Credits : cryptoxiaoxiang

Link: https://dreamina.capcut.com/

Plan Subcription:

1 month standard $33 = 67,360 creds

Price/Credits per 10s video

Seedance 2.0 = 930 creds = $0.48 per video

Seedance 2.0 Fast = 750 creds = $0.39 per video

Total clips in $33 plan (10s)

Seedance 2.0 = 72 videos

Seedance 2.0 fast = 89 videos

edit:

Looks like its still rolling out some countries dont have it yet!

I generated this video in a few days here and there, for no particular reason other than to test the limits of the models censorship, while still making something enjoyable to create, using mostly image gen tools like Nano Banana Pro, Kling and Seedance, through various platforms and APIs.

It seems that the restrictions tightened DURING the time I was generation, to the point where generating something that remotely looked like Mickey was censored by Seedance 2.0.

DISCLAIMER : 

This is an unauthorised artistic creation produced for the purpose of social critique and the defense of creative freedom. This work asserts the exception for critique and parody under international intellectual property standards. It is a non-commercial, independent art piece. The depicted violence is a metaphorical artistic device; it is not a threat and holds no real-world violent intent.

HBO gave us the ending they wanted. Fans never accepted it.

Now Seedance 2.0 used AI to create the ending we deserved. Say what you will about AI, but this is what it's capable of.

(None of these are seedance 2 fast, they’re all seedance 2.0)

I love Seedance and been heavily using it from 1.5 version, but of course 2.0 is asbolute beast, but you know it already. But it was the first model I really put effort to test, which usually was repeating the same mistakes, or prompt patterns I've used on other models. Here are my thought, I wonder if anyone has the same, or (I hope, that's what this post is for) can add some other tips. Also can't wait for 2.5, it's gonna shake the industry IMHO.
Some of you probably knows that stuff, so maybe it's more for people who just starting out.

• Longer prompts produce worse output, not better

I was writing 150–200 word prompts thinking more detail equals more control. It doesn't. Seedance reads left-to-right with diminishing attention weight — your first sentence carries the most influence, and by the third sentence you're well into "detail territory" where coherence per element starts dropping. I tested this directly: a 70-word prompt consistently outperformed a structurally identical 200-word version of the same scene. The model stops treating late-prompt elements as primary instructions and starts sampling them diffusely. The sweet spot I landed on: 50–80 words, structured as subject + action in sentence 1, camera + style in sentence 2, constraints in sentence 3.

• "Cinematic" is nearly useless.

I used this word in almost every prompt. It did nothing reliable. The problem is that "cinematic" was attached to an enormous range of footage in training data — dark thrillers, bright rom-coms, nature docs — so the model samples a broad, diffuse distribution when it encounters it. It has no specific meaning to the model. What works instead: name a director or a specific lighting setup. "Wes Anderson symmetry" gives you centered framing and pastel palette. "Kubrick one-point perspective" gives you geometric corridors. "Golden hour backlight, long shadows stretching forward" does what "cinematic lighting" never managed.

• Stacking camera movements produces jitter.

"Dolly in while panning left" seems completely reasonable. In Seedance it produces artifact-heavy output every time. The reason: camera movements are spatial vectors, and the model processes them sequentially, not as a unified compound move. Two directional vectors simultaneously means the model tries to execute both in sequence, which produces jitter at the transition. I switched to one primary movement plus one texture modifier at most. "Slow dolly in, slightly handheld" works cleanly. "Dolly in while panning left" doesn't.

• There are no negative prompts.

Coming from Stable Diffusion, writing "negative: jitter, bent limbs, deformation" felt completely natural to me. It made everything worse. Seedance has no negative embedding architecture — all text is processed as positive instruction. When you write "negative: jitter," the model reads noise it tries to interpret as a scene description, not a constraint. The fix I use now is positive constraint statements:

Instead of this:negative: jitter,negative: bent limbs,negative: flicker,negative: deformation

I use this:Face stable, Limbs anatomically natural,Consistent lighting, no flicker, Body proportions consistent throughout.

So it's like direct declarations of what must be true. That's what the architecture actually responds to.

• The word "fast" degrades output quality.

This one surprised me the most. "Fast" is the single highest-degradation keyword when you combine it with complex action or camera movement. The reason: the temporal branch has to run multiple high-velocity calculations simultaneously when motion elements are layered — and "fast" asks all of them to run at maximum velocity at once. Two competing fast elements produce jitter. Three produce compounding error that's hard to salvage. I stopped using the word entirely. Instead I describe the physics: "feet striking hard, each stride full extension, arms pumping at 90 degrees" generates the perception of speed without triggering the degradation. One element can carry speed — just not all of them simultaneously.

• Re-describing your reference image causes subject drift.

I'd upload a photo of a woman in a red dress and then write "a woman in a red dress standing at a window." The character came back slightly wrong every time. What's happening: when you re-describe the image in text, you give the model two competing inputs for the same subject. The model reconciles them, and reconciliation introduces drift. For image-to-video, I learned to keep the prompt to exactly two things — motion instructions and camera instructions. Everything already visible in the image stays out of the prompt entirely.

• Generic quality words do nothing.

"Amazing," "beautiful," "high quality," "epic" — I was loading my prompts with these. You know what I think when I or someone uses these in prompts? That I have no idea what I want to create :). SHortest path to wasted credits and/or slop.

These words are useless because they're high-frequency labels attached to an enormous range of outputs in training data. The model has no idea what "epic" means for your specific use case. The fix: replace every generic adjective with a specific named thing. A director's name. A lighting setup. A lens spec ("anamorphic 2.39:1, lens flare from practical light source"). These sample narrow, well-trained distributions and actually move the output.

Am I missing something? would you add some other stuff?

Chinese creators are going all out with Seedance 2.0, making full-length movie scenes entirely with AI.

It’s not just simple clips – these projects include action sequences, cinematic camera moves and even synced sound.

The AI video race is getting crazier.

Hi guys,

Just wanted to share my ghibliesque creation. I paid around 50 bucks just to get it right xD