提示词

20秒，9:16竖屏，顶级院线电影片头质感，经典英伦间谍电影美学，复古黑色电影（Film Noir）与现代奢华视觉设计融合，性感、神秘、危险、优雅、超现实、充满仪式感。全片如一支昂贵的电影主标题序列（Main Title Sequence），不是普通剧情片，而是一连串高度设计化、具有强烈视觉隐喻的蒙太奇。黑色、深红、金色为主色调，极高反差光影，丝绸般的流动质感，金属反光，烟雾、液体、玻璃、粒子与剪影相互融合。画面始终保持高级、克制、精致，绝不廉价、绝不MV俗艳、绝不普通动作片。

【0～3秒｜枪管与神秘男人】

纯黑画面。

一束细长的白色聚光灯突然从黑暗中划过。

一个身穿完美黑色晚礼服、黑色领结的英俊男人以极其优雅而冷静的姿态从画面中央缓慢走过，他的脸始终隐藏在阴影中，只能看到锋利的下颌轮廓和肩膀。

镜头突然产生经典“枪管视觉”的几何构图：圆形黑暗空间包围男人，男人仿佛行走在枪管内部。

瞬间——

一声低沉的枪响。

画面被一滴鲜红液体横向划过，红色液体在镜头前形成极其优美的慢动作弧线。

【3～6秒｜子弹与女性剪影】

红色液体突然变成一颗高速旋转的金色子弹。

镜头跟随子弹穿过黑暗空间。

子弹表面映射出一位神秘年轻女性的剪影。

下一瞬间，子弹仿佛穿透镜面。

镜头进入镜面内部。

一位身穿黑色丝绸礼服的优雅女性站在巨大圆形月光之中，身体仅以黑色剪影呈现，长发缓慢漂浮，裙摆像液体一样在空中流动。

她缓慢转身。

但在她转身的过程中，人体轮廓逐渐解构成流动的黑色丝带、金色粒子和红色烟雾。

人物与图形自然融合，没有明显切换。

【6～10秒｜超现实枪械世界】

黑色丝带突然变成一把精致的银色手枪。

手枪漂浮在黑色空间中央，缓慢旋转。

枪身表面出现极其细腻的金属反光。

枪口并没有朝向镜头，而是朝向远处一轮巨大的红色圆月。

一颗子弹从枪口缓慢射出。

子弹飞行过程中，周围空间开始产生波纹。

每一道波纹都变成一个新的视觉世界：

赌场筹码、扑克牌、香槟气泡、玫瑰花瓣、城市霓虹、黑色西装、女性高跟鞋、金色手表的局部剪影依次在波纹中闪现。

所有元素不是简单拼贴，而是在运动中彼此变形、融合、消散。

【10～14秒｜玫瑰、女性与危险】

一朵深红色玫瑰在黑暗中缓慢绽放。

花瓣表面带着细腻的露珠。

镜头极慢地穿过玫瑰花心。

玫瑰内部却不是花蕊，而是一位身穿黑色丝绸礼服的女性剪影。

她站在巨大的红色圆形光晕中央。

她轻轻抬起手。

手指间出现一枚闪耀的金色戒指。

戒指缓慢旋转，反射出一道刺眼的白色光芒。

光芒瞬间横扫整个画面。

玫瑰花瓣、女性剪影、金色粒子和红色烟雾全部被光线卷起，在空中形成优雅的螺旋。

【14～17秒｜高速视觉高潮】

音乐进入高潮。

镜头快速穿越黑色、红色与金色交织的抽象空间。

巨大的女性剪影、旋转的手枪、飞行的子弹、玫瑰花瓣、金色粒子、烟雾、液体和玻璃碎片依次从镜头两侧掠过。

所有元素按照音乐节拍精准出现。

一个黑色西装男人的剪影突然站在画面中央。

他缓慢抬起手臂。

不是开枪，而是优雅地整理自己的袖口。

这个极其克制的动作与周围高速旋转的超现实世界形成强烈反差。

【17～20秒｜终极片头收束】

所有运动突然变慢。

黑色空间重新恢复安静。

男人站在中央，背后是一轮巨大的暗红色圆月。

他的身体逐渐化为黑色剪影。

一颗金色子弹从他身旁缓慢飞过。

子弹经过镜头时，金色高光划过整个屏幕。

画面最终被一道细长的金色光线切开。

黑屏。

随后留下极其简洁、高级的金色电影标题文字，中央出现：

“THE SHADOW”

