Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

Возникла проблема при загрузке этого видео. Это может быть связано с временными проблемами сети или видео может быть недоступно.

На главную

I tested Seedance 2.0 vs Kling 3.0. The winner was obvious. Same prompt, same reference image, one scene: a boy rescuing his dog from an oncoming car. Seedance 2.0 came out ahead across the board: · Better character consistency — the boy's face and expression stayed recognizable through fast,... dynamic motion. · More coherent physics — when the boy dives to save the dog, he actually lands on the other side of the road. In Kling 3.0, they just drop in place, which breaks the logic of the scene. · More natural motion — fluid movements without the exaggerated, theatrical quality that plagues most AI video. · Richer cinematic language — varied shot compositions including close-ups, camera transitions, and framing shifts that actively reinforce emotion and narrative tension. The gap suggests Seedance 2.0's training leans heavier into film language, not just motion synthesis.show more

Latte

7,352 subscribers

167,558 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологии

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

Seedance 2.0 VS Kling 3.0! 🔥 Essential comparison to understand the two best models on the market Conclusions and prompt: The generations are radically different, using the same initial and final frames and spaceship elements. I specified that it's a fast-paced, cinematic action scene. But Seedance has created a beautiful, relaxing, high-quality scene. The rendering of the ship's movements is sublime with Seedance; it's a dynamic, cinematic-quality 3D element. The Kling scene conveys the message better; I specified that it should splash in the water. The sounds are good; in Seedance, the sound quality is cinematic. I've added a third shot with Kling and a giant. I used Kling 3.0 at Higgsfield Prompt in comment:

Seedance 2.0 VS Kling 3.0! 🔥 Essential comparison to understand the two best models on the market Conclusions and prompt: The generations are radically different, using the same initial and final frames and spaceship elements. I specified that it's a fast-paced, cinematic action scene. But Seedance has created a beautiful, relaxing, high-quality scene. The rendering of the ship's movements is sublime with Seedance; it's a dynamic, cinematic-quality 3D element. The Kling scene conveys the message better; I specified that it should splash in the water. The sounds are good; in Seedance, the sound quality is cinematic. I've added a third shot with Kling and a giant. I used Kling 3.0 at Higgsfield Prompt in comment:

hedoήist

44,077 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Seedance 2.0 vs Gemini Omni, tested under the same conditions 👀 I was working on a new storyboard. After generating it with Seedance 2.0, I gave the exact same prompt + storyboard reference + character reference to Gemini Omni as well. Result: Gemini Omni surprised me with style quality and got closer than I expected in prompt adherence. But Seedance still feels ahead for storyboard execution, motion energy, camera language and environmental interaction. Gemini looks good. Seedance feels directed. You can see them in the video and the storyboard sheet is shown at the end. Which one do you think is more useful for this kind of work?

Seedance 2.0 vs Gemini Omni, tested under the same conditions 👀 I was working on a new storyboard. After generating it with Seedance 2.0, I gave the exact same prompt + storyboard reference + character reference to Gemini Omni as well. Result: Gemini Omni surprised me with style quality and got closer than I expected in prompt adherence. But Seedance still feels ahead for storyboard execution, motion energy, camera language and environmental interaction. Gemini looks good. Seedance feels directed. You can see them in the video and the storyboard sheet is shown at the end. Which one do you think is more useful for this kind of work?

Kōda

36,257 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

Finally got our hands on Seedance 2.0 (through YouArt) and ran it head-to-head with Kling AI 3.0. Here’s what stood out: Seedance 2.0’s physics feel stronger right away. The movement just looks more natural and realistic, especially in bigger physical actions. It also handles continuity across multiple shots from a single prompt better than I expected, which makes scene building a lot easier. And on the audio side, the lip sync generally holds up better than Kling. But here’s the tradeoff: Both models struggle with fine details. Background faces and smaller elements still get a bit messy. Seedance currently outputs at 720p, while Kling 3.0 supports 1080p, so Kling has the edge in overall sharpness. Even with upscaling, Seedance doesn’t fully recover those tiny details. Verdict🏆: Seedance 2.0 is a real step forward, especially for motion realism, but it’s definitely not the “end of Hollywood.” Check out our latest tutorial where we show you how to get access to this new model and take a deep look at the quality of this new AI Video Generator:

