It is a very boring signature to look at. The render looks very static and with that kind of BG it looks more like a bigger sized avatar then a signature. And the light effects in the left bottom part looks very weird, like it doesnt belong there.
It is a very boring signature to look at. The render looks very static and with that kind of BG it looks more like a bigger sized avatar then a signature. And the light effects in the left bottom part looks very weird, like it doesnt belong there.
The render looks static, in other words there is no movement in it. Normally when people use a static render, they compensate it by adding lots of details in the signature, which you can't see on a 150x300 avatar, so that you dont get the feeling that it is a bigger sized avatar, your BG however lack those details. In other words it looks like a bigger sized avatar.
Here is an example of a signature which I just found on google:
You must be registered for see images
When you try to crop/resize this into an avatar, a lot of details will be lost. However when you crop/resize your signature into an avatar, it would more or less look the same. That is what I meant.
The render looks static, in other words there is no movement in it. Normally when people use a static render, they compensate it by adding lots of details in the signature, which you can't see on a 150x300 avatar, so that you dont get the feeling that it is a bigger sized avatar, your BG however lack those details. In other words it looks like a bigger sized avatar.
Here is an example of a signature which I just found on google:
You must be registered for see images
When you try to crop/resize this into an avatar, a lot of details will be lost. However when you crop/resize your signature into an avatar, it would more or less look the same. That is what I meant.