Skip to content

Build Widely confirmed7 publishers 3 min read Published Updated

Multi-turn GPT Image 2.5 editing runs only through OpenAI's Responses API

OpenAI's guide names Sunburst for editing precision and Flare for speed, and both run from either API. The editing loop, File ID inputs and the action switch exist on the Responses side alone.

The Engineer · Build desk

Send a correction

Illustration accompanying Multi-turn GPT Image 2.5 editing runs only through OpenAI's Responses API
Generated illustration

What happened

  • OpenAI's image generation guide names two models, gpt-image-2.5-sunburst for workflows where editing precision matters most and gpt-image-2.5-flare for fast, high-quality everyday generation.
  • The New Stack reports both models priced identically at $5 per million text input tokens, $8 per million image input tokens and $30 per million image output tokens.
  • OpenAI states that token rates match GPT Image 2 and that the GPT Image 2 calculator does not estimate GPT Image 2.5 token consumption.

Why it matters

  • Who has to decide decision Committing to the Image API today means rewriting both the request and the response parsing later if the product ever needs a second round of edits on the same image.
  • What it costs cost Anyone quoting a fixed price per generated image is exposed on margin until they have metered their own prompts, because the rate card alone cannot separate a Sunburst image from a Flare one.
  • What it limits constraint OpenAI's 50% latency claim is measured against GPT-Image-2, so it bounds a team's own gain only where that older model is the one being replaced at comparable size and quality settings.
  • Who's exposed exposure Pinning action to edit puts an error path in production that depends on whether the conversation still holds an image, while leaving it on auto hands that choice to the mainline model.

On the Image API you call client.images.generate with model set to gpt-image-2.5-sunburst, and the image comes back as base64 in result.data[0].b64_json [8]. On the Responses API you set a mainline model at the top level, the docs example uses gpt-6-astra, put the image model in the image_generation tool's model field, and then filter response.output for items whose type is image_generation_call [9][7]. Two model strings per request instead of one [23].

Single-shot editing works on both. The Image API has an Edits endpoint that modifies an existing image partially or entirely [5]. The Responses API adds iteration: multi-turn editing, and image File IDs accepted as inputs rather than only bytes [16]. Turn state comes from passing the image generation call output back in context, or from previous_response_id [19]. The guide's routing advice is direct: one image from one prompt, use the Image API; conversational, editable experiences, use the Responses API [6].

The tool's action parameter decides behaviour at runtime. Setting it to auto lets the model choose whether to generate a new image or edit one already in the conversation, generate always creates, and edit forces an edit when an image is in context [20]. Force edit with nothing in context and the call returns an error [21]. The guide documents that error as the expected result.

The docs do not settle pricing. The New Stack reports identical token rates for the two models [12], and OpenAI's note says "Token rates match GPT Image 2. The GPT Image 2 calculator does not estimate GPT Image 2.5 token consumption." [13]. According to The New Stack, there is no published guidance for estimating 2.5 consumption at all [14]. Image output at $30 per million tokens is 3 cents per thousand output tokens, so a 1,000-token render costs 3 cents and a 4,000-token one costs 12 cents [18]. Which of those you get comes out of a metered test run [17].

Treat the latency figure the same way. OpenAI says Flare delivers higher-quality images than GPT-Image-2 with 50% lower latency [4], and calls it "the default choice for most applications" [2]. That 50% bounds your own improvement only if GPT-Image-2 is what you are replacing, at your sizes, quality settings and prompt mix. Sunburst, which OpenAI describes as "built for premium visual workflows that benefit from tighter control across edits", comes with "longer generation times" per the launch announcement [3]. Per The New Stack, neither the announcement nor the model pages quantify that gap [22].

Quality, size, format and compression are adjustable from both APIs [11], so output settings do not decide this. The question is whether the product will ever want a second edit of the same image. If it might, write against the Responses API shape first, because switching later changes where the model is named and how the response is read [7][9].

What to watch

  • Per-image token counts or a GPT Image 2.5 calculator from OpenAI would make the Flare-versus-Sunburst cost comparison computable before a test run.
  • A published Flare-versus-Sunburst generation-time figure, or a latency claim measured against something other than GPT-Image-2.
  • Changes to the supported models list for mainline models that can call the image generation tool, which currently gates the Responses API path.

Clarity's read

What the record supports and how the coverage leans. The claims behind it follow.

Reality

Evidence76
Adoption40
Hype gap+10
Incentives55
Confidence74

Perspective Coverage

7 publishers
Builder
Builder 62%
Operator
Operator 24%
Investor
Investor 14%
Why these scores

Claim ledger

Ranked by verification strength, evidence, and original report placement.

