sabine POUGET

here is my final work...

Attached Images

sabine pouget-final.jpg (173.5 KB, 674 views)

Ernest Burden

I like the use of color. Sure, orange is going to get a 'nice color' comment, but you work it into a green-yellow, and offset it with a green-blue, one saturated, the other pale. Keeping the figures in neutrals works well, keeps other colors at bay.

What bothers me here is that we have an obviously enclosed space but a picture that opens up on the left as if it goes on and on. It doesn't, does it? I would like to see something that suggests the left boundry--maybe a piece of wall turning at the top left? I don't understand the pattern at the door. Is it a tree? You see as much of it through the orange shape as the clearish part, yet the orange would be more opaque. It confuses things without adding anything.

The trees seen out the low window add just the right color, not a texture. The stiching pattern seen inside the walls is great. It's not a floorline, so I don't know what it means, I still like the effect. But the walkways really should feel structurally bound to the orange pods. They seem to just meet without any link. I can't quite work out where or how the furniture meets the floor. And, to borrow a phrase from author Carrie Fisher (and Princess Leia!), 'if you get more that a few people in that elevator you're going to need a lubricant'.

__________________
Ernest Burden III
AcmeDigital
architectural rendering

matthewbannister

Certainly one of the more dynamic entries. The use of color and chosen scene are extremely bold. Although vibrant and energetic the image seems underdeveloped, with more work it could be very strong. Concentrate on the people in the foreground - they currently detract from the overall composition.

hbetter

This is somewhere between a drawing and an image. There is a sense of fantasy and play, which makes the uplifting. It is not convincing as a rendering of constructed reality but nevertheless it is still provocative.

ehanson

I agree that it is not representational, but the realistic aspects of it create a conflicted fell I believe. I would either go more for photorealism or more abstraction. Still a strong gestalt to the image, if not quite thought through structurallly.

jkletzien

Where it seems like you spent your time is on the door at the right and while I recognize that this is pretty bright and you want us to concentrate there – the rest of the areas of the canvas don’t defer to it so our eyes kind of wander around and - because it is a three point perspective- eventually go straight up.

Straight up is fine if it is a John Portman Atrium, or the Eiffel Tower, or the Pantheon but the top of this space it looks like it is more of the same stuff we see below – and there is no real payoff there. This canvas really brings to mind an axiom that I definitely try to follow:

To much – add little
To little – add much

Which to me in this instance means if you are doing a kind of space that the likes of us have never seen before, conveying that space in as conventional a way as possible is going to shed more light on it than representing it in a way that is also fractious. This is a different kind of space which I applaud – which to me means the more you can settle the viewer into the conventional means of representation the better – two point perspective, values determining graphic depth, etc...

My recommendation would be that you find the thing you want to emphasize most and let the organization of the canvas follow that.