FrameThrower vs EyeCandy
EyeCandy is organised by technique; FrameThrower is organised by frame. Both are useful, and for learning what a technique IS, a technique library is the better starting point. FrameThrower answers the next question: show me every frame across 5,489 films that does this, in this light, at this shot size.
What EyeCandy is good at
Organised around technique as the primary axis — a catalogue of visual devices with examples of each, which is a genuinely good way to learn the vocabulary rather than just collect pictures.
“A visual technique library.”— EyeCandy, in their own words. eyecannndy.com · read 2026-08-12
Which to pick
Pick EyeCandy if
you are learning the vocabulary and want techniques named and demonstrated.
Pick FrameThrower if
you know what you want and need to find many real examples of it, fast.
What FrameThrower does
- —5,489 films, indexed per frame. Lighting key and quality, lens character, shot size, camera angle, colour palette in hex, mood, era and time of day — on every frame, not per film.
- —Three ways to ask. Plain language, a reference image, or a colour.
- —Callable by machine. A REST API with 11 endpoints and no rate limits, an MCP server with four tools, and an npm SDK.
- —Moodboards, shot boards and lookbooks. Reference to deliverable without leaving the app or re-importing anything.
- —Free to start. $2 of credits on signup, no card. Then $1 = 500 searches, and credits never expire.
Note: EyeCandy's site blocked automated reading when this page was written (2026-08-12), so their self-description above is from public material rather than read directly that day. If anything here is out of date or wrong, tell us and it gets fixed — contact@framethrower.ai.
See it before you decide
$2 of credits free on signup, no card. Search 5,489 films by lighting, lens, colour and mood.
Sign up for freeOther comparisons: Frameset · frmz · ShotBook · MovieStillsDB · all