Finally got our hands on Seedance 2.0 (through YouArt) and ran it head-to-head with Kling AI 3.0. Here’s what stood out: Seedance 2.0’s physics feel stronger right away. The movement just looks more natural and realistic, especially in bigger physical actions. It also handles continuity across multiple shots from a single prompt better than I expected, which makes scene building a lot easier. And on the audio side, the lip sync generally holds up better than Kling. But here’s the tradeoff: Both models struggle with fine details. Background faces and smaller elements still get a bit messy. Seedance currently outputs at 720p, while Kling 3.0 supports 1080p, so Kling has the edge in overall sharpness. Even with upscaling, Seedance doesn’t fully recover those tiny details. Verdict🏆: Seedance 2.0 is a real step forward, especially for motion realism, but it’s definitely not the “end of Hollywood.” Check out our latest tutorial where we show you how to get access to this new model and take a deep look at the quality of this new AI Video Generator:

Curious Refuge

58,989 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

Same prompt. Same story. Two models. One intense car chase. I put Seedance 2.0 and Seedance 2.5 on CapCut through the exact same 30-second Hollywood style chase sequence to compare vehicle physics, camera stability, motion blur, character consistency, dialogue, and overall cinematic realism. No prompt changes. No shortcuts. Just a direct side-by-side test to see how much the generation quality has evolved. Which version feels more realistic to you? CapCut

Same prompt. Same story. Two models. One intense car chase. I put Seedance 2.0 and Seedance 2.5 on CapCut through the exact same 30-second Hollywood style chase sequence to compare vehicle physics, camera stability, motion blur, character consistency, dialogue, and overall cinematic realism. No prompt changes. No shortcuts. Just a direct side-by-side test to see how much the generation quality has evolved. Which version feels more realistic to you? CapCut

Natalia

35,789 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Same cozy pasta recipe. Same 30-second cinematic cooking vlog. I put Seedance 2.0 and Seedance 2.5 on CapCut through the exact same cooking sequence to compare food preparation, hand movements, steam, camera motion, lighting, character consistency, and overall cinematic realism. No prompt changes. No shortcuts. Just a direct side by side test to see how much the generation quality has evolved. CapCut Which one is your favorite?

Same cozy pasta recipe. Same 30-second cinematic cooking vlog. I put Seedance 2.0 and Seedance 2.5 on CapCut through the exact same cooking sequence to compare food preparation, hand movements, steam, camera motion, lighting, character consistency, and overall cinematic realism. No prompt changes. No shortcuts. Just a direct side by side test to see how much the generation quality has evolved. CapCut Which one is your favorite?

Soulful Ai

45,177 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

FIRST TEST Seedance 2.0! From my initial tests, this is one of the more impressive AI video models I’ve tried so far. Dynamic motion feels fluid, prompt adherence is solid, and the efficiency really stood out, very little iteration needed. Everything you see here was generated using just one reference image + one prompt. I also tested a 3×3 image grid with no prompt at all, and the results stayed surprisingly consistent. Another highlight: sound design is already included, and it actually works really well. Tested via BytePlus 👉 More detail and access link to try Seedance 2.0 is in the comments.

FIRST TEST Seedance 2.0! From my initial tests, this is one of the more impressive AI video models I’ve tried so far. Dynamic motion feels fluid, prompt adherence is solid, and the efficiency really stood out, very little iteration needed. Everything you see here was generated using just one reference image + one prompt. I also tested a 3×3 image grid with no prompt at all, and the results stayed surprisingly consistent. Another highlight: sound design is already included, and it actually works really well. Tested via BytePlus 👉 More detail and access link to try Seedance 2.0 is in the comments.

Dinda Prasetyo

45,450 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Testing four AI video models from the same input image and prompt. The scene: two cybernetic soldiers dueling with energy swords in a rainy neon cyberpunk city. This thread breaks down scene richness, physics, and camera motion for each model. First, a side-by-side comparison video of PixVerse V6 and Seedance 2.0.

Testing four AI video models from the same input image and prompt. The scene: two cybernetic soldiers dueling with energy swords in a rainy neon cyberpunk city. This thread breaks down scene richness, physics, and camera motion for each model. First, a side-by-side comparison video of PixVerse V6 and Seedance 2.0.

