Seedance 2.5 vs Wan 3.0: Both Reach 30 Seconds, For Different Reasons

This is the closest pair on the site. Both models reach 30 seconds in a single request. Both make dialogue, sound effects and music in the same pass as the picture. Both take text, images, video and audio as input. Both do first frame and first-to-last frame control.

The difference is the shape of those 30 seconds. Seedance 2.5 produces one continuous take. Wan 3.0 produces a storyboard of shots at 4 to 6 seconds each, with timestamps. And Wan accepts input nothing else here accepts: a document or a web page.

The two boxes at the top of this page are platforms, not models. They are the two places on this site where both models run.

The short version

If you have more than ten reference images, the choice is made for you. Seedance takes 30 images. Wan takes 10.

Side by side

All of this comes from published documentation. Alibaba Cloud publishes Wan 3.0’s limits in unusual detail, which is why this table has firm numbers in places where other comparisons on this site have blanks.

	Seedance 2.5	Wan 3.0
Maker	ByteDance	Alibaba
Generation length	up to 30 seconds	2 to 30 seconds, or auto
Shape of the output	one continuous take	multi-shot storyboard, 4 to 6 seconds per shot
Resolution	up to 1080p	480p, 720p, 1080p (default)
Frame rate	not documented	30fps
Aspect ratios	1:1, 3:4, 4:3, 16:9, 21:9, 9:16	16:9, 4:3, 1:1, 3:4, 9:16, adaptive
Native audio	dialogue, effects, music in one pass	dialogue, background music, effects in one pass
Total reference inputs	50	20
Reference images	30	10, up to 20MB each
Reference videos	10	5, 15 seconds total
Reference audio	10	5, 15 seconds total
Document or web input	no	yes, one file or one public link
First and last frame	yes	yes
Editing and extension	not documented	documented

One figure I could not settle. Several write-ups say Seedance 2.5 outputs 4K. ByteDance’s own page did not confirm it for me, so this site still says 1080p. Seedance’s frame rate is also not published in a source I could verify twice, so I left the cell empty rather than guess.

How you write for each one

The two formats look similar and behave differently, so it is worth being precise.

Seedance 2.5 wants stages with an end state. The end state is the point. It describes what is in the frame when the stage finishes, and the model starts the next stage from exactly that.

@Image1 defines <Bottle>. Only one <Bottle> exists in the video.

[Stage 1 | 0-10s]
Initial state: <Bottle> on a wet stone counter, morning light, no people.
Primary event: the camera pushes in slowly from a wide table view.
End state: <Bottle> fills the middle third, label readable, no people.

[Maintain Consistency]
Keep the label from @Image1 unchanged. Keep the counter and light throughout.

Wan 3.0 wants a timestamped storyboard. You are writing shots, not stages, and each shot is expected to run about 4 to 6 seconds. That is a real constraint rather than a style preference. A shot you write to last 15 seconds is not what the format expects.

[00:00-00:05] Wide shot. The bottle stands on a wet stone counter in morning
light. Slow push in.
[00:05-00:11] Close-up. Water beads catch the light. The label is readable.
[00:11-00:16] A hand enters from the right and lifts the bottle clear.

Wan’s document input changes how you start. Instead of writing the brief yourself, you can hand it the product page or the PDF and let it pull the content. That is useful for a first draft. It is not a substitute for writing your shots, because the model choosing your beats will not choose the ones you had in mind.

Both models drift if you use pronouns. Name the subject the same way in every shot.

Where to run each one

Platform	Seedance 2.5	Wan 3.0
ImagineArt	yes	not named, it lists Wan 2.6
OpenArt	yes	yes
Creatify	yes, from the Pro plan	yes, on the free plan
Figma Weave	yes	not named, it lists Wan 2.5 and Wan Animate
Vosu	yes	not named

Note the plan levels on Creatify. Wan 3.0 is available on its free plan and Seedance 2.5 needs the Pro plan. That is the biggest practical gap between the two on any platform in the table, and it makes Wan 3.0 the cheapest way to try a 30-second generation at all.

ImagineArt and Figma Weave both carry the Wan family, but older versions. If you want Wan 3.0 specifically, the version number on the model card is worth checking before you subscribe.

What this comparison does not cover

I have generated with Seedance 2.5 myself, on ImagineArt, Vosu and Figma Weave. I have not run production work through Wan 3.0. Everything above about Wan comes from Alibaba Cloud’s own documentation, not from my own output.

So this page compares documented capability. It cannot tell you which model gives better faces, whose audio sounds less synthetic, or which one holds a product label steady for longer. Those need the same prompt run through both, which I have not done.

I also did not test the document input. Wan documents that it reads docx, pdf, txt and similar files, plus public web links. How well it turns a product page into sensible shots is exactly the kind of thing documentation cannot tell you.

Cost is out of reach too. Wan is billed per generation by Alibaba Cloud and by credits on the platforms above, and no platform publishes a per-model credit price you can line up against Seedance.

Questions

If both reach 30 seconds, why does the difference matter?

Because continuity is not the same as length. A Seedance take never stops, so the light at second 29 is the light at second 1. Wan’s 30 seconds is a set of shots the model assembles, which means cuts, which means the cuts have to match. When a cut is what you wanted, that is a feature. When it is not, it is a problem.

Which one is better for a product ad?

Wan 3.0 is closer to how an ad is usually shot, because ads cut. It also reads a product page directly, which saves you writing the brief. Seedance is better when the ad is one unbroken camera move around the product.

Can I use Wan 3.0 for free?

Creatify’s catalogue lists Wan 3.0 at its free plan level. Free plan usually means limited credits rather than unlimited use, and Creatify does not publish the allowance, so treat that as a way to try it rather than a way to work.

Do I have to fill all 30 reference images on Seedance?

No, and you should not. Five clear references usually beat twenty muddy ones. Past a certain point the model starts averaging faces instead of picking one. The same caution applies to Wan’s ten.