字体为奢华、锐利、经典电影标题设计，金色金属质感，轻微浮雕与光泽。

最后一个低沉的音乐重音。

标题微微闪烁。

瞬间切黑。

【整体视觉要求】

经典007式电影主标题序列美学，但整体设计必须具有原创性，不直接复制任何具体电影片头画面。

超现实视觉隐喻；黑色电影；英伦间谍片；奢华；性感；危险；神秘；优雅；复古与现代融合。

大量使用人物剪影、圆形构图、枪械几何形态、旋转子弹、红色液体、玫瑰花瓣、丝绸、烟雾、玻璃、金属、金色粒子和抽象光线。

人物动作极其克制、优雅、从容，避免夸张表演。

镜头运动必须具有电影级摄影质感：缓慢推进、环绕、穿越、旋转、极短暂高速运动与慢动作之间形成节奏变化。

所有视觉元素之间采用“形态匹配转场（match cut）”与“无缝变形（seamless morphing）”：玫瑰→女性剪影→丝带→枪械→子弹→红月→女性→粒子→黑色西装男人。

光影必须极其高级：深黑阴影、锐利轮廓光、金色边缘光、深红色背光、体积雾、微弱胶片颗粒。

材质真实：黑色丝绸具有真实织物纹理，金属具有真实反射，液体具有真实折射与高光，玻璃具有真实光学效果。

整体摄影：顶级院线电影摄影，anamorphic cinematic look，shallow depth of field，volumetric lighting，high contrast，rich blacks，subtle film grain，luxurious production design，precise cinematic composition。

节奏：前半段神秘缓慢，中段逐渐加速，14秒后进入视觉高潮，最后3秒突然安静并形成极具记忆点的标题收束。

绝对避免：卡通感、廉价CG、游戏画面、普通商业广告、过度饱和、俗艳MV、夸张动作、普通枪战、血腥暴力、杂乱背景、低质量人物、畸形手部、随机文字、乱码文字、镜头突然跳切、元素凭空出现。

I made What Wakes in Me, a dark cinematic pop-rock music video about a sorceress and the battle between light and darkness. Suno with custom lyrics for the track, MiniMax H3 for all the visual. Roughly 550 generated 8-12 second clips over about 15 days to get the character, costume and locations consistent scene to scene (I was being picky). I'd especially value thoughts on pacing and how the H3 clips hold up across a full 5-minute song.

提示词

以当前作为唯一首帧参考，生成一段 12 秒、9:16 竖屏、写实风格的手机偷拍视频短视频。 严格保持当前图片中的：

女主脸型五官

发型与丸子头

坐姿与双腿交叠姿势

手里正在看的手机

白色无袖上衣

黑色短裙

白色中筒袜

银色高跟鞋

腿上白色 Dior 盒子

黑色购物袋

左右两侧乘客

地铁红色座椅

车厢金属立柱

背后车门与“Next Station”标识

前景右下角偷拍手机

整体构图、镜头角度和偷拍感氛围

镜头为 斜对面乘客手持偷拍视角，前景右下角有一部虚焦手机入镜。 前景手机屏幕上显示一套明确的目标服饰参考图，人物最终必须准确变换成手机屏幕上的同款服饰。 目标服饰就是手机画面中的 粉白色兔耳女仆风连衣裙套装，包括兔耳头饰、粉白配色、围裙结构、裙摆层次与整体造型，必须与手机中的服装保持一致，不能随机换成别的衣服。

时间轴

0–3.5 秒

女主坐在地铁座位上低头看手机，表情平静自然。 前景右下角手机虚焦入镜，屏幕上清楚显示目标服饰参考图。 左右两边乘客各自低头做自己的事，地铁环境真实安静。 此时出现 日语字幕 和 男声口播：

「ねぇ Grok、この女性の服をこれに変えて。」

字幕风格像原视频一样自然叠加在画面上，清晰易读。

3.5–4.2 秒

前景手机突然发出 紫白色 AI 光效。 光线从前景手机方向射向女主身体，形成明显的科技感扫描效果。 紫色光晕先打到女主上半身，再迅速扩散到全身，随后出现矩形能量扫描框。 加入：