Jibril

113,346 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Seedance 2.0 is now in HeyGen Everyone's using Seedance to generate cinematic video with any character. We just made that character you. Introducing Avatar Shots - your likeness, consistent across scenes. Dynamic motion. Multiple avatars in the same shot. Same face. Way more range. Only available through business email verification for all regions except US and Japan. RT + comment "SEEDANCE" for 100 HeyGen credits (must follow)

Joshua Xu

601,715 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

Check out our latest AI video comparison! This time we're putting Kling 1.6 head-to-head with Luma's new Ray2 image-to-video feature. We used the same image and the same prompt for both ("subtle camera movement, natural motion"), just like in our recent Pika 2.1 test. The results? Super interesting! Ray2 brings more dynamic motion and cinematic colors to the table, though with some distortion, while Kling keeps its reputation for solid quality and stability. Love seeing these different approaches to the same challenge. Which one do you like better?

Check out our latest AI video comparison! This time we're putting Kling 1.6 head-to-head with Luma's new Ray2 image-to-video feature. We used the same image and the same prompt for both ("subtle camera movement, natural motion"), just like in our recent Pika 2.1 test. The results? Super interesting! Ray2 brings more dynamic motion and cinematic colors to the table, though with some distortion, while Kling keeps its reputation for solid quality and stability. Love seeing these different approaches to the same challenge. Which one do you like better?

Curious Refuge

42,151 просмотров • 1 год назад

Seedance 2.0 - Advanced Workflows Series 11. Cinematic Camera Angles through Video Gen + Specialized Storyboard AI Agent Are you already getting camera shots and angles through Nano Banana Pro? Take the next step. Seedance 2.0 has a better spatial understanding of the scene than image generation models. Because it is built to produce cinematic clips, it achieves more beautiful shots and angles than image models like Nano Banana, which are primarily made for image editing. As an added bonus, Seedance renders the entire space of the scene, so you can get tens of shots with complete spatial and element consistency in a single generation. Create a specific AI Agent to help you with storyboarding, and feed the input into Seedance to get the most cinematic shots. You can access Seedance 2.0 now on insMind (link at the end of the thread). Workflow + Prompts👇

Seedance 2.0 - Advanced Workflows Series 11. Cinematic Camera Angles through Video Gen + Specialized Storyboard AI Agent Are you already getting camera shots and angles through Nano Banana Pro? Take the next step. Seedance 2.0 has a better spatial understanding of the scene than image generation models. Because it is built to produce cinematic clips, it achieves more beautiful shots and angles than image models like Nano Banana, which are primarily made for image editing. As an added bonus, Seedance renders the entire space of the scene, so you can get tens of shots with complete spatial and element consistency in a single generation. Create a specific AI Agent to help you with storyboarding, and feed the input into Seedance to get the most cinematic shots. You can access Seedance 2.0 now on insMind (link at the end of the thread). Workflow + Prompts👇

VoxelPlot

126,565 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Kling 3.0 vs Gemini Omni Flash vs Grok Imagine 1.5 vs Seedance 2.0. Another battle for the best AI video tool. This time I tested an extremely difficult stunt scene: a bridge jump, landing on a moving truck, then jumping onto a car and taking it over. No model handled it perfectly. Not even Seedance 2.0. The scene itself was very hard, but I kept the prompt relatively simple, without stuffing it with too many complex stunt terms. After Veo 3.1’s terrible results in previous rounds, I didn’t even include it this time. Seedance needed 4 attempts to give me a decent result. Gemini Omni Flash needed even more: 7 generations, and I picked the best one. Kling and Grok got 4 attempts each. None of them looked promising enough to justify more retries. My take: Grok Imagine 1.5, the new “revolutionary” release, once again showed that it still can’t handle complex action scenes properly. Two tests in a row now, and the result is objectively weak. Kling 3.0 feels outdated, but in this test it actually looked slightly better than Grok Imagine 1.5, which says a lot. Gemini Omni Flash gives decent movement, but the physics and action logic are clearly off. It’s better than Grok and Kling here, but still very far from the super-generator Google markets it as. Seedance 2.0 was the best again, as expected. Still not perfect. It also has a clear physics issue, because pulling a driver out of a moving car while standing on the road makes no physical sense. But overall, Seedance still produced a much more intense and cinematic scene than all the others. My ranking for this test: 1. Seedance 2.0 — clear winner, even with flaws 2. Gemini Omni Flash 3. Kling 3.0 4. Grok Imagine 1.5 — unfortunately, the weakest right now in my opinion Do you agree? #AIVideo

