|
1.
|
30-08-2008
|
Using photographs is legitimate, but not when they cover 90% of the image. Also, patching with brush strokes is absolutely awful. It means that you can't cast shadows on the ground?.. For the concept, I think it's shaky, because I don't consider religions as opposite or contrasting. They are different, but have pretty much the same goal or message. If you oppose religion and science instead, then we may have more of a concept.
|
|
2.
|
28-08-2008
|
I think the Buddha's themselves could have been better as they seem too flat.
|
|
3.
|
27-08-2008
|
While Buddhism and Christianity do contrast in many ways, this image, I believe, fails to demonstrate that contrast. In fact, it appears to me that the Buddha statues are worshiping at the cross.
Artistically, it's not too bad, but not great. I think the Buddha statues are well placed, but the cross is a bit on the tall side. The ground overbalances the sky, I think, and the figures all seem out of place in the grass.
Technically, it doesn't look like you actually did much. Grass and sky are image maps, with the grass blurred in the places where it meets the figures. Nothing technically difficult about that (not that it's a *bad* thing, but it distracts from the image, IMHO). The statues are washed out and details are completely lost. I don't take much issue with using pre-built models, but there's not much else in the scene. The cross is simple, with the hardest part being putting the text on it, which appears to have the same washed out problems as the statues. I *do* like the lighting idea idea with the sky.
|
|
4.
|
27-08-2008
|
There doesn't seem to be a lot of raytracing involved in this picture. The use of a real image is rather stark compared to the 3d models.
The 3d models don't appear to fit with the backdrop in lighting or in detail. Are they even lit.
|
|
5.
|
18-08-2008
|
The idea of contrast does feature nicely here although quite what message is trying to be conveyed is not clear to me. The reason for the low marks, particularly in technical, is because the picture is mainly composed of other peoples work or photographic material.
Keep on working though and would be great to see more images in the future.
|
|
6.
|
18-08-2008
|
I think, a very boudhistic interpretation of the theme :-)
The landscape is very well done and merges well with the Boudhas while the cross stands starkly out and seems almost out of place.
|
|
7.
|
17-08-2008
|
Not a bad picture for a beginner. The composition of the image is the best feature, I think. You've done a good job balancing the elements, connecting the sky with the ground using the cross, and creating a sense of balance and harmony with the middle division of earth and sky.
Conceptually, the contrast is not really evident. I suppose if one looks at Buddhism versus Christianity as opposite ends of the spectrum, it could be contrasting, but actually the two religions have many of the same precepts. Both teach love and consideration toward your fellow man, both involve striving toward a higher ethic, and both place emphasis on good works.
Technically, I think you should experiment more with your raytracer. This image could have been easily put together in Photoshop...image mapped grass and sky, with models that look rather 2D and do not interact with their environment. In particular, smearing the grass upward during postprocessing impedes the image. Next time, try using actual grass models (Gilles Tran has a great makegrass macro). Also, don't be afraid of shadowing. I think you'll be pleased with the result if you use your raytracer as a world-builder, not just an image composition program.
|
|
8.
|
15-08-2008
|
Though the concept is surely interesting, I think much of it is lost though problems in the execution. The lack of depth in the statues, for example - maybe the lighting?
There is a contradiction (contrast) - on one hand the grass seems to hold the statues, but no shadow is cast on it?
|
|
9.
|
14-08-2008
|
Nice idea but the textures are a bit flat.
|
|