  1. [1]

    OpenAI's image generation guide says the API lets you generate and edit images from text prompts using gpt-image-2.5-sunburst and gpt-image-2.5-flare, and to choose Sunburst for workflows where editing precision matters most and Flare for fast, high-quality everyday image generation.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  2. [2]

    OpenAI calls Flare "the default choice for most applications".

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  3. [3]

    OpenAI describes Sunburst as "built for premium visual workflows that benefit from tighter control across edits", and its launch announcement says Sunburst's better precision comes with "longer generation times".

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  4. [4]

    OpenAI says Flare delivers higher-quality images than GPT-Image-2 with 50% lower latency.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  5. [5]

    The Image API provides two endpoints: Generations, which creates images from a text prompt, and Edits, which modifies existing images with a new prompt, either partially or entirely.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  6. [6]

    The guide advises that if you only need to generate or edit a single image from one prompt, the Image API is the best choice, and if you want to build conversational, editable image experiences, use the Responses API.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  7. [7]

    With the Image API you set model to gpt-image-2.5-sunburst or gpt-image-2.5-flare directly; with the Responses API you select a supported mainline model at the top level and specify the image model in the image generation tool's model field.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  8. [8]

    The docs' Image API example calls client.images.generate(model="gpt-image-2.5-sunburst", prompt=prompt) and reads the image from result.data[0].b64_json before base64-decoding it to bytes.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  9. [9]

    The docs' Responses API example calls client.responses.create with model="gpt-6-astra" and tools=[{"type": "image_generation", "model": "gpt-image-2.5-sunburst"}], then collects image data by filtering response.output for outputs whose type is image_generation_call.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  10. [10]

    The New Stack reports that OpenAI launched GPT Images 2.5 this week, promising better results for changing one part of an image without disturbing the rest, including edits to a single element such as a product, background or piece of copy while preserving the surrounding scene.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  11. [11]

    Both APIs let you customize output by adjusting quality, size, format, and compression.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  12. [12]

    The New Stack reports that OpenAI lists the same token rates for Flare and Sunburst: $5 per million text input tokens, $8 per million image input tokens, and $30 per million image output tokens.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  13. [13]

    OpenAI states: "Token rates match GPT Image 2. The GPT Image 2 calculator does not estimate GPT Image 2.5 token consumption."

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  14. [14]

    The New Stack reports that although image generation pricing is based on token counts, OpenAI gives no explicit note on how to estimate GPT-Image-2.5 token consumption.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  15. [15]

    The guide directs readers to a supported models list for the mainline models that can call the image generation tool.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  16. [16]

    Compared with the Image API, the Responses API adds multi-turn editing (iterative high fidelity edits by prompting) and flexible inputs, accepting image File IDs as input images, not just bytes. It supports image generation as a built-in tool and accepts image inputs and outputs within context.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  17. [17]

    Because both models post the same per-token rates and OpenAI publishes no way to estimate GPT Image 2.5 token consumption, the per-image cost difference between Flare and Sunburst has to be measured on real requests rather than computed from the published price list.

    Derived Supported
  18. [18]

    At $30 per million image output tokens, image output costs 3 cents per thousand output tokens, so a 1,000-token image costs 3 cents and a 4,000-token image costs 12 cents.

    Derived Supported
  19. [19]

    With the Responses API, multi-turn image generation works either by providing image generation call outputs within context (the image ID also works) or by using the previous_response_id parameter.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  20. [20]

    The optional action parameter on the image generation tool controls whether a supported tool model generates a new image or edits one in the conversation: auto lets the model decide, generate always creates a new image, edit forces editing when an image is in context.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  21. [21]

    The guide states that if you force action "edit" without providing an image in context, the call will return an error.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  22. [22]

    The New Stack reports that neither OpenAI's launch announcement nor the model pages for Flare or Sunburst make clear the difference in generation time between the two models.

    Reported SupportedView cited source
  23. [23]

    A Responses API image request names two models, the top-level mainline model and the image model inside the tool, where an Image API request names one.

    Derived Supported

Sources

7 independent publishers whose own reporting we read for this story.

  1. blog.vercel.com

    1 article · September 7, 2026

    GPT Image 2.5 Flare and Sunburst now available on AI Gateway
  2. dev.to

    1 article · September 13, 2026

    GPT-Image-2.5 in Production: Choosing Between Flare and Sunburst
  3. developers.openai.com

    1 article · September 13, 2026

    Image generation | OpenAI API
  4. simonwillison.net

    1 article · September 8, 2026

    Introducing ChatGPT Images 2.5
  5. testingcatalog.com

    2 articles · September 9, 2026

    OpenAI launches ChatGPT Images 2.5 with faster editing
  6. the-decoder.com

    1 article · September 9, 2026

    ChatGPT Images 2.5: Faster, more precise, but not the same for everyone
  7. thenewstack.io

    1 article · September 10, 2026

    GPT Images 2.5 promises edits that leave the rest of your image alone

Topics and entities