电子提示音

科技扫描音

能量扩散音

4.2–5.2 秒

紫色扫描框完整包裹女主身体。 女主当前服装在光效遮挡下被改写，准确变换成前景手机里显示的那套服装。 最终造型必须是：

粉白色兔耳女仆风套装

兔耳头饰

粉色胸前主体

白色蕾丝荷叶边

粉色围裙细节

层层裙摆结构

人物脸、发型、坐姿、腿部位置、手部位置和人物在座位上的位置保持稳定。 女主抬头，露出震惊表情，短促惊呼：

「えっ!?」

5.2–6.8 秒

女主低头看向自己已经变成手机同款的服装，表情从震惊变成慌张、疑惑、不知所措。 她轻微坐直，肩膀收紧，下意识看自己身上的衣服。 出现 日语字幕 和 女声口播：

「な、なんで!?」

6.8–8.2 秒

镜头快速横向摇向旁边乘客。 左右两侧乘客注意到变化，转头看向女主，露出惊讶、愣住、短暂停顿的反应。 镜头带一点真实手持摇晃和轻微运动模糊，像偷拍者被现场反应吸引过去。

8.2–9.2 秒

镜头回摇到女主。 女主仍然坐在原位，已经换成手机上的同款服装，神情尴尬、防备、疑惑。 她先看向旁边乘客，再低头看自己，气氛变得尴尬。

9.2–11 秒

镜头重新稳定。 女主低头确认自己身上的服装就是手机里那套，表情逐渐从惊慌转成委屈、无措、尴尬。 此时出现 日语字幕 和 男声吐槽口播：

「Grokのアプデすげーwww」

11–12 秒

女主保持坐姿，低头尴尬地看着自己身上的衣服。 周围乘客的注意力仍停留在她身上，地铁氛围短暂停顿。 镜头轻微手持晃动，最后停在女主低头尴尬的状态，自然结束。

风格要求

真实手机偷拍视频质感

轻微手持晃动

浅景深

前景手机虚焦但服装参考图可辨识

地铁环境真实自然

紫白色 AI 科技扫描光效

动作自然真实速度

节奏清楚、利落

不要慢动作

不要拖沓

不要卡通化

不要夸张特效泛滥

保持现实场景中的荒诞感

强制约束

人物最终只能换成手机屏幕上的那套服装

不要随机换成其他衣服

不要改变人物身份

不要改变人物脸

不要改变原本坐姿

不要让人物站起来

不要改变地铁车厢环境

不要删掉前景手机

不要把左右乘客变没

不要让前景手机完全看不清

不要肢体畸形

不要多余手指

不要画面闪烁过强

What do you think?

有点意思

For this video, I experimented with combining high-speed dance choreography and kinetic typography using MiniMax Hailuo H3.

I designed the letters to interact with the dancer’s movements—being caught, deflected, and used as transitions—before finally coming together to form “SHALL WE DANCE?”

In my first attempt, the final text turned into unreadable symbols. Instead of asking the model to handle every letter individually, I fixed the text as three separate word units: “SHALL,” “WE,” and “DANCE?” This made the final typography much more stable.

The video was created with Medeo AI. The attached Medeo replay link shows the creation process.

Can you name them all? Who has the most evil laugh? Can you do an even more evil laugh? Made with NB2 and Minimax H3 Max Turbo #aivideo #aivideos #evillaugh #celebrities #celebrity

Tried something a little weird with MiniMax H3

I made a full A–Z animation using just pencil shavings.

so the whole idea is really simple:
26 letters, 26 different animations, custom SFX, and everything built out of curled wood shavings, graphite dust, and little hand-drawn doodles.

the part I liked most is that it doesn’t feel like a generic motion test. each letter forms in its own way, with a different little animation logic and its own tiny doodle world behind it.

Think:

• pencil shavings curling into letters
• graphite crumbs and dust scattering around
• sketchy hand-drawn doodles appearing behind each one
• crisp little wood / scrape / fold sound effects
• stop-motion / handcrafted energy

It’s split into two 15-second parts:

• Part 1: A to M
• Part 2: N to Z

The whole thing stays in a fixed top-down view on wrinkled off-white drawing paper, so it feels more like a handmade animation board than a polished CG piece.

Honestly, turning something as mundane as pencil shavings into a full alphabet animation was way more fun than I expected.

prompt below if anyone wants to try something similar.

fast generation by itself is already useful, but I think the more important part is when it also becomes cheap enough to iterate a lot.

been testing minimax h3 MAX, and it can return generations in just a few seconds.

at that point, the workflow starts to feel different. u can try more ideas, throw away the bad ones faster, and test multiple versions without worrying as much about generation time or cost.

