Video yükleniyor...

Video Yüklenemedi

Bu video yüklenirken bir sorun oluştu. Bu geçici bir ağ sorunundan kaynaklanıyor olabilir veya video kullanılamıyor olabilir.

Ana Sayfaya Dön

This is our second head-to-head test between Kling 3.0 and Seedance 2.0. This time, we pushed both models further, including dialogue-driven Sci-fi comedy shots and even a singing scene. Every single shot was generated using: • The exact same base image • The exact same prompt • No re-generate... show more

Dinda Prasetyo

6,668 subscribers

196,658 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce •via X (Twitter)

Bilim & Teknoloji

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Yorum

Yorum bulunmuyor

Orijinal gönderinin yorumları burada görünecek

Benzer Videolar

Kling 3.0 vs Seedance 2.0, Which one is better? Every single shot was generated using the exact same base image and identical prompt.

Kling 3.0 vs Seedance 2.0, Which one is better? Every single shot was generated using the exact same base image and identical prompt.

Dinda Prasetyo

87,349 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

Seedance 2.0 vs. Kling 3.0: Who delivers the most realistic emotional expressions? I put both models through the same test using one character, one reference image, and the exact same prompt. Each generated four emotions: anger, sadness, happiness, and disgust. Which AI video model handled the emotions better ?

Seedance 2.0 vs. Kling 3.0: Who delivers the most realistic emotional expressions? I put both models through the same test using one character, one reference image, and the exact same prompt. Each generated four emotions: anger, sadness, happiness, and disgust. Which AI video model handled the emotions better ?

FATHELA ESQ

38,646 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

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 görüntüleme • 21 gün önce

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 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

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 görüntüleme • 20 gün önce

Tested the exact same prompt on Seedance 2.0 vs. Omni Flash, and the results are wild. 🤯 Both have their weird little AI mutations (we all know the struggle lol), but the biggest shocker? Omni Flash generated this instantly with zero censorship, while Seedance 2.0 threw a fit and tried to ban the prompt. 💀 Dropping the exact prompt in the thread below 👇 Next up, I’m gonna push them harder with some crazy dynamic animation. Which model do you think won this round? tbh I’m torn.

Tested the exact same prompt on Seedance 2.0 vs. Omni Flash, and the results are wild. 🤯 Both have their weird little AI mutations (we all know the struggle lol), but the biggest shocker? Omni Flash generated this instantly with zero censorship, while Seedance 2.0 threw a fit and tried to ban the prompt. 💀 Dropping the exact prompt in the thread below 👇 Next up, I’m gonna push them harder with some crazy dynamic animation. Which model do you think won this round? tbh I’m torn.

Ivanna | AI Art & Prompts

38,463 görüntüleme • 2 ay önce

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 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

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

43,990 görüntüleme • 5 ay önce

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

36,015 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Seedance 2.5 is now LIVE on OpenGradient! This entire film was generated from a single prompt. One take, no edits. → Up to 30-second clips from one prompt → 10,000 character prompts for full scene-by-scene direction → Up to 30 reference uploads for character and environment consistency → Native audio and sound design built in Even the judges agree: it's a 2.5. Try it now →

Seedance 2.5 is now LIVE on OpenGradient! This entire film was generated from a single prompt. One take, no edits. → Up to 30-second clips from one prompt → 10,000 character prompts for full scene-by-scene direction → Up to 30 reference uploads for character and environment consistency → Native audio and sound design built in Even the judges agree: it's a 2.5. Try it now →

OpenGradient (∇, ∇)

11,705 görüntüleme • 22 gün önce

Seedance 2.5 Test 480p - 720p I created a fight scene in a Chinese donghua style. For my prompt tests, I usually generate 5-second clips at 480p just to see how the style and overall look turn out. Interestingly, action scenes look cleaner at 480p. At 720p, they become noticeably blurrier or noisier, even though both were generated with the exact same prompt. The timing also seems much more consistent across generations now. Seedance 2.0 wasn't following timestamps reliably, so I rarely used them back then. With 2.5, I have started using timestamps again. I upscaled the 480p with Topaz. What do you think? Also you can check the prompt below.

Seedance 2.5 Test 480p - 720p I created a fight scene in a Chinese donghua style. For my prompt tests, I usually generate 5-second clips at 480p just to see how the style and overall look turn out. Interestingly, action scenes look cleaner at 480p. At 720p, they become noticeably blurrier or noisier, even though both were generated with the exact same prompt. The timing also seems much more consistent across generations now. Seedance 2.0 wasn't following timestamps reliably, so I rarely used them back then. With 2.5, I have started using timestamps again. I upscaled the 480p with Topaz. What do you think? Also you can check the prompt below.

