S47 - Week 2 - Voting Group One

[jack 498]

Make sure to vote for both groups.

Choose all that you think should move on.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited March 1, 2016 by jack

[boubabi 4,725]

Some real creative stuff here. Number 1 for me 

[Wasty 566]

damn some great stuff here!

[Daniel 565]

2 & 3  

[Beketov 9,033]

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?

[Wasty 566]

31 minutes ago, Beketov said:

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?

It's a fantastic sig but I agree not "outside of the box" like the theme was, plus the render efx and design being super similar to Boubabi's 3Moons sig is distracting. The sig itself is sick though, just doesn't fit the theme this week.

[701 309]

holy fuck that first one is RAW

[Mr.Baller 440]

2 hours ago, Beketov said:

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?

I might have misunderstood the whole concept to be honest. If that's the case I should be disqualified to make it fair for others. 

 

[jack 498]

2 hours ago, Beketov said:

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?

 

2 hours ago, Wasty said:

It's a fantastic sig but I agree not "outside of the box" like the theme was, plus the render efx and design being super similar to Boubabi's 3Moons sig is distracting. The sig itself is sick though, just doesn't fit the theme this week.

 

4 minutes ago, Mr.Baller said:

I might have misunderstood the whole concept to be honest. If that's the case I should be disqualified to make it fair for others. 

 

 

 

From my original post I wrote this: "...As usual you can decide what this means to you. The themes are more to give some direction and inspiration. Some outside-the-box examples could be interesting canvas sizes/shapes, some abstract work, whatever"

 

I gave no specific requirements, and I was intentionally vague. The sig in question has some interesting geometry as the main render effects, and I see no reason to disqualify it.

[Wasty 566]

28 minutes ago, jack said:

 

 

 

 

From my original post I wrote this: "...As usual you can decide what this means to you. The themes are more to give some direction and inspiration. Some outside-the-box examples could be interesting canvas sizes/shapes, some abstract work, whatever"

 

I gave no specific requirements, and I was intentionally vague. The sig in question has some interesting geometry as the main render effects, and I see no reason to disqualify it.

Oh I would never want to disqualify Baller or the sig, it's an amazing sig don't get me wrong  I would never want that as he's an incredible sig maker. I just was more thrown off by it since it's more of an regular awesome sig than an out of the box theme, that's all

[Victor 10,947]

These are absolute fire.

[scoop 3,432]

RE: #3

 

those are clearly shattered remnants of the box that the dude is busting out of