What you think, this one is hard rejected ?
Thanks
your link does not work
Sorry, now ?
still does not work
Looks a little old. Gray shadows looks dirty. And aim looks too rough (black and bold). Try to make it more gentle. Scene with the tapes is too static. Try to add zooming.
Anyway tape style outdated in design today
Sorry, but I think it’s because you live in 2010.
The author asked for criticism, and this is what you have to say? What’s he supposed to take from that?
“Oh I guess next time i’ll try to make it more 2017” whatever that means.
In case you haven’t noticed, 3dbacks actually tried to make a unique project, and not simply ride the trend train and copy other popular slideshows a million times (:hint hint:), so you really have no place saying that.
On-topic: I think the biggest flaw with the concept is the static camera. Having an actual 3D object you have a lot of freedom to create more dynamic camera. What I would do is I would create a camera that sort of “rides” along the film strips and then somehow ending at the center of logo.
I also wouldn’t mix the 2D effects (the camera settings at the end) with 3D objects, just for the sake of consistency.
2 Likes
You realized that this is just a little mockery 
And you do not blame me for this, I saw messages from you and worse towards the authors.
I just don’t think that mocking an author who got slapped with a hard rejection is appropriate. Have a nice day 
1 Like
There is nothing wrong with some friendly mockery, but you gave no advice to the author. Without giving any constructive criticism or advice that just looks like you came here to insult the author. I understand that probably it wasn’t intended, but that’s just looks rude
2 Likes
thanks for your constructive reply