Skip to content
Prompt Mortem

The Graveyard Seedance 2.0 Case #006

Published 3 Nov 2026

[Case study] Video

Same Callum, Different Seedance

Twenty ArtCraft takes put seven Seedance variants through Callum Ward’s library scene. Six groups share prompts and references, and two additional takes show how the setup changed.

Foundation model

7 models

Seedance 2.0 · Seedance 2.0 Plus · Seedance 2.0 Plus Fast · Seedance 2.0 Plus Mini · Seedance 2.5 · Seedance 2.5 Ultra · Seedance Plus Ultra Mini

Provider

ArtCraft

Recorded cost

USD 41.65

USD 0.2074/s

Generation clips

20 clips

10.042s each

Resolution

1280×720

16:9 · 24 fps

Outcome

Mixed

The assignment

Objective

Compare how seven Seedance variants handle Callum’s likeness, voice and performance in a ten-second library scene. Compare takes within each group using the same prompt and ordered references.

Expected outcome

Callum leans against a desk in Coldharbour’s library, steps forward and delivers a teasing line to Tristan. The face should stay consistent through the move and the close-up. Where a voice sample is supplied, the delivery should resemble it and sync to the mouth.

// Generations

Two face references, corrected tags. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0.

Attempt 01

Seedance 2.0 — Two face references, corrected tags

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Two face references, corrected tags. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp.

Attempt 02

Seedance 2.0 Plus — Two face references, corrected tags

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Two face references, corrected tags. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5.

Attempt 03

Seedance 2.5 — Two face references, corrected tags

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Two face references, corrected tags. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5_u.

Attempt 04

Seedance 2.5 Ultra — Two face references, corrected tags

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

One image, no voice sample. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5.

Attempt 05

Seedance 2.5 — One image, no voice sample

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

One image, no voice sample. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bpu_mini.

Attempt 06

Seedance 2.0 Plus Ultra Mini — One image, no voice sample

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

One image, no voice sample. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp_mini.

Attempt 07

Seedance 2.0 Plus Mini — One image, no voice sample

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Character sheet and voice sample A. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5.

Attempt 08

Seedance 2.5 — Character sheet and voice sample A

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Character sheet and voice sample A. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5_u.

Attempt 09

Seedance 2.5 Ultra — Character sheet and voice sample A

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Character sheet and voice sample A. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bpu_mini.

Attempt 10

Seedance 2.0 Plus Ultra Mini — Character sheet and voice sample A

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Character sheet and voice sample A. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0.

Attempt 11

Seedance 2.0 — Character sheet and voice sample A

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Character sheet and voice sample B. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0.

Attempt 12

Seedance 2.0 — Character sheet and voice sample B

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Character sheet and voice sample B. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp_mini.

Attempt 13

Seedance 2.0 Plus Mini — Character sheet and voice sample B

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

One face image, character sheet and voice. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp.

Attempt 14

Seedance 2.0 Plus — One face image, character sheet and voice

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

One face image, character sheet and voice. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp_mini.

Attempt 15

Seedance 2.0 Plus Mini — One face image, character sheet and voice

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Four images and voice sample. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0.

Attempt 16

Seedance 2.0 — Four images and voice sample

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Four images and voice sample. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5_u.

Attempt 17

Seedance 2.5 Ultra — Four images and voice sample

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Four images and voice sample. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p5.

Attempt 18

Seedance 2.5 — Four images and voice sample

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

Alternate image, image-only prompt. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp_fast.

Attempt 19

Seedance 2.0 Plus Fast — Alternate image, image-only prompt

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
17 Oct 2026

Earlier prompt with duplicate image tag. ArtCraft model ID seedance_2p0_bp.

Attempt 20

Seedance 2.0 Plus — Earlier prompt with duplicate image tag

  • Video generation

Reference media

Technical record
Generated
18 Oct 2026

// Dissection

The autopsy

Overall observations

In my Callum tests, the Seedance 2.5 variants ignored the supplied voice sample. Some takes also placed Callum too far from the camera or softened his face with haze, making the performance harder to read. The 2.0 Mini variants handled the voice well, but their faces often had a visibly doll-like finish. For this scene, 2.0 Plus gave me little improvement over standard 2.0.

What worked

Standard Seedance 2.0 gave me the best animation for the money at $1.85 per ten-second take. Both Mini variants cost $0.91 per take and were useful for testing the voice, blocking and framing cheaply.

What failed

The 2.5 variants cost $2.68–$3.16 per take and missed the voice reference in my tests. Their longer generation option didn’t make up for those shortcomings. The comparison clips were ten seconds, so this case doesn’t establish how quality changes at 30 seconds. At $2.50, 2.0 Plus didn’t improve the result enough to justify the extra cost for this scene.

// Before the next run

Production implications

I’d use Seedance 2.0 for the final animation and the cheaper Mini variants to audition voice samples, try camera setups and iterate on shots before committing to a take.

// Final assessment

The verdict.

Seedance 2.0 wins this one. It gave me the best animation at a price I can justify. The Minis are useful for experimenting, especially with voice, but the doll-like faces keep them out of my final takes. I’d skip both 2.5 variants for this workflow. I paid more and still didn’t get Callum’s voice.

Conditional for my production workflow

Search the archive

Search cases, notes, rants, and models.