I tested one dangerous-looking first-person video idea through four… — NeuralZone

NeuralZone | AI Apps@NeuralZone · 389.6K subscribers Open in TelegramOpen

Forwarded fromHO

I tested one dangerous-looking first-person video idea through four fal.ai models, compared price and realism, and learned why Seedance 2.0 still won my small experiment overall

I used fal.ai because I could test several video models from one service and keep the same queue flow. I wanted a hard starting prompt: one long first-person action shot, clear height, parachute, industrial yard, and a muddy landing.

I picked Seedance 2.0 as the cinematic baseline, Kling v3 Pro for action and smart shot planning, Veo 3.1 because it is the premium Google option, and Wan 2.7 as a cheaper 1080p challenger.

What I got: Seedance 2.0 was best. It kept the helmet-camera feeling, the hands, the parachute lines, and the story rhythm most clearly. My only real complaint was the realism of the fall into the puddle. It cost about $2.43 for 8s at 720p.

Kling v3 Pro gave me good image quality, but the actions were not realistic. With audio on, 8s cost about $1.34.

Wan 2.7 accepted the prompt, but the result was basically an absurd video made from disconnected cuts. At 1080p, 8s cost about $1.20.

Veo 3.1 was the tricky one. The first request with the same prompt hit a content policy check. Then I softened the wording a little, sent it again, and got a video. It lost the first-person view and switched to third-person, but the result still looked cool. That successful 8s 1080p run with audio cost about $3.20.

So my successful clips cost about $8.17 total if I count the second Veo run. My winner was not the cheapest one; it was the one that followed the whole idea with the least confusion.

See the result 👇

t.me/NeuralZone/393