When to pick Wan 3.0: five questions vs Seedance 2.5 and Omni 1.1

Pick wan-3.0 on Sume when you need one clip of 11 to 30 seconds at a flat per-second price, or a clip as short as 2 seconds. Pick gemini-omni-flash-1.1 when you are editing an existing clip or need 4K up to 10 seconds, and seedance-2.5 when you want its token-priced 4 to 30 second range.

The limits side by side

Each of the three models covers a different part of the 2 to 30 second range, and the Sume docs give the limits.

1. How long is the clip?

Question one: how long must the clip be? Under 3 seconds, only Wan 3.0 accepts it (2 second minimum). Between 11 and 30 seconds, Wan 3.0 or Seedance 2.5. Above 30 seconds, split into several clips. Between 3 and 10 seconds all three work, so the next questions decide.

2. Are you editing footage?

Question two: do you already have footage to change? Only Omni Flash 1.1 has a documented video_url edit on Sume. Wan 3.0 and Seedance 2.5 generate new clips. Vendor feature lists mention editing for both (Alibaba and ByteDance, read 2026-10-05), but those fields are not in the Sume docs.

3. How do you want to be billed?

Question three: what is the price shape? Wan 3.0 is a flat rate by resolution: $0.0625, $0.125 and $0.25 a second on Sume. Omni is also per second: $0.0375, $0.125, $0.1875 and $0.375 at 360p, 720p, 1080p and 4K. Seedance 2.5 is priced by video tokens in the repo, with a list rate of $0.0214 per 1,000 video tokens ($0.0234 at 1080p), so its per-second cost depends on resolution and duration; read the catalog rather than guessing.

4. What references do you have?

Question four: which references do you have? Sume caps Wan 3.0 at 10 reference images, 5 videos and 5 audio files, and reference audio needs at least one image or video alongside it. Omni takes up to 10 reference images and 3 clips of at most 3 seconds, with no audio references. If you have audio to follow, Wan 3.0 or Seedance 2.5 fits; Omni does not take it.

5. Which aspect ratio?

Question five: what is the aspect ratio? Omni on Sume is 16:9 or 9:16 only. Wan 3.0 takes adaptive, 16:9, 4:3, 1:1, 3:4 and 9:16. If you need a square or 4:3 clip, Wan 3.0 is the choice of the three for that.

What the checklist cannot decide

Two things this checklist does not settle. First, quality: none of the vendor pages we read publishes a shared benchmark across these three models, so the only fair test is your own prompt on all three, at the lowest resolution, before you commit a campaign. A 5 second 480p Wan 3.0 test costs $0.3125 on Sume, and a 5 second Omni 360p test costs $0.1875.

Second, availability beyond Sume. ByteDance's Seedance 2.5 post says its API was coming soon via BytePlus ModelArk, while Alibaba describes Wan 3.0 as available on its own sites and QwenCloud (read 2026-10-05). The Sume catalog is the practical list of what you can call through one key; read it before you promise a model to a client.

Constraints first, price second

A last rule of thumb: when two answers disagree, let the constraint you cannot change win. A fixed 4:3 deliverable or a 25 second runtime removes Omni. A footage edit removes Wan and Seedance on Sume. A 2 second bumper removes Seedance and Omni. After the constraints, pick by price at the resolution you actually deliver.

Putting it together

Put together: a 30 second brand film with a 4:3 option and audio references points to Wan 3.0 at $3.75 for 720p; a 6 second product close-up in 4K points to Omni at $2.25; a 20 second clip where you want its token pricing and the vendor's reference-heavy workflow points to Seedance 2.5 after you read its catalog quote. Sources for the vendor features are the Wan 3.0 repository, the Seedance 2.5 post and Google's Omni 1.1 Flash post, all read 2026-10-05.