Generative AI models have been rapidly evolving, with new contenders entering the scene to challenge the established players. One such model is FLUX, developed by Black Forest Labs, which aims to rival well-known image generators like MidJourney and DALL-E. In this article, we’ll compare FLUX Pro with MidJourney 6.1, exploring how they handle various prompts and styles. Let’s dive into this head-to-head battle and see how they stack up.
Cartoon Style Showdown
We kicked off our comparison by testing both models in the cartoon style. When tasked with creating characters based on specific descriptions, MidJourney nailed the details, rendering characters with red hair, blue armor, a green cape, and a yellow mask. In contrast, FLUX struggled with color accuracy in the same scenario.
However, when asked to generate a scene featuring a lion, rabbit, and elephant, FLUX outshined MidJourney, delivering an accurate and consistent result, while MidJourney’s characters had distorted faces and awkward body shapes.
FLUX also proved its strength in scenes with multiple characters, such as children building a treehouse, handling the details and the composition with ease.
MidJourney, on the other hand, struggled to depict more than three characters clearly.
In terms of overall cartoonish style, FLUX was more consistent and aesthetically pleasing. Point to FLUX in this category.
Photorealism and Detailed Imagery
Both FLUX and MidJourney are known for their photorealistic capabilities, and the competition was fierce in this area. Using the Schnell version of FLUX, which is optimized for speed, we compared the realism of faces and objects. Both models delivered highly detailed and realistic results, making it difficult to pick a clear winner in this category.
The photo-realism battle ultimately ended in a tie, as both models proved their excellence in creating lifelike images. It’s impressive to see FLUX, an open-source model, match MidJourney in this space, especially given the latter’s industry dominance.
Typography and Text Handling
Text generation is a challenging task for many AI models, and we tested both FLUX and MidJourney’s ability to handle this. MidJourney’s performance was disappointing, frequently misspelling words or adding extra letters, making it unreliable for text-based prompts. FLUX, on the other hand, excelled in generating legible, accurate text while also maintaining the requested style.
Given the vast difference in text generation, FLUX takes the point in this category for its superior handling of words and style.
Stylized and Hand-Drawn Art
When it came to pixel art and hand-drawn styles, MidJourney performed better than FLUX. MidJourney captured intricate pixel details and produced convincing, realistic images that aligned with the style. FLUX’s output, while good, lacked the same level of refinement and looked more like digital art rather than hand-drawn.
In this category, MidJourney takes the point for its ability to convincingly mimic hand-drawn styles and pixel art.
Old Photograph Style
Both FLUX and MidJourney performed excellently in generating images with an old photograph style. Each model accurately depicted aged and worn images, making it hard to declare a clear winner. This final style test resulted in another tie.
Conclusion
After testing both models across multiple styles, the final score stands at 6 to 6, a reflection of how evenly matched FLUX and MidJourney are. FLUX stands out in text generation and prompt adherence, while MidJourney has a slight edge in certain art styles like hand-drawn and pixel art.
Overall, FLUX is a significant breakthrough in the world of AI-generated imagery, particularly for its open-source nature and its potential to rival giants like MidJourney. As FLUX continues to evolve, we expect it to cement its place among the top AI image generators.
Read other articles in our Blog.