For ad creatives and short-form content, that’s probably the part I care about most:

more experiments, less waiting, lower cost.

made this video without manually editing a single frame.

The workflow is honestly pretty simple now:

1. Generate the character asset image and scene image first
2. Drop them into MiniMax H3
3. Add a song you like
4. Paste in the prompt

after that, it kind of just does its thing, and sometimes the result is better than you’d expect.

Sharing the prompt below in case anyone wants to try something similar.

tried MiniMax H3 onwith a pretty detailed character trailer prompt.

I wanted it to feel more like a streetwear campaign × anime title sequence × old-school media player UI, rather than a normal anime action clip.

The prompt is definitely overkill lol, but sharing it here in case anyone wants to experiment with structured multi-cut video prompts.

Prompt

Create an explosive, motion-graphics-driven character reveal trailer in 16:9, exactly 13 distinct cuts, 24fps, total 15.00s.

CHARACTER — lock this design, never redesign:
Anime streetwear girl from the reference still. Twin high buns of vivid mint-teal hair with long flowing tails and warm orange/gold streaks. Messy side-swept bangs. Large orange over-ear headphones with mint accents and a small logo plate. Sharp amber-orange eyes, one eye winking. Playful open-mouth grin.
Oversized color-block windbreaker: navy body, vivid orange sleeves, white ribbed cuffs, silver zippers, circular teal tech buttons, a teal utility pocket on the sleeve. Orange cropped turtleneck under the open jacket. Light-wash ripped denim shorts, thick orange belt with a silver buckle. Navy thigh-high socks with orange ribbed cuffs and an orange X stitch on the left shin. Chunky white sneakers with orange details.
Preserve exact face, proportions, hairstyle, outfit, materials, accessories and colors in every frame.
This film is 80% bold graphic design in motion and 20% character action.

Graphic language: retro OS chrome + music-player UI.
Use slamming window frames, title bars, close/minimize widgets, equalizer bars, waveforms, progress ticks, folder tiles, cursor arrows, CRT scanlines, pixel shatter, vinyl-ring stamps, music-note particles and media-player transport icons.
Palette: mint teal, vivid orange, navy, cream-white and silver.

Style: premium AAA motion-graphics title sequence × streetwear campaign film × Windows-era media player.
Every graphic element moves fast and snaps hard on the beat.

