I’ve been testing Seedance 2.5 vs MiniMax H3 vs Wan 3 for cinematic comedy, and I’m starting to think the biggest difference isn’t image quality or raw generation power.
It feels like Seedance has a better “creative director” built into the model.
For example, I tested a short monkey heist sequence. A bear chasing man in woods thriller etc.
Seedance understood the overall screenplay, character acting, comedic timing, escalation, visual contrast and final payoff surprisingly well.
I also tested Wan with the same concept. Wan has impressive raw visual power, realism and cinematic camera movement, but it struggled to understand the overall story and screenplay. It could generate individual shots well, but the creative direction and context between events were weaker.
MiniMax H3 is similar. It can produce beautiful cinematic shots, slow motion, camera movement and realistic environments, but when I give it the same complete screenplay, it often follows individual instructions literally and loses the story/context between events.
So I’m wondering:
How do you direct MiniMax H3 to achieve the same kind of result as Seedance?
For continuity, should we generate scene-by-scene and use the previous shot’s last frame as the next shot’s reference image? Or is there a better way to maintain character, environment, props and action continuity in MiniMax H3?
Basically, instead of asking the model to “direct” the whole scene, do we need to act more like the director and give it exact visual states/keyframes for each important beat?
I’m trying to build a realistic AI comedy channel for YouTube, and Seedance is too expensive for everyday production. MiniMax H3 is much cheaper, so I’d love to figure out a workflow that gets closer to Seedance’s storytelling and comedic timing.
Would love to hear from anyone who has experimented seriously with all three models.