Adobe Firefly Image 4vs.Lumina-Image 2.0

Which one is better?

In our own test both are on par. Neither is in the arena. Neither has an API price.

Same task, the first image of each. The task with the biggest difference is preselected.

Adobe Firefly Image 4: Character and detail, first image from the fixed test run — Adobe Firefly Image 446 out of 100

Lumina-Image 2.0: Character and detail, first image from the fixed test run — Lumina-Image 2.017 out of 100

Result for “Character and detail”:Adobe Firefly Image 4 slightly ahead

Prompt given to both modelsCreate a square cinematic full-body portrait of a fictional bicycle courier waiting under a transparent umbrella at a rainy tram stop in Hamburg at blue hour. She wears a mustard raincoat, navy trousers, red sneakers, a silver helmet, and carries a teal messenger bag. Keep both hands visible, render the bicycle correctly, use realistic wet-street reflections, and include no readable brand names.

What the rating looks at: Anatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency.

“Ahead”: better in all three rating rounds. “Slightly ahead”: a higher value, but not in every round.

Test protocol of the images

Both models receive the same archived prompt in exactly one request, and the first result counts. Files are normalized to 1,024 × 1,024 pixels without cropping. Provider resolution, randomness, quality tier and prompt processing can still differ. The images are a practical visual test, not a reconstruction of the arena configuration.

Character and detail

Adobe Firefly Image 4: manual, 1:1, one request, first output, one output observed, exact UI model Firefly Image 4, provider-default random seed, native 2K square output, no reference images, no selected effects, default content settings, source UI file Create a square cinematic full-b 60374 ydr.ffgenimg, source 2048x2048, stored 1024x1024 (Lanczos3 downscale), generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:42 PM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:38 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: 985a75b38642a9f0e5e0c0e0c67f1b7f67780d42bd2168fa24e9a7a7a94b0da6

Adobe Firefly Image 4 image SHA 256: a0305ed203aa5f66fa5082f78a169737d0cea9fc6d7bdac14eb6c874521a6669

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: 8747df0401d91598486735bfff5d6bac6c139727a8bc50c60bf7f697f678b85f

Infographic

Adobe Firefly Image 4: manual, 1:1, one request, first output, one output observed, exact UI model Firefly Image 4, provider-default random seed, native 2K square output, no reference images, no selected effects, default content settings, source UI file Create a square German infograph 211113 2kW.ffgenimg, source 2048x2048, stored 1024x1024 (Lanczos3 downscale), generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:42 PM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:38 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: ed65cb4e6a51e2336f8b149ad4cbb16e020f07d527ad94362e719d2dcf91d94f

Adobe Firefly Image 4 image SHA 256: 6a23e56ba8c63ec5461c8a20fabc74aff347088ad49b3cc7aa39eb8088d33c23

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: b937b28f3c3209280c5828e18c85341d3ca443175020ca1e407dae035b5df14f

Product photography

Adobe Firefly Image 4: manual, 1:1, one request, first output, one output observed, exact UI model Firefly Image 4, provider-default random seed, native 2K square output, no reference images, no selected effects, default content settings, source UI file Create a square premium product 776320 41X.ffgenimg, source 2048x2048, stored 1024x1024 (Lanczos3 downscale), generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:42 PM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:38 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: c67fd71e91304458a2feef5c91efa8677260fab0c0099a29a2c52cb579f5b2f3

Adobe Firefly Image 4 image SHA 256: 4f93f6c8da78501a95fccc17a8464c95f590799028c4a62ed87d15342e123182

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: 74b79fcbad7565e29995c941d2b488d2edde884b307ed99e47fad994424e9dfc

Typography and layout

Adobe Firefly Image 4: manual, 1:1, one request, first output, one output observed, exact UI model Firefly Image 4, provider-default random seed, native 2K square output, no reference images, no selected effects, default content settings, source UI file Create a square editorial poster 565284 h6v.ffgenimg, source 2048x2048, stored 1024x1024 (Lanczos3 downscale), generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:42 PM. Source

Lumina-Image 2.0: fal, requested 1024x1024, n=1, seed=provider random, estimated cost $0.150000, generated Nov 1, 2026, 9:37 PM. Source

Protocol gradually-image-comparison-v1. Prompt SHA 256: 2e012c3d14ee5dd02203a94f394ca80a5038cdebd6032b25a8b8a221f2255419

Adobe Firefly Image 4 image SHA 256: 97ad71052994f6f16c416e03bb57c37b9e3a7c7be41377ee5f01ebd1fb253de2

Lumina-Image 2.0 image SHA 256: f132c159d659fb76c94cd82f1decb617c475b9c4095b177d02b73f09f2954df0

The numbers at a glance

Arena ratingfrom votes by users · higher is better

n/a

Adobe Firefly Image 4

not in the arena

n/a

Lumina-Image 2.0

not in the arena

GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100 · higher is better

Adobe Firefly Image 4

Rank 68 of 74

Lumina-Image 2.0

Rank 72 of 74

Price per imagedollars through the API · lower is better

n/a

Adobe Firefly Image 4

no API price

n/a

Lumina-Image 2.0

no API price

Ranks among the 22 image models with an arena rating and the 74 with a GraduallyBench run; prices compared with 28 models with an API price.

Adobe Firefly Image 4

Subscription: n/a No plan in Germany names exactly this model.
Via API: No API price known. Access: Web app.
Weights: unknown.

Lumina-Image 2.0

Subscription: n/a No plan in Germany names exactly this model.
Via API: No API price known. Access: local.
License: Open weights.

Subscriptions only count plans that name exactly this model. Subscription prices include VAT, API prices are in dollars.

GraduallyBench from Nov 1, 2026 · Subscription database from Sep 29, 2026 (34 days old)

All data side by side

The better value is bold. For ratings only when the gap is clear.

Kennzahl	Adobe Firefly Image 4	Lumina-Image 2.0
Ratings
Arena ratingfrom votes by users, higher is better	n/a	n/a
Arena rank	n/a	n/a
Arena votesmore votes, a safer rating	n/a	n/a
GraduallyBenchour own rating, 0 to 100	17	7
GraduallyBench by task
Typography and layoutLegible text, hierarchy, and composition	11	1
Product photographyMaterials, reflections, and fine details	5	4
Character and detailAnatomy, clothing, and spatial consistency	46	17
InfographicNumbers, labels, and visual organization	5	6
API price
Per imagelower is better	n/a	n/a
100 images	n/a	n/a
Profile
Released	Apr 24, 2025	Jan 25, 2025
Weightsopen means: runs locally	unknown	open
Access	Web app	local
Parameters	not published	2.6 billion
Largest output	not consistently published	not consistently published
Plans in Germanynaming exactly this model	n/a	n/a

API prices for one image at 1,024 × 1,024 pixels according to Artificial Analysis.

Sources: Adobe Firefly Image 4 model source (verified Nov 1, 2026) · Lumina-Image 2.0 model source (verified Nov 1, 2026)

Arena ratings by category

From blind votes on LMArena. “Ahead” means the lead is clear.

No shared arena score in the stored snapshot

The stored benchmark database contains no measurement for Adobe Firefly Image 4 and Lumina-Image 2.0 from the same arena and category. Older model versions are not used as substitutes.

Compare another matchup

First image modelSecond image model

More matchups

Compare Adobe Firefly Image 4 and Lumina-Image 2.0 with other important image models.

View the complete image model comparison

Same prompt, two images

The numbers at a glance

Adobe Firefly Image 4

Lumina-Image 2.0

All data side by side

Arena ratings by category

No shared arena score in the stored snapshot

Compare another matchup

Related image model comparisons