Kling 3.0 vs Gemini Omni Flash vs Grok Imagine 1.5 vs Seedance 2.0. Another battle for the best AI video tool. This time I tested an extremely difficult stunt scene: a bridge jump, landing on a moving truck, then jumping onto a car and taking it over. No model handled it perfectly. Not even Seedance 2.0. The scene itself was very hard, but I kept the prompt relatively simple, without stuffing it with too many complex stunt terms. After Veo 3.1’s terrible results in previous rounds, I didn’t even include it this time. Seedance needed 4 attempts to give me a decent result. Gemini Omni Flash needed even more: 7 generations, and I picked the best one. Kling and Grok got 4 attempts each. None of them looked promising enough to justify more retries. My take: Grok Imagine 1.5, the new “revolutionary” release, once again showed that it still can’t handle complex action scenes properly. Two tests in a row now, and the result is objectively weak. Kling 3.0 feels outdated, but in this test it actually looked slightly better than Grok Imagine 1.5, which says a lot. Gemini Omni Flash gives decent movement, but the physics and action logic are clearly off. It’s better than Grok and Kling here, but still very far from the super-generator Google markets it as. Seedance 2.0 was the best again, as expected. Still not perfect. It also has a clear physics issue, because pulling a driver out of a moving car while standing on the road makes no physical sense. But overall, Seedance still produced a much more intense and cinematic scene than all the others. My ranking for this test: 1. Seedance 2.0 — clear winner, even with flaws 2. Gemini Omni Flash 3. Kling 3.0 4. Grok Imagine 1.5 — unfortunately, the weakest right now in my opinion Do you agree? #AIVideo

Alpha Mom

67,514 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

New body-physics test for the best AI video tools: The newly released Grok Imagine 1.5, the king Seedance 2.0, Google’s “revolutionary super-duper” Gemini Omni Flash, and the old-timer Kling 3.0 Pro. This time I tested how each model handles realistic running motion, body movement, fabric physics, and natural secondary motion. And the result was much less obvious than I expected. Believe it or not, I can’t call Seedance the clear winner this time. Each model got several attempts. - Grok Imagine 1.5: The new version is finally available on the official Grok website, so I could properly test it. Honestly, I didn’t notice a massive improvement over the previous version. Still, the result was acceptable. It produced the most cartoonish image, and the woman runs as if she’s wearing heels, but the body physics were decent enough. It also understood the instructions quickly and followed them correctly. - Kling 3.0 Pro: The old man decided to test my patience. It repeatedly blocked a simple running scene as adult content, then misunderstood the instructions several times. The successful result has the most realistic lighting and frame rate, but the actual body physics look strange. It almost feels like loose foam padding is bouncing inside the leggings. There are also several visible artifacts and unnatural movements. - Gemini Omni Flash: As usual, it gave me that strange slow-motion, low-FPS look that Google models seem to love. But it didn’t censor anything, understood the instructions immediately, and produced a beautiful, realistic result. Surprisingly, this is the output I liked the most in this test. - Seedance 2.0: Seedance also blocked a couple of generations, just like Kling, but eventually produced a strong result. It delivered the most beautiful and visually appealing footage, but I honestly expected better physics. The video looks great, yet I can’t confidently call it the most physically accurate result. - My ranking: 1. Gemini Omni Flash — not perfect, but the best overall result for me 2. Seedance 2.0 — visually stunning, but I preferred Omni’s physics 3. Grok Imagine 1.5 — cartoonish look and strange running, but still acceptable 4. Kling 3.0 Pro — the longest wait, the strangest physics, and the most inconsistent result Do you agree with my ranking? #AIVideo

New body-physics test for the best AI video tools: The newly released Grok Imagine 1.5, the king Seedance 2.0, Google’s “revolutionary super-duper” Gemini Omni Flash, and the old-timer Kling 3.0 Pro. This time I tested how each model handles realistic running motion, body movement, fabric physics, and natural secondary motion. And the result was much less obvious than I expected. Believe it or not, I can’t call Seedance the clear winner this time. Each model got several attempts. - Grok Imagine 1.5: The new version is finally available on the official Grok website, so I could properly test it. Honestly, I didn’t notice a massive improvement over the previous version. Still, the result was acceptable. It produced the most cartoonish image, and the woman runs as if she’s wearing heels, but the body physics were decent enough. It also understood the instructions quickly and followed them correctly. - Kling 3.0 Pro: The old man decided to test my patience. It repeatedly blocked a simple running scene as adult content, then misunderstood the instructions several times. The successful result has the most realistic lighting and frame rate, but the actual body physics look strange. It almost feels like loose foam padding is bouncing inside the leggings. There are also several visible artifacts and unnatural movements. - Gemini Omni Flash: As usual, it gave me that strange slow-motion, low-FPS look that Google models seem to love. But it didn’t censor anything, understood the instructions immediately, and produced a beautiful, realistic result. Surprisingly, this is the output I liked the most in this test. - Seedance 2.0: Seedance also blocked a couple of generations, just like Kling, but eventually produced a strong result. It delivered the most beautiful and visually appealing footage, but I honestly expected better physics. The video looks great, yet I can’t confidently call it the most physically accurate result. - My ranking: 1. Gemini Omni Flash — not perfect, but the best overall result for me 2. Seedance 2.0 — visually stunning, but I preferred Omni’s physics 3. Grok Imagine 1.5 — cartoonish look and strange running, but still acceptable 4. Kling 3.0 Pro — the longest wait, the strangest physics, and the most inconsistent result Do you agree with my ranking? #AIVideo

Alpha Mom

157,932 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Been playing with a character consistency workflow again. This came from Nexora that starts with a single GPT Image 2.0 character sheet and turns it into a multi-shot cinematic sequence in Seedance 2.0. One thing I added to the workflow: I first comped the character, environment, and visual style together in Midjourney before bringing everything into GPT Image 2.0 to build the character sheet. I also pushed it a bit further by generating multiple characters, destinations, and art directions at the same time, then turning those into production-style character sheets and shot sequences. It's interesting how much consistency you can get from a single well-defined character board when the visual language, wardrobe, and environment are established upfront. Check out three different character + scenes here 👇

Been playing with a character consistency workflow again. This came from Nexora that starts with a single GPT Image 2.0 character sheet and turns it into a multi-shot cinematic sequence in Seedance 2.0. One thing I added to the workflow: I first comped the character, environment, and visual style together in Midjourney before bringing everything into GPT Image 2.0 to build the character sheet. I also pushed it a bit further by generating multiple characters, destinations, and art directions at the same time, then turning those into production-style character sheets and shot sequences. It's interesting how much consistency you can get from a single well-defined character board when the visual language, wardrobe, and environment are established upfront. Check out three different character + scenes here 👇

Curious Refuge

12,209 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

Midjourney V7 + Kling 2.0 → Damn. The painted wolves gave me goosebumps (idk why). TOOLS: + MJ V7: Image gen. + Kling 2.0: Video gen. + Topaz: Upscaling + Udio: Music gen. EX MIDJOURNEY PROMPT: african wild dogs hunting in the African plains, shot on Leica M10-R --ar 16:9 --profile rj6wbiu KLING PROMPT EX: The camera races low and fast across the dry savannah, tracking a pack of African painted wolves in full pursuit. Dust kicks up from their pounding paws as the lead hunter breaks off from the pack, eyes locked ahead. The handheld rig keeps tight on the alpha’s face — ears back, muscles flexing with every stride. The rest of the pack fills the edges of the frame in a blur of motion and urgency. The golden hour sun casts sharp shadows and streaks of warm light across their mottled coats, highlighting each ripple of tension and speed. The camera shakes and dips with the terrain, creating an immersive, visceral chase. A life-or-death hunt captured in raw, cinematic clarity. #midjourney #kling Kling AI

Rory Flynn

149,764 просмотров • 1 год назад

Seedance 2.0 is insane. Blender previs is having a moment in AI filmmaking for a reason. I wanted to see how far I could push the workflow beyond a simple camera move in an ambush scene. The workflow: 1. Make a start image in Midjourney 2. Block it out in Blender, animate the camera 3. Feed both to Seedance The more I test this pipeline, the more convinced I am that hybrid pipelines are the future. The conversation is moving fast but previs is one of the clearest unlocks so far. Seedance still isn't perfect at matching the reference but it's close. You can experiment with staging, timing, and camera movement before you ever touch the video model. Solve the scene before you generate the shot.

