FLUX1.1 [pro] Black Forest Labs vs GPT Image 1 OpenAI

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Exquisite rendering of glass refractions and reflections
• + Very high textural detail on the book and table
• + Atmospheric handling of background plant through glass

• − The glass container is a tall rectangular prism rather than a cube
• − The blue sphere appears to be floating in the center rather than resting on the bottom

GPT Image 1

• + The glass container is shaped much closer to a true cube
• + The blue sphere is resting naturally on the surface
• + Excellent spatial composition and lighting

• − The glass thickness is a bit inconsistent at the seams
• − Slightly less 'photorealistic' texture on the blue sphere compared to Model A

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent handling of wet pavement reflections and rainy atmosphere.
• + Captures the requested motion blur from passing cars well.
• + Realistic skin texture and age-appropriate lighting.

• − The bicycle geometry is broken, with a missing rear wheel and frame segment behind the man.
• − The man's posture is slightly awkward, hovering above the ground rather than standing or kneeling.

GPT Image 1

• + Stronger adherence to the action of 'repairing' the bicycle.
• + Superior skin texture and fine detail in the man's face and hands.
• + Better preservation of the bicycle's structural logic.

• − Missing the requested motion blur from passing cars.
• − Fails to show reflections on the pavement as clearly as the other model.

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Extremely high skin texture detail and realistic eyes.
• + Excellent use of shallow depth of field for a modern cinematic look.
• + Dynamic lighting with vibrant bokeh sparks.

• − Braided hair with beads is less prominent than requested.
• − Framing is very tight, cutting off much of the ornate armor details.

GPT Image 1

• + Excellent depiction of ornate engraved plate armor as requested.
• + Strong adherence to the braid and bead detail in the hair.
• + Warm torchlight atmospheric lighting is very convincing.

• − Skin textures and eyes look slightly more painterly/artificial compared to Model A.
• − The bokeh sparks are less integrated into the depth of the scene.

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent presentation of the menu in a realistic lifestyle setting
• + Includes a high number of food images in a grid as requested
• + Sophisticated use of white space and typography hierarchy

• − The text is mostly illegible gibberish
• − The 'grid' of photos is somewhat cluttered and lacks clear alignment with the text sections

GPT Image 1

• + Highly legible bold sans-serif text
• + Perfectly clean and balanced grid layout
• + Clear categorization with vibrant color-coded accents

• − Minimalist to a fault, feeling slightly like a template rather than a finished design
• − Contains minor spelling errors like 'descrigion'

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent photorealistic texture on the meat and bun
• + Clean typography and professional layout design
• + Realistic lighting integration between the burger and the background flames

• − Failed the 'exploded' instruction as the layers are stacked together
• − One instances of neon blue text contradicts the 'fiery glowing' prompt
• − Missing the requested starburst for the price

GPT Image 1

• + Followed the exploded view instruction perfectly with clear separation of ingredients
• + Strict adherence to the fiery glowing text aesthetic across all elements
• + Included the requested price starburst with the correct currency symbol

• − The price text is incorrect, showing €0.99 instead of €6.99
• − Overall image clarity and texture detail is slightly lower than the competitor
• − Composition is a bit crowded at the top and bottom borders

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent photographic depth of field and background bokeh
• + Authentic cursive style for the title

• − Failed the prompt instructions by splitting one menu item into two lines with incorrect text and enormous prices ($228, $98)
• − Included spelling errors like 'Chipkies' and 'Herbss'
• − Text looks like a digital overlay rather than physical chalk grit

GPT Image 1

• + Perfect adherence to the menu list and prices requested
• + Superior chalk texture that looks like real dust on a board
• + Correct spelling for all items including the cut-off 'Cookies'

• − The handwriting is somewhat uniform and lacks the 'elegant cursive' requested for the title
• − The lighting is flat compared to the atmospheric lighting in Model A

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent cinematic lighting and dynamic composition.
• + Highly detailed textures on the spacesuit and horse's mane.
• + Vibrant and surreal atmosphere with beautiful celestial clouds.