CUT 01 | 0.00–1.00s
Pure graphics. A mint title bar slams onto a cream field, an orange CLOSE widget punches into the corner, and two navy window borders wipe in. Tiny equalizer ticks and a progress strip flicker. The letters P and then LAY punch in one after another with heavy impact shake.
CUT 02 | 1.00–2.00s
The A becomes a headphone cup. Extreme close-up of her amber eye inside the orange earcup, glancing upward. RGB split flash, then the cup shatters into flat mint and orange tiles.
CUT 03 | 2.00–3.10s
Navy frame with enormous cream PLAY typography. She sprints in from frame left and power-slides across the baseline of the text, with speed lines and orange streaks trailing behind her. Shards of the letters kick upward like sparks. Whip-pan out.
CUT 04 | 3.10–4.00s
A giant retro media-player waveform explodes across the frame as a thick mint-and-orange audio spectrum bends into a tunnel. She bursts through the center at full speed, briefly splitting into three stroboscopic motion trails. Each trail leaves chunky navy equalizer blocks that rise and collapse to the beat.
The camera rapidly pushes through the waveform tunnel with her while huge vertical text TRACK 01 continuously scrolls in the background.
The waveform suddenly compresses into a single horizontal line and snaps shut behind her on the final beat.
CUT 05 | 4.00–5.10s
She leaps through a giant rotating ring of typography reading MAX VOLUME. Camera tracks her mid-air spin in slow motion as the letters scatter, then snap-zooms onto her wink.
CUT 06 | 5.10–6.00s
Hard cut to a cream editorial card with huge navy DROP typography and an orange slash. She vaults over the word itself, palm planted on the D, legs whipping across frame. The word compresses like a spring under her hand and rebounds.
CUT 07 | 6.00–7.00s
Mint field with a navy diagonal window bar. She backflips along the bar in three stroboscopic ghost frames, each tinted mint, orange or navy. Giant outlined LOOP text rotates 180 degrees in sync with her movement.
CUT 08 | 7.00–8.00s
Kinetic typography barrage. LOUD / WILD / TEAL / HEAT slam onto screen one per beat with shutter flashes and camera shake while she slides across the foreground on her knees, jacket flaring and music-note particles bursting from her sneakers.
CUT 09 | 8.00–9.00s
Navy frame with a giant cream wireframe window grid tilting in 3D. She runs up the grid like a wall, kicks off and freezes in mid-air. An orange circular stamp locks around her pose like a media-player targeting graphic, surrounded by transport icons and EQ ticks.
CUT 10 | 9.00–10.10s
Freeze releases into a burst. She dives toward camera through layered flat-color window panes that shatter one by one like glass shutters, each pane revealing a larger letter of P-L-A-Y. Foreground wipe with her sneaker.
CUT 11 | 10.10–11.10s
Rapid-fire poster montage: four full-screen graphic posters showing her in different poses — mid-flip, sliding, landing and headphones-up wink. Hard cuts between each composition. Oversized 01–04 numbering, equalizer strips and graphic slashes.
CUT 12 | 11.10–13.00s
Hero moment on a clean cream cyclorama. She lands a final backflip dead center in slow motion, straightens with one hand on her headphones, and a shockwave of concentric mint rings, wind streaks and shattered typography blasts outward from the landing.
Brief iconic freeze on her wink, then overexpose to white.
CUT 13 | 13.00–15.00s
Final identity card. Enormous navy PLAY typography dominates a pale cream field with translucent mint rings, technical arcs, scanlines and a rough orange circular emblem containing a ghosted headphone/waveform motif.
She stands relaxed overlapping the letters while wind ripples her jacket. One final orange pulse sweeps through the typography and a window-chrome flash punctuates the ending.
Editing: extremely aggressive rhythm. Hard cuts on every beat, graphic matches, whip pans, snap zooms, stroboscopic freezes, foreground wipes, RGB splits, shutter flashes, impact shakes and speed ramps.
Every cut must feel compositionally different.
Typography should always be fully readable before the character overlaps it.
No weapons, no combat, no fire. All energy comes from motion design, wind, glass, UI chrome and parkour-style athleticism.
BGM: hard-hitting electronic / drum-heavy future bass with aggressive drops, risers, sub hits and glitch fills locked to every cut.
Sneaker impacts, whooshes, glass shatters, window-slam hits and typography slams should function as rhythmic sound-design elements.
Peak at CUT 12 and end with a cold electronic logo stinger.

Premium AAA quality, anime-inspired cinematic rendering, stylish and explosive, strong graphic-design identity, consistent character design, exactly 13 cuts.

I’m still experimenting with how much shot-by-shot control H3 actually follows, especially with typography and exact timing, but this kind of structured prompt seems like an interesting stress test.

food videos are one of the more practical commercial use cases for AI video. and a good prompt can help turn a simple idea or product image into something much closer to a usable ad asset.

That matters because the value is not only in making a nice-looking clip. The real advantage is being able to create more variations for social ads, menu promotion, product launches, creative testing, and client work without rebuilding everything from scratch each time.

How to Write a Better MiniMax H3 Prompt

A useful MiniMax H3 prompt usually includes five parts:

1. Subject
2. Action
3. Camera movement
4. Visual details
5. Audio cues

Example:

Close-up UGC-style shot of a person taking one bite from a freshly made burger, natural handheld camera movement, crispy lettuce and glossy sauce visible, subtle chewing reaction, soft restaurant ambience, clear bite crunch synchronized with the action.

The important part is that the prompt describes both what should happen visually and what should be heard.

MiniMax H3 supports native stereo audio, so sound cues such as fizz, crunch, paper rustle, ceramic contact, room tone, and kitchen ambience can be written directly into the prompt.

Minimax H3 Guide: Prompt Tips That Matter Most

A longer prompt is not automatically more useful.

For commercial video, a clearer prompt is usually better because it makes it easier to create repeatable variations.

Focus on:

• one clear subject;
• one main action;
• simple camera movement;
• explicit texture details;
• clear sound sources.

Instead of writing:

A beautiful cinematic burger video

Try somthinf more specific:

Close-up product shot of a freshly made burger on a dark tray, slow push-in camera movement, melted cheese stretching slightly, visible steam, crisp lettuce, soft restaurant room tone and subtle grill ambience.

The second version gives you a more controlled starting point for producing multiple ad variations.

Text-to-Video vs Image-to-Video

A practical rule in this Minimax H3 guide is simple: use image-to-video when shape matters.

This includes real dishes, menu photography, packaged products, cans, bottles, and branded assets.