Seedance 2.0 is insane. Blender previs is having a moment in AI filmmaking for a reason. I wanted to see how far I could push the workflow beyond a simple camera move in an ambush scene. The workflow: 1. Make a start image in Midjourney 2. Block it out in Blender, animate the camera 3. Feed both to Seedance The more I test this pipeline, the more convinced I am that hybrid pipelines are the future. The conversation is moving fast but previs is one of the clearest unlocks so far. Seedance still isn't perfect at matching the reference but it's close. You can experiment with staging, timing, and camera movement before you ever touch the video model. Solve the scene before you generate the shot.

Reid Hannaford

227,641 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

I was invited to test OpenArt Director. I made this nearly 1-minute cinematic video through conversation, starting with only an initial idea, two character images, and one background image. This is what vibe directing feels like. A few details impressed me: Director first generates the voiceover, then uses it as reference audio for Seedance 2.0. That makes the character voices feel much more natural and better synced. After the character images, it also helps create storyboard frames and camera reference images. That massively improves the final generation quality. It feels less like writing a prompt, and more like building a shot with an AI production team.

I was invited to test OpenArt Director. I made this nearly 1-minute cinematic video through conversation, starting with only an initial idea, two character images, and one background image. This is what vibe directing feels like. A few details impressed me: Director first generates the voiceover, then uses it as reference audio for Seedance 2.0. That makes the character voices feel much more natural and better synced. After the character images, it also helps create storyboard frames and camera reference images. That massively improves the final generation quality. It feels less like writing a prompt, and more like building a shot with an AI production team.

underwood

16,581 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

We generated this scene with just one trial on Seedance Enterprise 2.5. We had run this same shot on other models and it took us around 8 attempts before anything came back usable. Generations are billed one at a time so 8 tries to 1 is the entire cost story. 30 seconds, single shot, no stitching, what used to be a day of rerolling is now a single pass, which means the budget goes into testing new concepts instead of rescuing one. Watch the water as the creature moves through it, and watch the camera fall behind during the escape. The realistic physics, smooth camera motion, and shot consistency all came directly from the model.None of that was added in post. We used Seedream 5.0 for the visual ideation and Seedance 2.5 for the video. Both are running on lumina at 4K, up to 50 references to hold a character or product steady across a shot, and region editing to fix one part of a frame without regenerating the whole thing. Seedance 2.5 API is about to launch on BytePlus, and now you can try it directly on Lumina.

We generated this scene with just one trial on Seedance Enterprise 2.5. We had run this same shot on other models and it took us around 8 attempts before anything came back usable. Generations are billed one at a time so 8 tries to 1 is the entire cost story. 30 seconds, single shot, no stitching, what used to be a day of rerolling is now a single pass, which means the budget goes into testing new concepts instead of rescuing one. Watch the water as the creature moves through it, and watch the camera fall behind during the escape. The realistic physics, smooth camera motion, and shot consistency all came directly from the model.None of that was added in post. We used Seedream 5.0 for the visual ideation and Seedance 2.5 for the video. Both are running on lumina at 4K, up to 50 references to hold a character or product steady across a shot, and region editing to fix one part of a frame without regenerating the whole thing. Seedance 2.5 API is about to launch on BytePlus, and now you can try it directly on Lumina.

Future Stacked

86,430 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

A Chinese creator found a way to sell $3,000-$5,000 brand videos with no team, no camera crew, and no agency. no film crew. no editor. no storyboard artist. just one ComfyUI canvas turning product photos into finished AI ads. > GPT-image2 builds the director board: shots, camera moves, scenes, sound design > Seedance 2.0 turns the board into motion > product reference locks the object > character reference locks the face, outfit, and style > 16:9. 4K. one visual plan. > final prompt: generate the video from this storyboard old workflow: brand → agency → director → editor → revisions → invoice new workflow: product image → storyboard → reference sheet → video the expensive part was never rendering.