Kōda

29,089 görüntüleme • 26 gün önce

GPT Image 2 - Character Reference Sheet Prompt You can create a character reference sheet in any style you want for use in your Seedance 2.0 videos. All you need to do is either provide a reference image or describe your character. You can also input random values to generate completely random characters. This reference sheet provides a clear, structured, and highly readable visual breakdown of the character, helping the model maintain strong identity consistency across different outputs. The layout ensures the model focuses on essential visual information rather than stylistic noise, while the inclusion of expressions, head angles, and performance cues improves the model’s ability to generate believable acting and varied poses without losing character integrity. All clips in the demonstration video were generated using the reference sheet image and the same Seedance 2.0 prompt. You can find the prompts in the replies. 👇 GPT Image 2 and Seedance 2.0 are both available on mitte.ai

GPT Image 2 - Character Reference Sheet Prompt You can create a character reference sheet in any style you want for use in your Seedance 2.0 videos. All you need to do is either provide a reference image or describe your character. You can also input random values to generate completely random characters. This reference sheet provides a clear, structured, and highly readable visual breakdown of the character, helping the model maintain strong identity consistency across different outputs. The layout ensures the model focuses on essential visual information rather than stylistic noise, while the inclusion of expressions, head angles, and performance cues improves the model’s ability to generate believable acting and varied poses without losing character integrity. All clips in the demonstration video were generated using the reference sheet image and the same Seedance 2.0 prompt. You can find the prompts in the replies. 👇 GPT Image 2 and Seedance 2.0 are both available on mitte.ai

Kōda

164,464 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

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.

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.

Latte

167,558 görüntüleme • 6 ay önce

We came across a really interesting workflow that could help solve environmental consistency. It’s called the “burst frame” technique. You take a single image, prompt 20 quick shot variations using Seedance 2.0, and generate a multi-angle sequence from the same scene. Because everything comes from one source, the environment stays consistent across shots. It ends up working like a fast pre-vis tool. Explore angles, pick your favorites, and build from there. Shoutout to Kai Turner for sharing this method.

We came across a really interesting workflow that could help solve environmental consistency. It’s called the “burst frame” technique. You take a single image, prompt 20 quick shot variations using Seedance 2.0, and generate a multi-angle sequence from the same scene. Because everything comes from one source, the environment stays consistent across shots. It ends up working like a fast pre-vis tool. Explore angles, pick your favorites, and build from there. Shoutout to Kai Turner for sharing this method.

Curious Refuge

22,242 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

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 görüntüleme • 1 yıl önce

I just cracked the code on AI UGC ads 🤯 51 seconds long. One creator across the entire ad: same face, same voice, same product packaging in every single shot. Talking-head delivery, b-roll cutaways, voiceover running over the b-roll, and the creator moving through different settings. A fully edited, multi-shot ad that actually holds. If you've been stuck generating 8-second clips that look fine but fall apart the second you try to string them into a real ad, no character that holds, no voice that stays the same clip to clip, no product that survives more than one shot, this is the workflow you're missing. Here's exactly how I did it: → Pull a winning authority ad and rewrite the script for your product → Build your creator in ChatGPT Images 2.0 to match the exact buyer demographic → Lock the creator + product as reusable Elements so they stay identical across every shot → Break the script into single-scene shots so each one is a clean generation → Lock the voice on the first clip, then carry that same voice through every shot after → Tag your b-roll shots as voiceover so the line plays over the cutaway instead of lip-syncing → Edit in CapCut: cut the dead air, nudge to 1.1x → Drop the final cut in Captions, add subtitles, export Consistent character, consistent voice, consistent packaging — across talking head, b-roll, voiceover, and multiple settings. No character drift. No robotic voice swap. No disconnected 8-second clips. I put together the full step-by-step playbook with the exact ChatGPT Images 2.0 and Seedance prompts, the element-tagging setup, and the voice trick most people miss. Want it? > Like this post > Comment "UGC" And I'll send it over (must be following so I can DM)

I just cracked the code on AI UGC ads 🤯 51 seconds long. One creator across the entire ad: same face, same voice, same product packaging in every single shot. Talking-head delivery, b-roll cutaways, voiceover running over the b-roll, and the creator moving through different settings. A fully edited, multi-shot ad that actually holds. If you've been stuck generating 8-second clips that look fine but fall apart the second you try to string them into a real ad, no character that holds, no voice that stays the same clip to clip, no product that survives more than one shot, this is the workflow you're missing. Here's exactly how I did it: → Pull a winning authority ad and rewrite the script for your product → Build your creator in ChatGPT Images 2.0 to match the exact buyer demographic → Lock the creator + product as reusable Elements so they stay identical across every shot → Break the script into single-scene shots so each one is a clean generation → Lock the voice on the first clip, then carry that same voice through every shot after → Tag your b-roll shots as voiceover so the line plays over the cutaway instead of lip-syncing → Edit in CapCut: cut the dead air, nudge to 1.1x → Drop the final cut in Captions, add subtitles, export Consistent character, consistent voice, consistent packaging — across talking head, b-roll, voiceover, and multiple settings. No character drift. No robotic voice swap. No disconnected 8-second clips. I put together the full step-by-step playbook with the exact ChatGPT Images 2.0 and Seedance prompts, the element-tagging setup, and the voice trick most people miss. Want it? > Like this post > Comment "UGC" And I'll send it over (must be following so I can DM)

