Head to head
Esc

Models · slot A

to navigate to pick

FLUX.2 [dev] Black Forest Labs FLUX.2 [flex] Black Forest Labs

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

FLUX.2 [dev]

24.3 arena score

#20 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Skill signature · Text-to-Image

FLUX.2 [flex]

24.8 arena score

#14 of 62 in Text-to-Image

Vote tally

Where the votes landed

FLUX.2 [dev]

0.0%

win rate

Ties

0.0%

FLUX.2 [flex]

100.0%

win rate

0.0% 0.0% ties 100.0%
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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent realistic lighting and caustic reflections from the glass.
  • + The plant is correctly positioned behind the cube with realistic distortion through the glass.
  • + High level of textural detail on the wooden table and book cover.
  • The blue sphere appears to be floating rather than resting on the bottom of the cube.
  • The book doesn't sit quite flat on the glass block's rounded edges.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Perfect geometric composition with sharp, clean lines for the cube and book.
  • + The blue sphere is firmly grounded on the base of the cube.
  • + Clean, minimalist aesthetic with very balanced framing.
  • The background plant feels slightly disconnected from the glass and lacks realistic refraction.
  • The lighting is a bit more flat and CG-like compared to the warmth of the other image.

Verdict: Both models followed the complex spatial instructions perfectly. FLUX.2 [dev] produced a more photographic and atmospheric result with superior light interaction, while FLUX.2 [flex] delivered a cleaner, more precise geometric render. FLUX.2 [dev] is the slightly better image due to the realistic treatment of the window light and the way the plant is seen 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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent preservation of the subjects clothing including the specific plaid pattern, scarf, and cargo pants.
  • + High-quality interior detail that matches the luxury aesthetic of the source vehicle.
  • + Cinematic lighting and realistic motion blur for the background.
  • The man's facial features changed significantly compared to the source image.
  • The hand on the steering wheel has anatomical issues and merged fingers.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Excellent preservation of the source vehicle's exterior and proportions.
  • + Action-oriented composition that captures more of the California coastline environment.
  • + Maintains the man's hair style and skin tone well even at a distance.
  • Lost the subject's specific outfit from the source image, replacing the heavy coat and scarf with a light shirt.
  • The man's scale within the car looks slightly small/low in the seat.

Verdict: Both models successfully combined the two source images into a cohesive scene. FLUX.2 [dev] (Image A) is superior in interior detail and faithfully recreating the man's complex outfit, though it struggled with his facial likeness and hand anatomy. FLUX.2 [flex] (Image B) did a better job preserving the car's exterior and captured the spirit of the 'California coastline' better, but failed to preserve the subject's specific clothing.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]
0% wins 0% ties 100% wins

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent depiction of motion blur with passing cars.
  • + Highly realistic, natural skin texture and clothing folds.
  • + Detailed and accurate interpretation of 'light rain' and wet pavement reflections.
  • The bicycle structure is physically impossible and cluttered with random wires and parts.
  • The man's posture appears a bit detached from the bike frame.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Stronger composition with a clear focal point and nice bokeh.
  • + The bicycle is much more coherent and recognizable as a real vehicle.
  • + Good use of 'imperfect framing' with the foreground pillar.
  • The motion blur of the cars is less pronounced than requested.
  • The man's hands are slightly merged with the bicycle chain area.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] captures the 'candid street' and 'motion blur' aspects of the prompt more effectively, but fails significantly on the anatomy of the bicycle. FLUX.2 [flex] provides a more aesthetically pleasing and coherent image with a much better-rendered bicycle and realistic lighting, though the motion blur is subtler. FLUX.2 [flex] is the preferred choice for its overall technical coherence and superior composition.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent depiction of colored beads in the braids
  • + The engraving on the armor is more delicate and intricate
  • + Superior lighting realism with more natural orange glints across the metal
  • The torch flame looks a bit flat and simplified

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Strong symmetrical composition and centered framing
  • + The torch flame has more realistic smoke and transparency
  • + Consistent texture on the knit underlayer
  • The beads in the hair look more like metal fasteners than the requested 'small beads'
  • The hair texture on the top of the head appears slightly plasticky

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt exceptionally well, producing near-identical character designs. FLUX.2 [dev] wins slightly due to its better interpretation of the 'beads' and more realistic armor engravings, whereas FLUX.2 [flex] has a slightly flatter skin texture and less variety in the bead elements.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Features a high-density grid of images consistent with professional food photography.
  • + Accurately includes and labels all three requested sections: Appetizers, Pizza, and Mains.
  • + Effective use of vibrant color accents in headers.
  • Text consists of nonsensical characters and gibberish.
  • The layout is a bit cluttered, especially the 'Pizzau' header and overlapping sections.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Superior text rendering with legible names like 'Bruschetta' and 'Margherita Pizza'.
  • + Stronger overall composition with a clear, professional visual hierarchy and clean margins.
  • + Excellent adherence to the 'minimalist' and 'casual dining' aesthetic requested.
  • Misinterprets the section headers, placing 'Appetizers' as the main title for the whole page.
  • Smaller food image grid compared to Model A.

Verdict: While FLUX.2 [dev] follows the section requirements more literally, FLUX.2 [flex] produces a significantly better design through legible typography and a more professional, balanced layout. FLUX.2 [flex] successfully captures the 'modern minimalist' aesthetic with clean lines and realistic menu items, making it the more usable generation despite the header misstep.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent text rendering with clean, legible fonts
  • + Bright and consistent fiery background with good embers
  • + Accurate exploded view with clear separation of ingredients
  • The cheese looks very flat and plastic-like
  • The burger bun is a bit plain and lacks texture detail

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Highly photorealistic food textures, especially the glistening bun and juicy patty
  • + Stronger sense of motion with seasoning particles and dripping sauce
  • + More complex and visually interesting lighting on the burger
  • The 'LIMITED TIME ONLY' text is slightly thinner and less impactful
  • The starburst graphic feels a bit like a stock asset overlay compared to the rest of the art

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt exceptionally well, producing high-quality advertisements with accurate text. FLUX.2 [dev] offers a cleaner, more graphic layout, while FLUX.2 [flex] provides superior texture work on the food itself, making the burger look significantly more appetizing and realistic.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent chalk texture within the letters themselves.
  • + Authentic chalk smudge and erasure marks on the board.
  • + Strong adherence to the price and item descriptions.
  • The word 'with' in the second item has some messy ghosting/overlapping artifacts.
  • The text layout is slightly cramped on the left edge.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Beautiful, clean cursive handwriting that feels very elegant.
  • + Perfection in word alignment and centered composition.
  • + Superior lighting effects on the wooden frame and chalkboard surface.
  • The text looks a bit too 'perfect', leaning slightly towards a digital font feel despite the script style.
  • Less visible chalk grain texture compared to the other model.

Verdict: Both models performed exceptionally well on complex text rendering, but FLUX.2 [dev] captures a more realistic, gritty 'chalk' aesthetic with natural imperfections. FLUX.2 [flex] produced a more aesthetically pleasing, balanced layout with highly legible calligraphy, though it lacks the tactile chalk texture found in the first image.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Matches the specific clothing, scarf, and accessories from Image 2 correctly.
  • + Maintains the distinct character features including the sunglasses.
  • Has a horrific anatomical failure where the original person's head from Image 1 is still attached to the back of the character.
  • Fails to replicate the pose correctly, resulting in an impossible torso shape.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Captures the character's clothing and likeness from Image 2 effectively.
  • + Successfully removes the person from Image 1 entirely for a cleaner composition.
  • Does not follow the 'exact pose' from Image 1, opting for a squatting position instead of the dynamic bent-over pose.
  • The leg and foot placement on the ottoman look unnatural and poorly integrated.

Verdict: Both models struggled significantly with the complex instruction. FLUX.2 [dev] attempted to follow the pose of Image 1 but failed catastrophically by leaving the original person's head fused to the character's back. FLUX.2 [flex] successfully transferred the character details and produced a cleaner image, but it failed to follow the specific 'exact pose' requirement, substituting a simpler squat for the requested dynamic position.

The Reversed Rodeo

Text-to-Image

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

FLUX.2 [dev]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + High degree of photographic realism in the lighting and textures
  • + Excellent anatomical correctness for both the horse and the space suit
  • + Cinematic composition with a natural-looking horizon and moon
  • Failed the negative constraint entirely by placing the astronaut on top of the horse

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Successfully followed the complex instruction of putting the horse on top of the astronaut
  • + Highly surreal and imaginative composition
  • + Vibrant colors and dramatic lighting that fit the 'cinematic' prompt
  • Distorted anatomy in the astronaut's hands and the horse's front legs
  • The horse's face has some slight anatomical irregularities

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] produced a much higher quality image in terms of realism and detail, but it completely ignored the specific spatial instruction for a horse to be riding an astronaut. FLUX.2 [flex] successfully interpreted the surreal prompt correctly, showing a horse on top of an astronaut, making it the clear winner for prompt adherence despite lower technical polish.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent capybara fur texture and realism
  • + Perfectly captures the 'bored' expression of the passenger
  • + Lighting on the subjects matches the exterior city bokeh well
  • The passenger appears to be in the front seat or mid-cabin due to the perspective