0xTria

16,251 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

I've been playing more with this depth map motion transfer workflow, and if you're trying to recreate really specific body movements from a reference video, this works surprisingly well. Here's the workflow: 1. Grab your reference video, then create your character and environment references. 2. Run the video through Depth Anything on fal to generate a depth map: 3. Drop that depth map into Seedance Omni as your motion reference along with your character and environment references. You don't even need the original video. I also tested this against using the original video as the motion reference in Seedance, and there's definitely a noticeable difference. One thing I found, though, is that this works much better for body movement than facial performance since the depth map can't really capture subtle facial motion. I'm running more tests to see if there's a good way to control both body movement and facial performance. If you have any workflows I should try, do share in the comments!

I've been playing more with this depth map motion transfer workflow, and if you're trying to recreate really specific body movements from a reference video, this works surprisingly well. Here's the workflow: 1. Grab your reference video, then create your character and environment references. 2. Run the video through Depth Anything on fal to generate a depth map: 3. Drop that depth map into Seedance Omni as your motion reference along with your character and environment references. You don't even need the original video. I also tested this against using the original video as the motion reference in Seedance, and there's definitely a noticeable difference. One thing I found, though, is that this works much better for body movement than facial performance since the depth map can't really capture subtle facial motion. I'm running more tests to see if there's a good way to control both body movement and facial performance. If you have any workflows I should try, do share in the comments!

Curious Refuge

16,709 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

📖THE SEEDANCE 2.0 PROMPT FORMAT THAT NOBODY IS USING BUT EVERYONE SHOULD Most people use Seedance 2.0 wrong. They type a normal prompt and wonder why the result looks generic. The difference between these two visuals isn't a better idea — it's a better prompt format. Normal prompt gives you a good result. JSON prompt gives you a cinematic one. Here's why it works: A normal prompt describes what you want. A JSON prompt tells Seedance exactly how to build the scene — camera movement, lighting angle, atmosphere, texture, depth, timing. You're not asking for a video. You're engineering one. The crystal dolphin jumping above an ancient courtyard with floating jellyfish — same concept, two completely different outputs. The JSON version has golden hour, dramatic clouds, volumetric light, and a sense of scale the normal prompt never reached. The glowing lotus fountain — same story. Normal prompt gives you a clean render. JSON gives you a full cinematic frame with layered depth, warm lantern light, and a composition that looks like it belongs in a feature film. The workflow that produces this: • Step 1 — Write your scene idea in plain language first •Step 2 — Ask Claude to convert it into a structured JSON prompt with fields for: subject, environment, camera, lighting, mood, motion, color grade • Step 3 — Paste the JSON into Seedance 2.0 • Step 4 — Take the best clip into Premiere Pro for final color correction and sound design The tools are free or cheap. The knowledge of how to prompt is what separates the results. This is the gap most creators never close. 📥 BACK TOMORROW. There will be new life hacks 🔖 The full guide is pinned below. Save it before you need it.

📖THE SEEDANCE 2.0 PROMPT FORMAT THAT NOBODY IS USING BUT EVERYONE SHOULD Most people use Seedance 2.0 wrong. They type a normal prompt and wonder why the result looks generic. The difference between these two visuals isn't a better idea — it's a better prompt format. Normal prompt gives you a good result. JSON prompt gives you a cinematic one. Here's why it works: A normal prompt describes what you want. A JSON prompt tells Seedance exactly how to build the scene — camera movement, lighting angle, atmosphere, texture, depth, timing. You're not asking for a video. You're engineering one. The crystal dolphin jumping above an ancient courtyard with floating jellyfish — same concept, two completely different outputs. The JSON version has golden hour, dramatic clouds, volumetric light, and a sense of scale the normal prompt never reached. The glowing lotus fountain — same story. Normal prompt gives you a clean render. JSON gives you a full cinematic frame with layered depth, warm lantern light, and a composition that looks like it belongs in a feature film. The workflow that produces this: • Step 1 — Write your scene idea in plain language first •Step 2 — Ask Claude to convert it into a structured JSON prompt with fields for: subject, environment, camera, lighting, mood, motion, color grade • Step 3 — Paste the JSON into Seedance 2.0 • Step 4 — Take the best clip into Premiere Pro for final color correction and sound design The tools are free or cheap. The knowledge of how to prompt is what separates the results. This is the gap most creators never close. 📥 BACK TOMORROW. There will be new life hacks 🔖 The full guide is pinned below. Save it before you need it.

Zentrix⌚️

136,911 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад