>Heyyyy...what's up guys. It's Anthony from Anthony's Cumstains, and for dis review, we are going to look at...Decent Figure from Company A.>*Sighhhh* Right off the bat, I'm gonna say, this figure is garbage. The paint job is terrible, there's only 1 shade of yellow instead of 56 shades. I'll give the look a 0 out of 10.>Okay, now let's look at the accessories. I mean, it's alright. 10 pairs of hands, 10 weapons, 10 power effects, and a stand. I feel like they could've included more, like a comic book and macbook, but it's alright. 5 out of 10.>Now let's look at the articulation. And oh my god, this is really bad. The waist can only bend 90 degree instead of 720 degree. And you can't even bend the legs up to its head and wrap around the neck! Oh my god...-10 out of 10, no, -100 out of 10!>As a self-proclaimed genius, I could've made this much, much better than this even though I've never made a single figure myself. I mean, just look at how critical I am, only an expert like me would nitpick everything.>Okay, so, final rating, 6 out of 10. I don't even know why they made this figure. I won't recommend this figure to anyone. For 30 dollars, you could've gotten so much more. But it's up to you. If you really like it, go ahead. I'll just label you as a retarded faggot because only my opinion is correct.>Thanks for watching, and I'll see you soon.
>>11741791He believes a jew was god and puts it at the end of every video after making jokes about his "package" to his audience of children
>>11741791You forgot the part where he has to mention that he knows nothing about the character or the IP even though a 30 second google search would have given him all the necessary context.
I like him and think the package joke is funny
>>11741817And for some reason you're very angry about it.
>>11741817Dead cats
>>11742061RIP Fluffy and RIP his bandai sponsor
The undisputed king of /toy/
>>11742196>I am brown and gay...ok.
>>11742041Am I? Are you sure?
>>11742202Nah thats you Pedro.
>>11741791His theme sounds like farts
>>11741791A while back I asked him why god allows children to suffer with cancer and he typed out like 8 paragraphs of dumb shit trying to explain it, that basically surmounted to "idk". I asked him a couple more questions in a response then he blocked me.
I wish they would ban all youtubers and clean this board up
>>11742310That's really annoying, please kill yourself.
>>11742360that's a sin.
he's the goat
>>11741791>that's what she said hehe, my package hehe, dicks hehe>d-does the female character have nipples?! you guys are sick perverts.What causes this?
I don't mind him. There's worse ones for sure.
>>11742409I wish you locked yourself in a garage with a car running
>>11742289>>11742409Only a brown and gay tranny with low self esteem would suck his penis so hard.
>>11742310>Bad things happen because those things that happen are badLol. Lmao.
>>11742549I'm pretty sure the second anon you replied to is being sarcastic. That screenshot is a classic example of Anthony's tardation.
>>11742310The man can barely formulate his thoughts on action figures, why would you think he could do it on god
>>11742409>uh..yes it is?
>>11742315There are decent to good reviewers like robo, dan who, mcucollector24, etc. But shartimus and cumstains are the worst.
>>11742603What about D Amazing? Every single thing he reviews is really, really dope - even when it's crumbling before our eyes. That is my worst type of reviewer. He's also so damn lazy with his reviews, always feels like he's doing everybody a favor.
>>11742619Never heard of him desu
>>11742594I hate when people type like that. Why even do it? an advantage of speaking through text is that you don't have to deal with speech impediments and crutch words. Why would you bring such limitations of verbal speech into a form of communication that doesn't need them?
>>11742619He does professional photography for several big toy companies, so he can’t really talk shit on them.
>>11742725isn’t he a Mezco photographer? How the fuck Does he take such good pics for his channel but their promos are such obviously photoshopped trash?
>>11742725>>11742753Nta, but do you seriously consider his photography good? I don't hate him or his reviews, they're quick and to the point, but I find that his photography is very amateur. His lighting isn't good and his composition isn't either. You can tell by comparing his photography to the very basic stuff you see for Kaiyodo, GSC, Figma. Those photographers while under stricter restrictions understand lighting and angles far better (long before edits). His just look like generic tiktok photos.
