<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">
  <channel>
    <title>DEV Community: 王立戈</title>
    <description>The latest articles on DEV Community by 王立戈 (@lygerone).</description>
    <link>https://dev.to/lygerone</link>
    
    <atom:link rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="https://dev.to/feed/lygerone"/>
    <language>en</language>
    <item>
      <title>GPT Image 2.6 pricing: what one edit really costs on fal, measured</title>
      <dc:creator>王立戈</dc:creator>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Nov 2026 01:08:07 +0000</pubDate>
      <link>https://dev.to/lygerone/gpt-image-26-pricing-what-one-edit-really-costs-on-fal-measured-5aan</link>
      <guid>https://dev.to/lygerone/gpt-image-26-pricing-what-one-edit-really-costs-on-fal-measured-5aan</guid>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;I run a small photo editor that calls three image models: Google's Nano Banana 2.1 through the Gemini API, and OpenAI's GPT Image 2.5 and 2.6 through fal.ai. Before I set a price I run each model on the same photos and read the bill, because per-image estimates rarely match what an edit actually costs. GPT Image 2.6 came out on November 4; these numbers are from November 5 and 6.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  GPT Image 2.6, per image
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Flare endpoint (&lt;code&gt;openai/gpt-image-2.6/flare/edit&lt;/code&gt;), one 4:3 input photo, output at the same 4:3 shape. These are whole requests: the input photo, the prompt and any reasoning tokens are included.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"&gt;&lt;table&gt;
&lt;thead&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;th&gt;&lt;code&gt;quality&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;th&gt;1K&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;th&gt;2K&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;th&gt;4K&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/thead&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.041&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.075&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.119&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;code&gt;high&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.048&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.089&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.142&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;code&gt;max&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.164&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.324&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.540&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The surprise is the &lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt; row. On GPT Image 2.5 the same settings cost $0.019, $0.029 and $0.042, so 2.6 at &lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt; is two to three times the price. &lt;code&gt;high&lt;/code&gt; and &lt;code&gt;max&lt;/code&gt; cost exactly what they did on 2.5.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;Each extra input image (a second photo, or a mask sent as an image) added about $0.0085, whatever the quality.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;fal now bills 2.6 by tokens ($30 per million image-output tokens, $8 per million image-input tokens) and lists an estimate per output size. One thing in that table is easy to miss: square images cost more than wider or taller ones with more pixels. At &lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt;, the image output for 1024 × 1024 is $0.043, for 1024 × 1536 it is $0.034. If you don't need a square, don't ask for one.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  GIFs
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;2.6 can return an animated GIF, and fal's edit endpoint takes a photo and gives one back with &lt;code&gt;output_format: "gif"&lt;/code&gt;. One photo to a 576 × 432 GIF, 9 frames:&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;div class="table-wrapper-paragraph"&gt;&lt;table&gt;
&lt;thead&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;th&gt;&lt;code&gt;quality&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;th&gt;cost&lt;/th&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/thead&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;code&gt;low&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.035&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.054&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;&lt;code&gt;high&lt;/code&gt;&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;td&gt;$0.064&lt;/td&gt;
&lt;/tr&gt;
&lt;/tbody&gt;
&lt;/table&gt;&lt;/div&gt;

&lt;p&gt;A GIF has 256 colors, and I couldn't see a difference between the three. Bigger frames (768 × 576) cost $0.073 and gave a 2.5 MB file that didn't look better. Setting &lt;code&gt;reasoning_effort&lt;/code&gt; to &lt;code&gt;low&lt;/code&gt; didn't change the price. I settled on &lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt;, about 512 × 512 pixels per frame, and the default 9 frames of 200 ms, which is enough for one small motion.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Compared with Nano Banana 2.1
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;For Nano Banana 2.1 I converted the token counts in each response's &lt;code&gt;usageMetadata&lt;/code&gt; at the official prices (October 9, a 4:3 input): 1K $0.044 (about 25 s), 2K $0.057 (about 29 s), 4K $0.121 (about 44 s). An extra reference image is about 1,120 input tokens, roughly $0.0017.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;So at 1K, GPT Image 2.6 at &lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt; ($0.041) and Nano Banana 2.1 ($0.044) now cost about the same. At 2K Nano Banana is cheaper ($0.057 against $0.075), and extra images are five times cheaper.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  Three things worth knowing before you ship it
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;1. How the mask reaches the model.&lt;/strong&gt; When I first wired up GPT Image 2.5, I passed the brushed area as fal's &lt;code&gt;mask_url&lt;/code&gt;. Edits inside the mask came back unrelated to what was there: color and texture changes redrew the whole shirt or face. Sending the mask as one more input image, with a sentence after the prompt saying the last image is a mask and only its white area should change, fixed it. I send masks to 2.6 the same way and haven't gone back to &lt;code&gt;mask_url&lt;/code&gt;.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;2. 2.6 adds real brand names.&lt;/strong&gt; I ran 48 edit prompts on Flare. In 3 results it printed real brand names that weren't in the photo: book titles on a living-room shelf, a logo on a gaming headset, a toy maker's logo on a figure box. Of 10 prompts I also ran on Sunburst, 1 had a real brand on a speaker. If the results end up in product listings, check the props.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;3. Output size rules.&lt;/strong&gt; GPT Image wants both sides a multiple of 16, the longest side at most 3840, an aspect ratio of at most 3:1 and at most 3840 × 2160 pixels in total. I compute width and height from a target pixel count and the photo's aspect ratio, then round down to 16, so a request never goes over.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;h2&gt;
  
  
  How I price it
&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;My rule is that the credits for an edit, at my cheapest bulk rate, cover at least twice the measured cost. With 2.6's &lt;code&gt;medium&lt;/code&gt; price, a 1K edit on 2.6 is 6 credits where 2.5 was 3. Measure before you price: run a few edits on your own photos and read the bill; Gemini also puts the token counts in every response.&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;The 48 test edits are side by side, Nano Banana 2.1 against GPT Image 2.6, here: &lt;a href="https://yepshot.com/nano-banana-2-1-vs-gpt-image-2-6?utm_source=devto&amp;amp;utm_medium=social" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://yepshot.com/nano-banana-2-1-vs-gpt-image-2-6?utm_source=devto&amp;amp;utm_medium=social&lt;/a&gt;. The prompts and results are open, CC BY 4.0: &lt;a href="https://github.com/lygerone/awesome-gpt-image-2-6-prompts" rel="noopener noreferrer"&gt;https://github.com/lygerone/awesome-gpt-image-2-6-prompts&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

&lt;p&gt;&lt;em&gt;Disclosure: I built YepShot, the editor these numbers come from.&lt;/em&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

</description>
      <category>ai</category>
      <category>openai</category>
      <category>webdev</category>
      <category>api</category>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
