom of the cube.
  • + Highly realistic textures on the glass, including dust and fingerprints.
  • + Correct distortion and refraction of the plant visible through the glass cube.
  • The sphere has a marble-like texture which might be seen as less 'pure' than a solid blue sphere.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Clean, minimalist aesthetic with smooth surfaces.
  • + Adheres to all requested objects in the prompt.
  • The blue sphere is floating unnaturally in the center of the cube, defying gravity.
  • The plant is not visible through the glass as requested, but occupies the space behind the book/cube.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produces a much more realistic image with convincing physics and light refraction; it correctly places the sphere on the bottom of the cube and shows the plant through the glass. GPT Image 1 Mini fails on physics by showing a floating sphere and misses the prompt requirement to have the plant visible through the glass.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Retains the character's facial structure and intense expression quite well.
  • + Higher fidelity in the interior textures, particularly the wood grain and seat leather.
  • + Dynamic composition with realistic motion blur in the background.
  • The steering wheel logo and dashboard configuration do not match the source car's modern Rolls-Royce style.
  • The character appears as a passenger in a right-hand drive car despite the prompt asking him to drive.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Accurately places the character in the driver's seat (left-hand drive) as requested.
  • + Preserves the car's exterior design details, like the door handle and side badge, more accurately.
  • + Captures the cheerful expression from the source image.
  • Significant anatomical error where his left arm seems to disappear or blend awkwardly into the door.
  • The perspective of the car's front hood looks slightly flattened and distorted.
  • The steering wheel is overly simplistic and lacks detail.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produces a much higher quality image with better lighting and textures, but it fails the logic of the prompt by placing the man in the passenger seat. GPT Image 1 Mini follows the instruction of having the man drive, but the anatomical errors and the loss of car interior detail make it a less successful image overall. FLUX.2 is preferred for visual quality, though GPT Image 1 Mini is technically more accurate to the 'driving' instruction.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini
0% wins 0% ties 100% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'motion blur' requirement with realistic passing cars.
  • + Very high skin and clothing detail, appearing highly realistic and un-stylized.
  • + Bicycle mechanics and tools on the ground add to the narrative and realism.
  • The hands have some minor structural clipping issues with the bicycle brake cable.
  • The front wheel of the bicycle is slightly disconnected from the frame's fork.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Strong composition with a side profile that emphasizes the man's expression.
  • + Good wet pavement reflections and rainy atmosphere.
  • + Natural looking pose for someone repairing a bicycle wheel.
  • Failed to include the requested 'motion blur from passing cars'.
  • The bicycle frame geometry is nonsensical, especially where the seat post and rear wheel meet.
  • The image has a slightly softer, more digital look compared to the requested 'no stylization'.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash followed the prompt much more closely, successfully incorporating the motion blur from passing cars which GPT Image 1 Mini ignored. While both models struggled with perfect bicycle anatomy, FLUX.2 [dev] Flash delivered a much more realistic texture and a complex, crowded street scene that feels like a genuine candid 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
GPT Image 1 Mini
50% wins 50% ties 0% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'beads in hair' prompt element.
  • + Incredible detail on the engraving, leather straps, and chainmail textures.
  • + Superior sharpness and lighting on the facial features.
  • The torches in the background are a bit literal and sharp, slightly distracting from the bokeh effect.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Strong cinematic atmosphere with very warm, believable torchlight reflections.
  • + Good implementation of shallow depth of field and bokeh sparks.
  • + Natural skin texture and battle-worn appearance.
  • Missed the 'beads' in the braided hair entirely.
