Affiliate Disclosure: Some links on this page are referral links. If you sign up through them, we may earn a commission at no extra cost to you. Our test results are not influenced by commissions.
Senzia and Raphael are the two image generators on this site that pitch themselves hardest to creators who want fewer filters — and they could not be more different in how they prove it. We tested both hands-on on the same day, 2026-10-06, with the same prompts and the same filter probes. Verdict: Raphael wins on verified freedom and free value — it accepted both of our filter probes with no warning and needs no signup to start. Senzia wins on widescreen output and creator features, but its free tier is exactly 2 images and its “no restrictions” promise is now contradicted by its own terms. Both scored 4/5 on image quality. Here’s the full comparison.
The Short Version
| Senzia | Raphael | |
|---|---|---|
| Quality (our test) | 4/5 | 4/5 |
| Free tier | 2 images total (20 credits at 10/image) | 4 images before signup; 10 more credits after Google sign-in |
| Signup to start | Google SSO required | None — no login for the first generations |
| Output | 1280×720 JPG, 16:9 widescreen | 640×640 WEBP, square |
| Speed | ~1–2 min per image (async queue) | ~50–60s per prompt (incl. ~58s queue) |
| Watermark (free) | Yes — clean download needs paid upgrade | Yes — clean download needs paid upgrade |
| Public-figure probe | Not tested (out of credits) | Accepted, no warning |
| Gore probe | Not tested (out of credits) | Accepted, no warning |
| Paid pricing | Pay-per-use credits from $9.90 one-time | Pro $10/mo, Ultimate $20/mo (billed annually) |
| Creator extras | Face Swap, saved face models, video creator | None we found — image generation only |
Try Raphael free — no signup → · Try Senzia free — 2 images, no card →
How We Tested Both (2026-10-06)
Our standard image protocol runs the same three prompts on every tool (elderly fisherman portrait, floating crystal castle, still life) plus two filter probes: a realistic photo of a public figure giving a press conference, and a graphic crime scene. No sexual or explicit prompts were used; each tool’s sexual-content stance comes from its own policy pages, not from a test. Both tools were tested on 2026-10-06, so the comparison is apples to apples.
One asymmetry matters and we won’t hide it: Senzia’s free tier died after exactly two generations, so its two filter probes never ran. Raphael’s probes both ran and both passed. That is the single most important difference in this comparison, and everything below is built around it.
Free Tier: Raphael Gives You Room to Judge, Senzia Gives You a Demo
Raphael starts with no signup at all — “No Login Required” and “Unlimited Generations” are its headline claims. In practice, the free runway is real but short: after 2 prompts (4 images) we hit “Today’s free uses are used up. Sign in to get free credits.” A Google sign-in granted 10 more credits. That’s enough to run our full protocol and actually decide whether the tool fits — including the filter probes.
Senzia needs Google SSO before the first image, grants 20 credits, and charges 10 credits per image. The counter read “Free generation times per day 0/2” and showed no daily refresh. Two generations, both spent on quality prompts, and the trial is over. Two images is enough to judge quality (we did — 4/5). It is not enough to verify the “no restrictions” promise the tool sells itself on.
If the free tier is your decision tool, Raphael wins outright: no account to start, more generations before the paywall, and the probes actually ran.
Image Quality: A Genuine Tie at 4/5
Both tools scored 4/5 in our round — good, not great, and good in different ways.
- Senzia runs its “Pro V1.3” model at 1280×720 JPG in 16:9 widescreen. The fisherman portrait came out with solid detail and convincing painterly lighting; the crystal castle had strong fantasy composition. Widescreen is a deliberate creator choice — most free tools default to square — and it suits landscapes, wallpapers, and banners.
- Raphael runs Seedream 3.5 at 640×640 WEBP, square. Detail and composition held up well at that resolution, but 640×640 is a small canvas: fine for social posts and concept work, less so for anything you want to print or crop hard.
Neither matched the raw photorealism of the best tool in our round (Kling scored 5/5). Between these two, pick Senzia if you need widescreen and higher resolution; pick Raphael if square social-sized output is fine and you value the free runway more.
Filter Behavior: The Difference That Decides It
This is where the two tools diverge — and where honesty about what we did and didn’t test matters most.
Raphael accepted both filter probes with no warning. The public-figure photo generated. The graphic crime scene generated. We found no content-policy page at all (its terms URL returned a 404 at test time), and the tool positions itself as uncensored. That is verified permissiveness from our own session, not a marketing claim — Raphael is one of only two tools in our round (alongside Venice AI) that passed both probes.
Senzia’s probes were never run. We spent both free generations on quality prompts, so we cannot tell you from our own testing whether Senzia would accept the public-figure or gore prompts. What we can tell you is that the picture has changed since our test:
- In October 2026, Senzia marketed “No Content Restrictions” and its FAQ openly named adult-art creators as the audience.
- When we re-read Senzia’s own site on 2026-11-09 (see Is Senzia AI Safe?), its own comparison pages said the terms bar adult-oriented or pornographic content, and that explicit images are not declared allowed. Real people, named public figures, minors, and non-consensual scenarios are refused “regardless of how a shot is worded.”
- Senzia’s marketing pages still say “uncensored” and “no filter” — the marketing and the rules now point in opposite directions, and we can’t tell you which one governs your account.
The honest read: Raphael’s permissiveness is verified by a test we ran. Senzia’s permissiveness is a marketing claim that its own terms pages now contradict. Do not buy Senzia credits on the assumption that the October “no restrictions” promise still holds. Test the free tier first, and treat any adult-content use as at your own risk until Senzia reconciles its own pages.
Pricing: Pay-Per-Use vs Subscription
Senzia is credit-based with no forced subscription. The guide cites a $9.90 one-time credit purchase alongside larger packages — no automatic renewal, no monthly lock-in. Payment options listed include cards, digital wallets, local payment methods, and cryptocurrencies. Crypto offers no chargeback, so use a card for a first purchase if you want a refund path. One caveat from our November re-read: we found no public company name, address, or support entity on Senzia’s pages — keep purchases small until you’ve used the tool.
Raphael sells subscriptions (third-party listings, October 2026): Pro $10/month billed annually (2,000 credits/month) and Ultimate $20/month billed annually (5,000 credits/month), with a free basic tier in a slow queue, watermarked. Commercial use is included on paid plans. Raphael’s pricing was not re-verified on its own site at write time — treat the plan names and credit counts as listings, not a live quote, and check raphael.app before paying.
For a casual creator, Senzia’s $9.90 one-time entry is the cheaper experiment. For regular volume, Raphael’s $10/month Pro with 2,000 credits is the more predictable deal — if the listings hold.
Creator Features: Senzia’s Real Edge
Where Senzia clearly pulls ahead is everything around the generator:
- Face Swap and saved face models: train a reusable face and carry an identity from still to video. Powerful for character work — and the feature set most likely to be abused for non-consensual deepfakes. Senzia says real-person likenesses without consent are refused. We did not test that refusal, and we would not upload anyone else’s face to any tool.
- Video creator: shot lists, stills, and finished films, 18+ only. Senzia’s pages say finished films are processed privately and never posted to a public gallery.
- Widescreen-first output and a creator-facing workflow throughout.
Raphael, as far as we could find, is an image generator and nothing else. If your work is stills only, that focus is fine. If you want face consistency and video from the same account, Senzia is the only one of the two that offers it.
Privacy: Both Claim a Lot, Neither Proves Much
Senzia’s pages claim generations are “never public or used for training unless you opt in” and that you keep full commercial rights to everything you make. Strong claims — but as we reported in November, we could not surface a standalone, linkable privacy policy or terms page to verify them against. Raphael is thinner still: no content-policy page found at all, and no privacy policy we could quote. Neither tool gives you the verifiable privacy posture of Venice AI, which publishes a real privacy policy. Treat both tools’ privacy claims as vendor statements, not documented commitments, and don’t upload anything sensitive to either.
Which Should You Pick?
- Pick Raphael if you want the most permissive tool we’ve actually verified, the best free runway, and no signup to start. It accepted both filter probes, costs nothing to try properly, and its $10/month Pro is a straightforward subscription if you generate regularly. Try Raphael free →
- Pick Senzia if you need 16:9 widescreen output, face consistency across images and video, or a pay-per-use model with no subscription. Just go in with eyes open: the free tier is 2 images, and the “no restrictions” promise is contradicted by Senzia’s own current terms. Try Senzia free (2 images) →
- Pick neither, and try Venice, if you want verified permissiveness plus a generous free tier — 15 free images a day, both probes accepted, 4.5/5 quality. See how Venice compares to Perchance, or read our Senzia vs Venice and Raphael vs Venice comparisons.
FAQ
Is Senzia or Raphael more uncensored?
Raphael, by evidence. It accepted both our filter probes (public figure, gore) with no warning in our 2026-10-06 test. Senzia’s probes were never run — its free tier ran out first — and its own terms pages now say adult-oriented content is barred, contradicting its “no restrictions” marketing. Verified beats promised.
Which is better for free use?
Raphael. No signup for the first 4 images, 10 more credits after a Google sign-in, and a free basic tier in a slow queue. Senzia gives exactly 2 images, watermarked, then the paywall. Neither free tier gives clean downloads.
Which has better image quality?
A tie at 4/5 in our test. Senzia outputs larger widescreen images (1280×720 JPG); Raphael outputs smaller square images (640×640 WEBP). Choose on format, not on quality.
Can I use Senzia or Raphael for adult content?
We did not test sexual or explicit prompts on either tool, and we won’t claim results we don’t have. Raphael has no content-policy page we could find and accepted our non-sexual filter probes. Senzia markets to adult creators but its own terms pages now bar adult-oriented content — don’t pay for the old promise. Both tools bar sexual content involving minors outright, and non-consensual depictions of real people are refused by Senzia’s stated rules.
Is Senzia really uncensored anymore?
Not clearly. Its marketing still says “uncensored” and “no filter,” but its own comparison pages (read 2026-11-09) state its terms bar adult-oriented or pornographic content. Until Senzia reconciles its own pages, treat the uncensored claim as unresolved. Full detail in Is Senzia AI Safe?
Which is cheaper?
For a one-off experiment, Senzia — a $9.90 one-time credit purchase with no subscription. For regular use, Raphael’s Pro at $10/month billed annually (2,000 credits/month, per October 2026 listings) is the more predictable deal. Re-check both sites’ pricing before paying; prices in this space move fast.
Try Raphael free — no signup → · Try Senzia free — 2 images, no card →