>>11742763Yes.
>>11742603I want them all gone to purify this board, and their spammers too.
>>11742795I don't know how you look at this and think it's peak/professional any photography let alone toy. He doesn't understand his own lighting, angles, depth of field. Looks so cheap lol.
>>11742795>>11742945Like wtf is this? Imagine seeing something this terrible in a comic panel.
>>11741791I still get a chuckle out of the fact I came up with the Anthony Cumstains moniker. Glad it stuck after all this time.
>>11742945This one isn’t great>>11742949This one is fine though
the image that killed dcg
>>11742955That looks kind of ass
>>11742962outside of the rape face its more than serviceable if you put some effort into how you pose it.
>>11742969>just hide the bad paintjob in shadow and its fineyeh sure i guess
>>11742945>>11742949Looks good.
>>11742955Anthony really will glaze any bad figure as long as it has a lot of paint on it
>>11742952Based OG. I've been sticking with "cumstains" ever since the first time i saw the joke (pun super intended)
>>11742409kek what figure
>>11742945>>11742949Can someone explain like I'm 5 what's wrong with these photos? I have zero knowledge in photography
>>11742986Thoughtless composition, thoughtless lighting, thoughtless depth of field and points of focus. Unironically looks like AI slop. Again, imagine seeing something like this on the cover or panel of a comic.
>>11743005>thoughtless response
>>11743005In English please?
>>11743005...i said explain like I'm 5, bro...
>>11743012I did. That's why I said a cover or panel in a comic. Photography is the same as drawing. Look at how he's crammed in frame at a weird tilt not giving you any real sense of direction or motion. Then look at what is and isn't in focus and how little in focus it is, it's distorting his fist in a very unappealing way and with no purpose. Same for the eyes being soft.The lighting makes no sense, what is he trying to highlight or shade? Just look at how badly light and in/out of focus his face and eyes are He's either extremely lazy or as I suspect clueless about basic photography. Look at pic related, again what is he lighting or shading? What is he pulling focus to? This is peak slop.
>>11743012>>11743070You can tell the difference in quality between the 2? And this pic related is what is considered the very basic in professional toy photography.
>>11743070I still think it looks cool
>>11743070If you're talking about the spidey pic, then yeah, the photo looks too crammed in and the weird blurring of the shooting hand is kinda weird. But I really don't know how to look at lighting tho.And the one where the soldier is confronting a fallen guy looks fine tho? Or is it about lighting again?
Idk I like that he calls out companies like Bandai for charging insane amount of money for mid toys that barely come with accessories
>>11743098Almost every single picture of his is mainly the composition and the way he arranges everything in frame. The figures or props in the front often get mixed up with stuff in the background. Every single picture will have bright lights or objects clash or overlap in unappealing ways. He also doesn't understand something basic like silhouettes. This is as basic as I can explain it. You can like his pictures but it's slop and should never be the standard for professional toy photography.
>>11743098Again, which looks closer to a panel or cover?
>>11743121>>11743127pics on the right are also very obviously edited afterwards. Left are all in camera. post some of your pics so we can see a true artiste?
>>11743168It's got nothing to do with editing. You could take away the props and background, even the lighting, and he still wouldn't understand how to both pose a figure properly and achieve aesthetically pleasing basic silhouettes. He has no basic understanding of composition or photography. Go look at Fei Long and Vega's pic. Why are their limbs looking like they're either completely amputated or meshing into their upper bodies? What purpose do his tilts play in any of these images? See >>11743070 as well, what purpose is there in exaggerated that giant cavity in the right arm? Look at the silhouette of the lower body/crotch and how lazy he is.See >>11742945 Why is the knee so sharp in focus and why is it lined up with his upper body and mohawk's head?
