No such language.
Luma Ray has nine levels of how closely to stick to the original — from an almost unchanged frame to a complete reimagining. Wan has no such scale, but it has a resolution choice and accepts a negative description, meaning you can forbid what must not appear. Precise control over the strength of the change — Luma Ray. Control over the output and over defects — Wan.
The price in credits is per SECOND of video and is shown on the “Generate” button before every run. The “Five seconds cost” row below is the same price multiplied by five.
| What | WAN | Luma Ray |
|---|---|---|
| Model variants on our platform | 2 | 1 |
| What it needs as input | video | video |
| Price in credits per second | 161–201 | 703 |
| Five seconds cost | 805 credits | 3515 credits |
| Longest clip at once | 10 sec | 10 sec |
| Resolutions to choose from | 480p, 720p, 1080p | — |
| Aspect ratio 16:9 | ✓ | ✗ |
| Aspect ratio 9:16 | ✓ | ✗ |
| Aspect ratio 1:1 | ✓ | ✗ |
| Sound from the model itself | ✗ | ✗ |
| Negative description (“without…”) | ✓ | ✗ |
| Longest description | 800 characters | 5000 characters |
| Cheapest variant | Wan 2.2 | Luma Ray 2 Modify |
Wan offers a choice of resolution — something Luma Ray doesn't give here. The reworked clip comes out at the size you need, instead of the one the model decides on.
Wan accepts a negative prompt: you rule out blur, distorted hands, text and watermarks in advance, instead of finding them after the run.
There are two variants, so there's a step between a test and a final.
Luma Ray gives nine levels of adherence to the original. That is the most precise control over the strength of change among the transformation models here: you choose whether the frame is touched up lightly or reimagined completely.
The description field is much larger than Wan's. For an instruction with many conditions, there is room.
One model, one price, no choice of variant.
Where Luma Ray loses. It has no resolution choice and doesn't accept a negative prompt — the typical defects can't be ruled out in advance. A single model also means there's no cheap tier for tests, and with nine levels of adherence, tests are exactly what you'll be doing.
Where Wan loses. It has no adherence scale: the change is as strong as the model decides. It also accepts a much shorter prompt than Luma Ray — a complex instruction has to be shortened.
You don't know how strong a change you want and will be experimenting — Luma Ray, thanks to its nine levels. You know what you want and need a specific output — Wan, thanks to its resolution and restrictions.
With both, the price is per second. Try it on a short segment before you run the whole clip.
WAN. WAN starts at 161 credits per second, Luma Ray — at 703 credits per second. The cheapest option for WAN is Wan 2.2, for Luma Ray — Luma Ray 2 Modify. The exact price is shown on the button before you start the generation.
How much of the source frame stays. A low level changes only the look; a high one rethinks the scene. Luma Ray gives nine such steps, Wan — none.
With Wan — yes, through the negative prompt. Luma Ray has no such field.
Luma Ray at a low change level keeps the most of the original. With Wan the strength of the change can't be set, and the result is less predictable.
This page compares the two brands with each other. The full technical card for each — all variants, their strengths and weaknesses, typical tasks and real examples from the community — is on its own page.
Last updated:
