Ideogram V3 vs Nano Banana Pro

This prompt tests multiple text elements at different scales: a primary name in French, a classification, and a region. Wine labels require precise typography with appropriate elegance—any text errors immediately diminish the premium feel.

Both models produced legible text in our testing, but with different characteristics. Ideogram consistently rendered all text elements accurately with typographically coherent styling. Nano Banana Pro achieved similar accuracy on most attempts but occasionally required regeneration for perfect results. Given the 5x cost difference, Ideogram represents significantly better value for text-focused work—achieving comparable or better text accuracy at a fraction of the price.

Character portraits with fine detail requirements test a model's ability to render convincing human features—skin texture, subtle expressions, natural imperfections, and the quality of light on surfaces. This is where flagship models typically justify their premium.

Nano Banana Pro demonstrated its flagship status here, producing portraits with exceptional skin detail, natural lighting transitions, and the subtle qualities that distinguish professional photography. Ideogram's portraits were good—certainly usable—but with a slightly more processed quality and less nuanced rendering of fine details. For hero portraits and final assets, the quality difference is visible; for iterations and non-showcase work, Ideogram performs adequately.

Complex scenes with multiple subjects, varied lighting, and text elements test both composition ability and prompt understanding. The model must balance many elements while maintaining coherence and visual appeal.

Nano Banana Pro's superior prompt understanding showed clearly in complex scenes, managing multiple elements with more natural spatial relationships and consistent lighting. The model better understood which elements should be prominent and how they should interact. Ideogram handled the text elements well but sometimes produced less coherent overall compositions. For scenes where many elements must work together harmoniously, the flagship model's sophistication justifies the investment.

Product photography demands accurate material rendering—glass reflections, surface textures, subtle highlights. Commercial applications require images that could pass for professional studio shots. Quality differences here directly impact how premium a product appears.

Both models produced compelling product imagery, but Nano Banana Pro's rendering of materials showed noticeably more sophistication. Glass reflections appeared more natural, water droplets more convincing, and the overall lighting more professionally nuanced. Ideogram's output was good—usable for many contexts—but lacked the premium quality that makes luxury products truly shine. For high-end e-commerce and advertising, the quality difference matters.

This packaging prompt combines text requirements with product photography aesthetics—a common commercial use case. Success requires both accurate typography and appealing material rendering.

With Nano Banana Pro costing 5x more per image, every flagship generation equals five Ideogram generations. For exploratory work—testing concepts, iterating on designs, generating variations—this math heavily favors Ideogram. For final assets where the output will be widely seen and quality directly impacts perception, Nano Banana Pro's premium becomes easier to justify. The optimal workflow uses both: iterate with Ideogram, finalize with Nano Banana Pro.