  • The armor engraving is less sharp and detailed compared to Model A.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the clear winner for its superior prompt adherence, particularly the inclusion of beads in the hair which GPT Image 1 Mini omitted. FLUX.2 also provides significantly more detail in the armor engravings and leather textures, making for a much more striking high-resolution portrait.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Includes detailed menu item text and pricing which makes it look like a real menu.
  • + High-quality, realistic photography of pizza and food items.
  • + Uses vibrant color accents as requested in the prompt.
  • The text contains several spelling errors (e.g., 'CASSUAL', 'RIZLA').
  • The logical mapping of text to photos is poor, labeling a section 'Pizza' next to a block of text while showing pizzas in the 'Appetizers' section.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Very clean and minimalist layout with high contrast.
  • + Food photos are well-organized in a perfect grid.
  • + Text is perfectly legible and free of AI artifacts.
  • Lacks actual menu item text or pricing, feeling more like a template than a finished design.
  • The food icons/photos appear slightly more generic and less professional than Model A.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produces a much more realistic and comprehensive menu design with detailed pricing and vibrant accents, though it suffers from typical AI spelling issues. GPT Image 1 Mini creates a cleaner, more minimalist layout that is easier to read, but it misses the 'professional' feel by leaving the menu item sections completely blank. FLUX.2 is the winner for capturing the complexity and specific food photography requested.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to text instructions, including the currency symbol and specific phrases.
  • + Superior photographic texture and lighting on the burger ingredients.
  • + Dynamic composition with suspended droplets and floating embers that create a true sense of motion.
  • The spacing between the letters in the 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' text is slightly inconsistent.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Clear, bold typography with a strong fiery glow effect.
  • + Good placement of the price starburst in the lower right third.
  • The burger ingredients appear somewhat flat and lack the photorealistic detail requested.
  • The composition feels more static and vertical compared to the 'exploded' motion in Model A.
  • The currency symbol is slightly obscured by the glowing starburst outline.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash significantly outperformed GPT Image 1 Mini by delivering a highly dynamic, professional-grade advertisement. While both models handled the text rendering well, FLUX.2 [dev] Flash captured the 'exploded' mid-air motion and photorealistic food textures with much greater success, whereas GPT Image 1 Mini felt more like a simple stack of 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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent chalk texture with realistic smudges and dust on the board.
  • + Strong adherence to the 'elegant cursive' request for the title.
  • + The text looks genuinely handwritten with natural variation in stroke weight.
  • Some minor messy overlapping of letters in the bottom section.
  • The last price line is slightly broken up by the bottom edge layout.
  • The cursive can be slightly harder to read in certain places.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Perfect legibility of all requested text.
  • + Great layout and alignment of prices.
  • + Clean, professional presentation of the menu items.
  • The text looks more like a digital font or chalk marker rather than traditional 'handwritten' chalk.
  • The title lacks the requested 'elegant cursive' style.
  • The chalk texture is too uniform and lacks realistic dust variations.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash captures the requested 'handwritten chalk' aesthetic much more effectively, featuring realistic chalk dust, smudges, and diverse cursive lettering. While GPT Image 1 Mini provides perfect legibility, its output feels too much like a digital chalkboard font and fails to follow the specific 'elegant cursive' instruction for the title.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent character likeness, preserving the facial features and original sunglasses shape perfectly
  • + Highly accurate clothing details including the specific scarf pattern and shirt text
  • + Maintains the unique lighting and color temperature of the original scene
  • Serious anatomical failure with a second head and hair appearing behind the main character
  • Poor leg/feet integration with confusing overlapping limbs