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Better spatial composition with a clear distinction between front and back seats
  • + Includes authentic details like the taxi meter and 'TAXI' patch on the jacket
  • + Dynamic side-profile angle creates a cinematic feel
  • The capybara's face is slightly less detailed and more smooth than Model A

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt exceptionally well, capturing the surreal yet professional atmosphere of a capybara driving a NYC taxi. FLUX.2 [dev] excels in the fine details of the capybara's face and the specific 'bored' expression of the passenger, while FLUX.2 [flex] provides a superior composition that clearly places the businesswoman in the back seat and includes more technical taxi interior details.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent text rendering with clean, gothic typography
  • + Stronger visual framing with the thorn and web border
  • + High-contrast cinematic lighting on the jack-o-lantern
  • The parchment effect is slightly less realistic than model b
  • Sky is a bit flat with fewer atmospheric details like the moon

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Beautifully distressed and realistic torn parchment edges
  • + Includes a moon which adds to the requested moody night sky
  • + Solid adherence to all text requirements and layout components
  • The thorns in the border are less distinct and more like simple flourishes
  • The font choice for the contact details is a bit thin and harder to read against the gray fog

Verdict: Both models followed the complex text instructions perfectly. FLUX.2 [dev] is the winner because its composition feels more like a finished poster, with a much more defined and intricate thorn/web border that satisfies the gothic prompt better than the more subtle borders in FLUX.2 [flex].

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]
Before After
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent source preservation, keeping the face and background identical to the original.
  • + High-density hair texture with a complex, realistic afro style.
  • The hair style choice is quite dramatic and may not match the existing beard texture perfectly.
  • Slightly less natural hairline integration compared to the other model.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Natural hairline that blends seamlessly with the existing forehead and temples.
  • + Excellent style matching between the new head hair and the existing beard texture.
  • + Perfect preservation of the facial features and original environment.
  • The hair density is slightly less 'full' than Model A, appearing more like a crew cut.

Verdict: Both models did an excellent job of preserving the source image while adding hair. FLUX.2 [flex] is the winner because the hair style it chose looks more natural and integrated with the man's existing beard and facial structure, whereas FLUX.2 [dev] opted for a very large afro that feels less cohesive with the overall look.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent typography with clean, balanced spacing
  • + Superior material rendering showing realistic textures on the fish and rice grains
  • + Perfect lighting that creates soft, appealing depth
  • The square base has a slight perspective tilt compared to a perfectly mathmatical isometric view

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Strongly evokes the '3D cartoon' aesthetic with stylized, toy-like objects
  • + Very clean rounded diorama base
  • + Accurate representation of the flag and text requirements
  • The textures on the fish look a bit more plastic and less realistic than requested
  • Text is slightly less refined in its layout compared to Image A

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt exceptionally well, producing clean, high-quality isometric dioramas. FLUX.2 [dev] is the winner because its material rendering (PBR) is more sophisticated, making the sushi look both appetizing and high-end, whereas FLUX.2 [flex] leans slightly more toward a generic plastic-toy aesthetic.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent preservation of the subject's facial features in a caricature style.
  • + Cleverly merges the TV anchor desk with an ice hockey rink background.
  • + Incorporates humorous details like dogs wearing hockey jerseys and a cameraman on the ice.
  • The text on the anchor desk is illegible and nonsensical.
  • The additional human character in the top left appears random and wasn't requested.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Strong cartoon/caricature aesthetic with vibrant colors.
  • + Includes many dogs and clearly identifies the 'News' profession through text and background screens.
  • + Maintains the subject's outfit (denim jacket) from the source image.
  • The facial likeness is significantly lower than Model A, looking more like a generic character.
  • The hockey theme is slightly less integrated, appearing only as jerseys and one small stick.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] (Image A) is the clear winner for its superior ability to maintain the subject's facial likeness while translating it into a caricature style. It also does a creative job of blending the two requested themes—hockey and news—by placing the anchor desk directly onto an ice rink, whereas FLUX.2 [flex] (Image B) relies more on generic cartoon features and a standard studio setting.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent fur rendering with realistic texture and lighting interaction.
  • + Beautifully soft, diffused golden hour lighting with realistic lens flares.
  • + Vibrant wildflower detail in the foreground.
  • The animals are mostly sitting rather than 'playfully chasing' as requested.
  • Included an extra baby bunny that wasn't explicitly requested.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Perfect adherence to the 'playfully chasing' and 'tumbling' part of the prompt with dynamic poses.
  • + Strong execution of 'god rays' through the trees in the background.
  • + Better overall composition that feels more active and joyful.
  • The kitten's front paws look slightly awkward/unformed in mid-air.
  • The butterfly wings have somewhat simplified, repetitive patterns.

