Recraft V3 vs Ideogram V3

This prompt tests multiple text elements at different sizes and styles—a business name, product descriptor, and establishment date. Victorian apothecary labels demand precise typography with ornate serifs that are challenging for any model to render correctly.

In our testing, both models successfully rendered the main text elements, but with subtle differences. Recraft tended to produce more consistent letterforms with better kerning (spacing between letters). Ideogram sometimes generated more visually interesting compositions but with occasional minor text imperfections—a slightly malformed letter or inconsistent baseline. For most uses, both produce text that's readable and usable; for high-precision typography work, Recraft had a slight edge.

Corporate design requires restraint and professionalism—the opposite of creative experimentation. This prompt tests whether each model can deliver the clean, understated aesthetic expected in business contexts without adding unwanted flourishes.

Recraft's style presets shine in scenarios like this. Selecting "realistic_image/enterprise" or "digital_illustration/2d_art_poster" gives predictable, appropriate results. Ideogram's magic prompt feature can sometimes over-enhance business prompts, adding creative elements that may not suit conservative corporate contexts. Disabling magic prompt and using the "Design" style preset typically produces more appropriate results for professional applications.

Art nouveau presents an interesting challenge—it's a highly stylized artistic movement with specific conventions for typography, composition, and ornamentation. This prompt tests whether each model understands the aesthetic vocabulary of the style while maintaining readable text.

Both models demonstrate good understanding of the art nouveau aesthetic. Ideogram's magic prompt sometimes adds period-appropriate details that enhance the result. Recraft with digital_illustration presets produces clean, poster-ready outputs that closely match the movement's conventions. The choice here often comes down to whether you want interpretive enhancement (Ideogram) or precise execution of your specified vision (Recraft).

Neon signage presents unique challenges: the text must follow the physical constraints of bent neon tubes while remaining legible. Cursive scripts are particularly demanding, requiring smooth connections between letters that make visual sense as illuminated tubes.

In our testing, both models produced convincing neon aesthetics with that characteristic glow and color bleeding. Recraft tended to generate more technically accurate neon—tubes with consistent widths and physically plausible bends. Ideogram sometimes produced more atmospheric results with creative lighting effects, though occasionally the tube paths were less realistic. For signage mockups intended to guide actual fabrication, Recraft's precision may be preferable.

Book covers require everything these models excel at: prominent title text, author attribution, and compelling imagery that works at thumbnail size. This prompt tests practical commercial design output.

Ideogram offers roughly 25% cost savings compared to Recraft. For many design exploration workflows—generating multiple concepts to find direction—this adds up. However, Recraft's style presets can reduce the number of iterations needed by giving you more control over the aesthetic from the start. The "best value" depends on your workflow: if you iterate frequently, Ideogram's lower cost wins; if you prefer dialing in exact settings upfront, Recraft's precision may reduce total generations needed.