Beketov

I'm still confused why you made the H of Holik match the first name instead of the last name, seems an odd choice. Aside from that this is sick though. Effects look good, lighting looks great. The left side might be a tad too sharp but it's nothing major.

Gotta agree with boub's. Part of lighting is making sure that the visible source matches the render lighting and this doesn't. The effects are pretty cool and the colours look nice. The red behind the main text I think could be a bit smaller (or make the text larger) but it's not so bad that it doesn't work. I think if you got more contrast on the render via lighting it would really make this pop.

Aren't all of these supposed to be VHL related?

This is beautiful, I gotta say. Shame I skip pretty much all dialogue in the game any time I play it haha

4

Just glad it wasn't me haha. Wuebec is the I ly team I've never played on (in one way or another since teams have moved) and aim fine with that.

I'm already crossed out hut haven't been picked yet? Spoilers?

Velvet goes first, in a move that surprises absolutely no one. Congrats Higgins.

I'd love to go first but I doubt they pass on Higgins. Especially with their trade push to get a solid group of guys, doubt they trust s rookie goalie

Kendrick and Street showing their age, that was in fact a Brooks sig posted on August 4th, 2007 before he was even changed his username to Brooks. Here's the next challenge: A: Brooks (again) B: Terry C: McKelvie D: Nibbz

This might not work but could be fun if it does. Sorta inspired by what Stamkos is doing, I went back to the old board and grabbed a sig from the olden days. Given that most people weren't around back then, i'm curious to see if anyone can guess who made the sig; I'll give a few options to make it a bit easier. So, sig number 1, who made this: A: Kendrick B: Beketov C: Brooks D: Rumpleforeskin No looking at the URL BTW, not sure if it gives it away so just don't cheat.

2.5/3 1.5/3 1/1 TOTAL: 5/6

I think you're likely right on that. As much as I would love to play for what is looking like a pretty strong team I don't think they'd be getting these kinds of pieces without a solid plan in net. Not that I wouldn't be solid, but maybe not the guaranteed quality they are looking for.

Looks like Toronto just needs a goalie, good thing the draft is Saturday

time period and maker have a lot of effect on grading, always have. What was perfect effort in S1 wouldn't get half points in S40. In any case: 2/3 1/2 1/1 TOTAL: 4/6

Still not 100% sure how this is "outside the box" but it's still an amazing piece. BG is clean and pristine, geometric shapes work perfect to blend the render in and the lighting is top notch. If I have to make a complaint it's that, compered to everything else, the text seems a little flat for my liking; the wranglers text especially.

The BG is very simple but I think the effects on it make it work quite well. Lighting is good but would be better if it was slightly off to the side instead of directly over the render's head. I like how you worked depth in with the lines, I think it looks very nice. Could try playing with some blur on them to really enhance the depth feel but not necessary. Text is simple but I think it works well with this piece. Well done.

I agree that the effects look top notch and well executed. I also love the use of the logo (at least I think that's the stars logo?) in the BG to create depth, I think it looks very good. The lighting definitely needs some tweaking as I feel the whole piece is a little dark and has a tad too much contrast. I would also say that the text stands out a bit too much. Don't be afraid to play around with text layers and blend them in a bit; the effects on the text are decent but it stands out like a sore thumb.

Stock work is looking pretty good here but blending is key to really bring it all together which is where I think this is lacking, I'd like to see an extra exposure layer to bring it all together. As Jack said, the watch face is a little weird; mostly because we can tell it's a watch. That stock is likely better used with a strong gaussian blue to give some lighting effects. I don't mind the text but the thin font does get lost a little bit amongst everything else. Lighting is decent but get the right side of the sig darkened up a tad to make the contrast pop better.

I used it as a sig last week under Draper's claim from round 1. I'll just have to make something else for this week, no big deal.

I absolutely love number 3 but, even though I voted for it, not sure how it fits as "outside the box". Not a weird shape or size, no weird colours, no weird style. Am i missing something?

Man, I liked my sig this week up until the point that I saw what it's up against. Damn, people outdid themselves this time. Really wish I had gotten that bye from the first round haha

When's the vote for this coming up? Need to get through that and into the next round so I know what yo make for my PT his week haha

Love it, absolutely love it. Effects are amazing, text is beyond words, blending is perfection, lighting is good. If I were to complain about anything it would be that it looks a tad washed out so maybe a bit of extra contrast would help but overall I think this is a great piece. Well done.

Did the camera guy forget to turn a light on? Where the heck is your render hiding? a B&W render on a black BG desperately NEEDS strong contrast lighting to make him pop, this sadly has none. On a poorly calibrated monitor I would probably only see the text honestly. The text itself is different and kinda fun, same with the border on the bottom, but the render and effects are desperately lacking.