Verdict: Both models followed the prompt well, but FLUX.2 [flex] captured the dynamic 'joyful' and 'chasing' elements much better than FLUX.2 [dev], which produced a more static, portrait-like image. While FLUX.2 [dev] has slightly more realistic fur textures, FLUX.2 [flex] wins on composition and energy.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent hand-painted paper texture and soft lighting.
  • + Captures the character likenesses while translating them into an illustrative style.
  • + Maintains the specific expressions of the original meme perfectly.
  • Replaced the urban background with a field of flowers, altering the scene context.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Preserved the original street background and background characters accurately.
  • + Matches the specific line-work and color palette of a 90s Ghibli aesthetic well.
  • + Captures the hand-painted texture faithfully.
  • Lost the 'jealous' expression of the girl on the right, making her look happy instead.
  • The girl in the foreground has a somewhat vacant expression compared to the original.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] produced a more aesthetically pleasing illustration with better emotional fidelity to the original meme, although it changed the street to a flower field. FLUX.2 [flex] was more faithful to the source composition and background elements, but it failed to capture the essential negative expression of the girlfriend on the right, which is the core of the image's meaning. FLUX.2 [dev] is the winner for better preserving the intent and character 'soul' of the original photo.

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]
Before After
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent depiction of wind-blown hair that looks natural and dynamic.
  • + Includes a high volume of falling leaves that enhances the 'energetic' feel.
  • + Maintains strong consistency with the subject's face and the background elements.
  • Some leaves look like static cutouts without much motion blur.
  • The leaves are mostly brown, which slightly clashes with the very green trees in the background.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Successfully adds motion to the hair while keeping the subject's face preserved.
  • + The green leaves match the color palette of the existing foliage better than the brown leaves in Model A.
  • + Preserves the dog and the background with very high fidelity.
  • The leaves appear very small and sparse compared to the request for an 'energetic' feel.
  • The dog's left front leg is slightly more blurred/distorted compared to the source.

Verdict: Both models performed well, successfully adding wind-blown hair and flying leaves while keeping the woman and the environment consistent. FLUX.2 [dev] is the winner because the larger volume and variety of flying leaves much better capture the 'dynamic' and 'energetic' feel requested, whereas the leaves in FLUX.2 [flex] are too sparse to make a significant impact.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Perfectly rendered typography within a complex ribbon banner.
  • + Excellent use of distressed texture that adds to the vintage feel.
  • + Balanced vector composition with a strong central focal point.
  • The steam lines are a bit thick and stylized compared to the finer details of the banner.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Clean, minimalist layout that adheres well to a modern-vintage aesthetic.
  • + Accurate typography and curved text placement.
  • The banner for 'Est. 1720' is quite small and lacks the detail present in the other version.
  • Slightly generic 'clipart' feel to the cloche illustration.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [dev] produces a more professional and stylistically cohesive logo with superior texture and banner detail. While FLUX.2 [flex] is clean and minimalist, it lacks the premium vintage character and 'vector emblem' complexity found in the FLUX.2 [dev] output.

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]
FLUX.2 [flex]

AI Judge Analysis

FLUX.2 [dev]

  • + Excellent adherence to the color palette constraints.
  • + Detailed and aesthetically pleasing illustrations of the hardware.
  • + Includes clever additional details like the crew names and Tranquility Base marker.
  • Layout is extremely disorganized with items out of order and redundant text.
  • Significant text rendering errors in several step titles.
  • Failed to follow the requested chronological order of the mission steps.

FLUX.2 [flex]

  • + Strong professional layout that mimics a real infographic poster.
  • + Excellent text clarity and typography with minimal errors.
  • + Perfect adherence to the requested chronological steps and iconography.
  • Missing the final 6th step (Landing on the surface) requested in the prompt.
  • The 'Translunar' graphic is a bit abstract compared to its counterpart.
  • The color palette is slightly limited compared to the NASA inspiration requested.

Verdict: FLUX.2 [flex] successfully captures the 'modern vector infographic' essence with a clean, logical layout and highly legible typography, though it unfortunately missed the final step of the landing. FLUX.2 [dev] produced more beautiful individual illustrations and followed the color palette better, but the chaotic layout and garbled text make it unsuccessful as an infographic. FLUX.2 [flex] is the winner for its functional design and superior composition.

Next steps

Explore each model