Uncensored
Sogni
More than two hundred creative models for images and video, backed by a decentralised rendering grid.
Provisional score. Built from documented features, current pricing, published reviews. Full bench run on a paid account is queued. Score will move; we'll log the delta here.
Verdict
The largest model menu we tested. Output quality shifts with each choice. Tinkerers get the most out of it.
Wins
- Model library is massive
- Handles images and video
- Free tier actually works
Loses
- Model quality varies widely
- Adult content needs model and setting tweaks, no master toggle
What it is
More than two hundred creative models for images and video, backed by a decentralised rendering grid.
Where it stands out
Model library is massive. Handles images and video.
Where it falls short
Model quality varies widely. Adult content needs model and setting tweaks, no master toggle.
Who it is for
The largest model menu we tested. Output quality shifts with each choice. Tinkerers get the most out of it.
Pricing
| Free credits |
| Paid from about $20 a month |
Compare and swap
What each reading means
- Realism (22%)
- Skin, hands, lighting and anatomy on the same prompt set. Photoreal when asked, stylised when asked.
- Prompt control (17%)
- How much of the result you steer: model choice, reference images, LoRAs, negative prompts, seeds, inpainting.
- Consistency (15%)
- Same subject, four scenes, then video. Does the face, body and styling survive, or does each render produce a stranger?
- Freedom (18%)
- What the tool lets you make. Explicit content on by default, opt-in, or blocked, and how often moderation false-positives.
- Video (10%)
- Whether it does video at all, clip length, motion quality, and whether video is explicit-capable.
- Usability (6%)
- Time from sign-up to first good output, queue times, and whether the interface gets in the way.
- Value (12%)
- What a month of real use costs against what you get: credits, unlimited tiers, watermarks and free allowance.