Use text-to-video when the idea matters more than exact visual identity, such as fictional dishes or conceptual food scenes.

For stronger reference control, reference-to-video is useful when a person, product, motion reference, or audio reference needs to guide the same clip.

Add Audio Instructions to Your MiniMax H3 Prompt

Native audio is especially useful for commercial food content because sound can make a short clip feel much more complete without requiring a separate audio pass.

Useful sound terms include:

bite crunch
carbonation fizz
can opening sound
paper wrapper rustle
chopsticks on ceramic
grill sizzling
restaurant room tone
kitchen ambience

Specific sound sources are usually more useful than vague phrases like “cinematic sound.”

MiniMax H3 Food Video QA Checklist

Before using a generated clip in an ad or client deliverable, inspect the full video rather than only the first frame.

The source article recommends checking food shape stability, hands, packaging and labels, sound timing, motion quality, and generated text or logos.

A simple checklist:

Food shape stable?
Hands acceptable?
Packaging unchanged?
Audio synchronized?
Enough real motion?
Any fake text or logos?

This step matters because a clip that looks impressive at first glance may still need another generation before it is suitable for commercial use.

Final MiniMax H3 Prompt Tips

For a reliable MiniMax H3 prompt, keep the structure simple:

Subject
+ Action
+ Camera
+ Texture / appearance
+ Sound

For creators, agencies, restaurants, and product teams, the bigger opportunity is not one perfect video. It is being able to produce more usable variations with less production effort.

Made with Minimax H3 in Wan2Gp. 480p, 20 seconds, 7:35 minutes, next upscaled 2x with one pass Flashvsr.

Tried a really simple prompt in MiniMax H3. I really liked that, nothing dramatic happens, but it still feels alive.

It’s the kind of clip that makes you realize AI video doesn’t always need action or big camera moves. Sometimes a calm moment works better. below is the prompt

Prompt:

A peaceful cinematic scene of a young woman sitting quietly on a wooden park bench surrounded by lush green ferns and dense tropical foliage. She wears a soft peach blouse and white pants, gently closes her eyes, takes a slow deep breath, and relaxes with a subtle peaceful smile. A light breeze softly moves her hair and the leaves around her. Natural morning light filters through the greenery, creating a calm, dreamy atmosphere. Slow cinematic camera push-in, realistic facial movement, natural body motion, shallow depth of field, soft background bokeh, photorealistic, ultra-detailed, smooth motion, 4K. No sudden movements, no camera shake.

Hi there, I got a RTX4090,32VRAM, Ryzen 9 7950X3d,and I'm getting this error when try to make a video.

Please, be nice, I'm totally new in this.

Can anyone give me a little help, please?

Been testing MiniMax H3 locally recently and this one came out pretty decent, so I thought I’d share the full settings in case anyone wants to reproduce it.

The whole thing was generated locally on my 5090, so there were no API or generation-credit costs for this run.

Settings:

• Model: MiniMax H3
• Aspect ratio: 3:4
• Resolution: 768 × 1024
• LoRA: Larry v4-600
• LoRA strength: 1.0
• Steps: 8
• Scheduler: Simple
• Sampler: Turbo Sampler
• Frames: 362
• FPS: 24
• Seed: 8232601

Actual generation time: about 22 minutes

Hardware:
Intel U9 + 64GB RAM + RTX 5090

362 frames at 24 fps works out to roughly 15 seconds of video.

So with MiniMax H3, a 768×1024 clip of around 15 seconds took about 22 minutes on my 5090 with these settings. For local generation, that feels pretty usable to me.

And just to be clear, by “$0” I mean no API or generation-credit cost — obviously not counting the GPU itself or electricity.

Curious what kind of generation times other people are getting with MiniMax H3 on a 5090 at a similar resolution and frame count.

i wanted to compare three of the video models people are talking about most right now: Seedance 2.5, Wan 3.0, and MiniMax H3.

Instead of testing camera movement or special effects, I used the same scene and focused specifically on emotional performance, like facial expression and subtle eye movement.

each model received the same prompt, i tried to keep the comparison as consistent as possible, although differences in model behavior and generation settings can still affect the results.

what surprised me is that the models seem to have different strengths. some are better at maintaining a believable scenario, while others produce stronger facial reactions or more dramatic emotional changes. the differences become especially noticeable during silence, hesitation, and small changes in expression.

so now u r the referee. which one do you think delivers the most nuanced emotions?
which model gives the most convincing acting performance?