• − Completely failed the negative constraint to have the horse on top.
• − Anatomical issues with the horse's front legs merging into its chest.
• − The horse appears to be Wearing an astronaut suit pieces in a nonsensical way.

GPT Image 1

• + Strong image clarity and clean rendering.
• + Good spatial composition with the curve of the planet.
• + Consistent horse anatomy and realistic fur texture.

• − Completely failed the negative constraint to have the horse on top.
• − Less creative interpretation of the 'surreal' aspect compared to Model A.
• − A more standard, less cinematic color palette.

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent photographic lighting and depth of field
• + High level of texture detail in the capybara's fur
• + Good text rendering on the hat

• − Compositional error puts both characters in the front or middle seat area
• − Failed to place the capybara's paws on the steering wheel correctly
• − The capybara is looking at the passenger rather than driving professionally

GPT Image 1

• + Perfect adherence to the requested composition with the capybara driving and passenger in the back
• + Accurately depicts both front paws on the steering wheel
• + Captures the bored, 'normal' expression of the businesswoman well

• − Anatomical issues with the capybara's paws looking like monkey hands
• − The capybara's face is slightly less detailed than in the competitor
• − Strange placement of the taxi light on top of the car, visible through the windshield

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Features cinematic lighting with high contrast and a vibrant glowing jack-o-lantern.
• + Detailed thorn border and atmospheric elements like the trees and moon.
• + Good use of vertical space despite the square aspect ratio.

• − Significant text errors including redundant lines and typos like 'univted'.
• − Information at the bottom is cluttered and repetitive.
• − Missed the 'Invitation' part of the title on the banner.

GPT Image 1

• + Excellent text legibility and accuracy with no spelling errors.
• + Clearly captures the vintage parchment texture requested.
• + Follows the layout instructions perfectly, including the scroll banner and clear footer details.

• − The lighting is a bit flat compared to the other model.
• − The aesthetic leans more modern-digital-vintage than truly gothic cinematic.

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Excellent variety of sushi types within the scene
• + Accurate 45-degree isometric perspective
• + High clarity with soft, appealing lighting

• − Missed the small flag icon requested in the prompt
• − Text is somewhat stylized rather than simply 'bold' as requested

GPT Image 1

• + Includes all elements including the small flag icon
• + Very clean, minimal composition that aligns well with the 'miniature' request
• + Perfect execution of the text hierarchy and bold font

• − Texture on the rice looks a bit more like clay than 'refined texture'
• − Background color is slightly darker than the requested 'light blue'

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Sophisticated vector illustration style with high artistic detail.
• + Excellent use of warm brown and cream tones with subtle texturing.
• + Includes a complex, ornate banner that fits the vintage aesthetic.

• − Spelling error in the main text rendering it as 'Caffé Franilian'.
• − The dome structure looks more like a building's cupola than a restaurant cloche dome.

GPT Image 1

• + Perfect spelling of 'Caffè Florian' and 'Est. 1720'.
• + Accurately represents a cloche dome as requested in the prompt.
• + Strong minimalist vector execution with a clear, balanced layout.

• − Failed the requirement for a light background, providing a black one instead.
• − The texture is very subtle and less noticeable than in the competing model.

FLUX1.1 [pro]

• + Clean aesthetic with a professional layout and hierarchy.
• + Effective use of negative space and a wide color range from the NASA palette.
• + Captures the sense of a complete infographic poster.

• − Text is largely illegible gibberish after the main title.
• − The numbering and sequence of steps are logically broken and repetitive.
• − Iconography is inconsistent and does not clearly match the specific requested items.

GPT Image 1

• + Excellent adherence to specific icon requests like the lunar module and trajectory arc.
• + Highly legible typography with correct spelling of mission names (mostly).
• + Strict adherence to the flat-vector style and NASA-inspired palette.

• − Composition feels more like an icon set than a cohesive infographic poster.
• − One spelling error with 'EARLLUNAR'.
• − The layout lacks a clear flow or connective lines between the steps.