Mike Futia

37,888 görüntüleme • 3 ay önce

Claude Cowork + Seedance 2.0 is f*cking wild 🤯 I built a skill inside Claude Cowork that generates UGC video ads on demand using Seedance 2.0, the best AI video model. One product image + one prompt = a full UGC ad with multiple shots, dialogue, and on-brand pacing. All inside Claude Cowork. Perfect for DTC brands and agencies who need UGC creative at volume without hiring creators or paying per-video SaaS fees. If you're briefing creators every week, waiting days for footage, paying $150–$300 per UGC video, and still getting ads that miss the brand vibe... This skill eliminates the entire loop: → Drop a product image into Claude Cowork → Tell it the ad angle (unboxing, review, lifestyle, demo) → Claude writes the dialogue, shot list, and pacing → Fires it to Seedance 2.0 via FAL AI API → Downloads finished clips into organized folders → Stitches multiple shots into one finished ad No creator briefs. No waiting for footage. No $200/video platform fees. What you get: → UGC video ads generated in minutes, not days → Full control over dialogue, pacing, and shot composition → Your product photos as reference so Seedance matches your real packaging → A reusable skill: new product, new folder, same pipeline Built 100% in Claude Cowork with the Seedance 2.0 API. I put together a full playbook with the Claude Cowork skill file, the exact prompts, and the FAL AI setup to get this running yourself. Want it for free? > Like this post > Comment "UGC" And I'll send it over (must be following so I can DM)

Mike Futia

80,151 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Seeing a lot of people say Seedance 2.5 isn’t worth it now that Minimax H3 is out and can reportedly be run locally with very little difference in image quality. So I decided to do a blind test. These 3 clips were each generated once with: • Seedance 2.5 • Seedance 2.0 • Minimax H3 No cherry-picking. No rerolls. And I’m not naive — I’m sure local models will eventually catch up. The real question is: on what hardware? 😂 Take a guess which is which. 👀

Seeing a lot of people say Seedance 2.5 isn’t worth it now that Minimax H3 is out and can reportedly be run locally with very little difference in image quality. So I decided to do a blind test. These 3 clips were each generated once with: • Seedance 2.5 • Seedance 2.0 • Minimax H3 No cherry-picking. No rerolls. And I’m not naive — I’m sure local models will eventually catch up. The real question is: on what hardware? 😂 Take a guess which is which. 👀

JSFILMZ

37,749 görüntüleme • 16 gün önce

ChatGPT Images 2.0 + Seedance 2.0 is f*cking wild 🤯 I generated this 25-second UGC ad for Barebells in under 20 minutes: creator, script, scenes, finished cut. ChatGPT Images 2.0 generates the creator. Seedance 2.0 turns it into video. Perfect for DTC brands and agencies who want to test 20 UGC angles before paying $2K per creator video. If you're briefing creator agencies every week, waiting 7-10 days for one take of one variation, and paying $150–$300+ per UGC video that still misses the brand vibe... This workflow eliminates the entire loop: → Generate your creator in ChatGPT Images 2.0 → Save her as a Character Element in Seedance so her face stays locked across every scene → Save your product as a Prop Element with brand-accurate wrapper details → Write a 3-scene script in real UGC dialogue cadence → Fire each scene to Seedance 2.0 with both elements selected → Stitch in CapCut with auto-captions, no music, hard cuts only No creator briefs. No 7-day turnarounds. No $200/video platform fees. What you get: → A finished UGC ad in your brand's voice → Infinite variations of the same concept (test 10 hooks against one product in an afternoon) → A reusable creator and product Element library that scales across every ad → A repeatable workflow your team can run in 15-30 minutes I put together a full playbook with the 5-step system, every prompt template, the Seedance scene structure, and every common failure mode and how to fix it. Want it for free? > Like this post > Comment "UGC" And I'll send it over (must be following so I can DM)

Mike Futia

40,452 görüntüleme • 4 ay önce

Built a full parking garage chase scene chase, fight, escape in just two 30-second shots. No stitching. No fake cuts holding the tension together. Each shot is a single continuous take generated with Seedance Enterprise 2.5 on BytePlus. The biggest pain used to be nailing the lighting, camera movement, and rhythm... only to notice a wrong color or a distracting background. Rerolls were expensive and time-consuming. Now I just select the area I want to change, and everything else stays untouched with localized editing. Seedance 2.5 API is about to launch on BytePlus and you can try it directly on Lumina. Here's why that actually matters. 🧵

Built a full parking garage chase scene chase, fight, escape in just two 30-second shots. No stitching. No fake cuts holding the tension together. Each shot is a single continuous take generated with Seedance Enterprise 2.5 on BytePlus. The biggest pain used to be nailing the lighting, camera movement, and rhythm... only to notice a wrong color or a distracting background. Rerolls were expensive and time-consuming. Now I just select the area I want to change, and everything else stays untouched with localized editing. Seedance 2.5 API is about to launch on BytePlus and you can try it directly on Lumina. Here's why that actually matters. 🧵

Ciri

25,034 görüntüleme • 23 gün önce