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Successfully merges the character and the pose into a single, coherent figure without extra body parts
  • + Good integration of the character's clothing style into the dynamic action
  • + Clean image quality with no major hallucinations like extra heads
  • Lost the 'exact' pose from Image 1, modifying it into more of a crouch rather than the specific bent-over balance
  • Character likeness is slightly generic compared to the source
  • Modified the sunglasses from aviators to a more rounded shape

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash achieves a much higher level of detail and character accuracy, but suffers from a catastrophic anatomical hallucination by including parts of the woman's head from the original pose reference. GPT Image 1 Mini fails to replicate the exact pose requested, but creates a far more usable and physically coherent image. While FLUX is better at character transfer, GPT is the winner for providing a clean, logical composition without disturbing artifacts.

The Reversed Rodeo

Text-to-Image

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

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent high-detail rendering of the spacesuit and horse texture.
  • + Bright, cinematic lighting with a clear planetary background.
  • + Dynamic composition with a sense of motion in the horse's mane and tail.
  • Failed to follow the specific spatial instruction 'horse on top, not vice versa'.
  • The anatomy of the horse's back legs is slightly distorted.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Atmospheric, moody lighting that fits a space setting.
  • + Good textural detail on the astronaut's suit.
  • Failed to follow the specific spatial instruction 'horse on top, not vice versa'.
  • The image is quite dark, losing some detail in the horse's body.
  • Anatomical issues where the horse's front legs meet the chest.

Verdict: Both FLUX.2 [dev] Flash and GPT Image 1 Mini failed the specific logic test of the prompt, which requested the horse to be on top of the astronaut. However, FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the superior image due to its significantly higher level of detail, better lighting, and more vibrant cinematic composition compared to the dark and slightly muddy output of GPT Image 1 Mini.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Successfully captured the dark coat and plaid scarf elements from the second image.
  • + Included some jewelry accessories mentioned in the prompt.
  • Severely failed at face preservation, creating a horrific double-face/mangled head artifact.
  • Added arbitrary new elements like excessive jewelry and a belt that weren't in the source jacket.
  • The person's pose and hair are completely altered.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Maintained the character's face, skin condition, and hairstyle much better than the competitor.
  • + Successfully transferred the coat, scarf, and jeans from Image 2 while adapting to the pose.
  • + Preserved the background and lighting style of Image 1 effectively.
  • The person's pose was slightly shifted from a profile lean to a more forward-facing lean.
  • The vitiligo pattern on the face was simplified compared to the source image.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a major technical failure, resulting in a mangled, nightmarish face that did not preserve the identity of the person in Image 1 at all. In contrast, GPT Image 1 Mini successfully applied the outfit from Image 2 onto the person from Image 1 while maintaining his facial features, hair, and the beach environment.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent photorealism with sharp textures on the capybara's fur and the woman's clothing.
  • + Captures the bored, mundane expression of the businesswoman perfectly.
  • + Cleverly positioned as if the camera is outside looking through the windshield with accurate taxi branding.
  • The passenger is sitting in the front passenger seat rather than the back seat as requested.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Correctly positions the passenger in the back seat.
  • + Accurate lighting and atmospheric 'night street' bokeh through the window.
  • The capybara only has one paw visible on the steering wheel.
  • The passenger's face is slightly out of focus and less detailed compared to the driver.

Verdict: Both models captured the surrealism of the prompt very well. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash had superior overall clarity and better followed the character expression details, but it failed the spatial instruction of placing the passenger in the back seat. GPT Image 1 Mini adhered more closely to the physical layout and seating arrangement requested, though its textures are slightly softer.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent font choice that perfectly matches the gothic vintage theme.
  • + High image clarity with a very detailed thorny and cobweb border.
  • + Includes all requested text elements with mostly accurate spelling.
  • Includes some hallucinated text/symbols next to the time field.
  • The lighting on the pumpkin feels slightly disconnected from the foreground elements.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Atmospheric, grainy vintage parchment texture fits the prompt well.
  • + Strong central composition with clean, legible text and a better scroll integration.
  • + More cohesive 'cinematic lighting' with subtle glows.
  • The border is much less detailed and harder to see than requested.
  • Missing the specific labels for 'Date:', 'Time:', and 'Location:' before the details.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash produced a much more detailed and visually striking border that perfectly captured the 'webs and thorns' requirement, though it suffered from minor text artifacts. GPT Image 1 Mini captured the vintage parchment aesthetic and mood better but missed the specific formatting of the event details. FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the winner for its superior clarity and adherence to the complex border and text requirements.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent preservation of the original face, lighting, and environmental background.
  • + High-detail hair texture with realistic individual strands at the hairline.
  • + Maintains the original grain and image quality of the source.
  • The hairstyle choice (large afro) may look slightly incongruous with the existing beard texture.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Natural-looking hairstyle that blends well with the subject's existing beard.
  • + Accurately follows the 'full, thick head of hair' request.
  • Noticeably alters the subject's facial structure, especially around the eyes and nose.
  • Changes the background and lighting, losing the high-contrast grit of the original photo.
  • The glasses have been redesigned and no longer match the source image.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the clear winner because it functioned as an actual image editor, keeping the face, glasses, and background identical to the source while adding the hair. GPT Image 1 Mini essentially generated a new image of a similar-looking man, failing to preserve the specific facial features and environmental details of the original photograph.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent PBR textures showing realistic sub-surface scattering and rice grains
  • + Perfect adherence to isometric perspective and layout alignment
  • + Text rendering is clean and sharp
  • The sushi roll construction is slightly nonsensical with fish draped over a roll

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Stylized cartoon aesthetic is very appealing and clean
  • + Text is well-integrated with the background color
  • + Nicely rounded diorama corners match the cartoon theme
  • The textures look more like plastic/clay than realistic PBR materials requested
  • The perspective is slightly flatter than the requested 45-degree isometric angle

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash delivered a superior technical result with high-fidelity PBR materials and a perfect isometric layout that feels more like a 3D render. While GPT Image 1 Mini captured the cartoon aesthetic well, it lacked the material complexity and the specific 45-degree geometric precision requested in the 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.2 [dev] Flash
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Successfully incorporates all elements including the TV desk, hockey rink, and multiple dogs in hockey gear.
  • + Strong caricature style with the 'big head' aesthetic while maintaining a clear resemblance to the source subject.
  • + High visual quality with clean lines and vibrant colors.
  • The transition from the source image's casual denim to a professional suit for the 'anchor' role is appropriate, but less of the original attire is preserved.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Retains the original denim jacket from the source image, making the 'before and after' feel more connected.
  • + Classic hand-drawn colored pencil caricature aesthetic which feels very traditional for this style.
  • + Good inclusion of the hockey puck and stick as discrete props.
  • The subject's facial resemblance to the source is less accurate, appearing older and more generic.
  • The hockey stick is partially cut off at the edge of the frame, and the composition feels a bit cramped compared to Image A.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash is the clear winner for its creative and expansive interpretation of the prompt, placing the subject in a fully realized 'hockey news' set with charming dogs in hockey uniforms. While GPT Image 1 Mini does a good job preserving the subject's original clothing, its caricature style is less polished and the faces are less recognizable than those in FLUX.2 [dev] Flash.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent adherence to the 'dew sparkles' prompt with visible, crystalline drops on the grass.
  • + Very high detail in the fur textures and butterfly wing patterns.
  • + Dynamic composition that feels like a 'tumble' as requested.
  • Included an extra animal (two rabbits/rodents) which was not in the prompt.
  • The lighting feels a bit more like a digital composite rather than a natural photograph.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Perfectly captured the requested animal count (one of each species).
  • + Better sense of motion with animals mid-air, matching the 'chasing' and 'tumbling' description.
  • + Warm, natural lighting that feels cohesive across all subjects.
  • Lower contrast in the fur details compared to the other model.
  • The butterflies are less detailed and fewer in number.

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt well, but GPT Image 1 Mini adhered more accurately to the specific list of animals provided, whereas FLUX.2 [dev] Flash added an extra creature. However, FLUX.2 [dev] Flash delivered superior fine details in the fur and environment, particularly with the dew sparkles and butterfly textures, making it more visually impressive.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Perfectly captures the Studio Ghibli cel-shaded anime style with thin outlines and soft highlights.
  • + Preserves the exact hand-held hand and plaid shirt pattern from the source image.
  • + Creative background addition that fits the 'dreamy' prompt through soft clouds and flowers.
  • The facial features are slightly homogenized, losing a bit of the specific likeness of the original actors.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Accurately maintains the urban street setting seen in the original photo.
  • + Applies a textured, crayon-like colored pencil aesthetic that feels hand-painted.
  • + Maintains the distinct facial bone structures of the original subjects well.
  • The 'pencil sketch' look is less representative of the classic Studio Ghibli film style than a colored drawing.
  • The colors are a bit too saturated/orange compared to the requested 'soft pastel colors'.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash delivered a superior transformation by perfectly mimicking the actual animation style of Studio Ghibli, including the characteristic lighting and character designs, while maintaining high fidelity to the original meme's composition. GPT Image 1 Mini took a more literal pencil-crayon approach that, while artistic, missed the specific 'anime movie' aesthetic and soft pastel palette requested.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent preservation of the woman's face and original features.
  • + Highly effective and dramatic wind effect on the hair.
  • + Adds a large quantity of leaves as requested.
  • The wind direction on the hair is symmetrical, making it look a bit unnatural.
  • Some leaves look like small specks/artifacts in the background.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Realistic, directional wind effect applied to the hair.
  • + The leaves have varied sizes and motion blur, adding to the feeling of depth.
  • + Successfully captures an energetic atmosphere.
  • Slightly alters the woman's facial structure and features compared to the source.
  • Removed the background bridge, failing to preserve the full environment of the source image.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash does a superior job of preserving the source image, keeping the subject's face identical while adding the requested motion and leaves. While GPT Image 1 Mini creates a more natural-looking 'gust of wind' effect, it fails to preserve the original background elements (like the bridge) and changes the woman's face slightly too much for a strict editing task.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent typography including the requested accent on the 'È'.
  • + Perfect adherence to the light background and subtle texture request.
  • + Professional vector emblem composition with a well-integrated banner.
  • The 'Est. 1720' is placed below the banner rather than inside it as described.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Strong gold-on-black aesthetic that feels high-end.
  • + Accurate text rendering and placement of the date on the banner.
  • Completely ignored the request for a light background.
  • The 'Est. 1720' text is slightly off-center within its banner.
  • The sketch-like texture is more illustrative than a clean vector emblem.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] Flash much more closely followed the prompt instructions, specifically the request for a light background and a cream/brown color palette. While GPT Image 1 Mini correctly placed the date inside the banner, its choice of a black background and harsher texture makes it less versatile as a logo compared to the clean, well-balanced emblem from FLUX.2.

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
GPT Image 1 Mini

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev] Flash

  • + Excellent typography including naming the crew members correctly.
  • + Strong visual storytelling with detailed assets for the Saturn V and Lunar Module.
  • + Effective use of the dark navy palette to create a celestial atmosphere.
  • The layout is a bit cluttered with redundant labels and assets.
  • The trajectory arcs are somewhat confusing and do not create a clear chronological flow.
  • Text artifacts present in labels like 'LAUNCH' and 'MOON'.

GPT Image 1 Mini

  • + Perfect adherence to the flat-vector, clean line style requested.
  • + Clear, numbered chronological flow that is easy to read as an infographic.
  • + Consistent iconography across all six steps.
  • The 'Translunar' icon is an abstract loop that doesn't clearly represent a trajectory.
  • The palette is slightly more beige/cream than the requested white/light gray.
  • Text is cut off at the bottom of the frame.

Verdict: GPT Image 1 Mini captured the 'flat-vector' and 'infographic' aesthetic much better, providing a clear numbered sequence that is easy to follow. While FLUX.2 [dev] Flash has more detailed renderings and impressive text for the crew names, it fails the layout requirements of an infographic, appearing more like a collage of disjointed assets.

Next steps

Explore each model