Lets Explore

Discussion in 'Signatures' started by McLovin, Oct 14, 2007.

  1. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]

    [​IMG]


    ye
     
  2. CarpeDiem

    CarpeDiem Well-Known Member

    Age:
    36
    Posts:
    642
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 24, 2007
    That first one's tight, but the bottom sigs have no focal point at all... I had to search for the render =\
     
  3. Dusk`

    Dusk` Senior Member

    Age:
    32
    Posts:
    2,346
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Mar 5, 2006
    Location:
    WINNIPEG, MANITOBA.
    v1 on the first. Love it.

    Now, the bottom ones bother me. The focal could be brought out alot more. But v2 looks good. D:
     
  4. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    lol, thanks .
     
  5. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    bump
     
  6. Kleptek

    Kleptek Active Member

    Posts:
    39
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2006
    the first is definitely the secks (so is the show ;) ) and i love the BG in the second but i agree that the render is too hidden by the effects. with the BG on the second you could prolly have the basics for an awesome abstract sig. just my 2 cents.
     
  7. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    thanks
    : )
     
  8. McLovin

    McLovin Well-Known Member

    Age:
    33
    Posts:
    2,110
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 14, 2005
    bump ...
     

Share This Page