For me it is beginning to get a little hard to evaluate TG2 renders, because now I have a very good understanding of how hard it is to make a great image. So when I see a new render I always first think "how hard would that be for me to make", Then I ask my self, "does that look real?" Its hard to imagine now what I would think of a lot of renders if I had no idea what TG2 was.
Then again, if there was more animation and sequence making the reality question would not mater so much, because it becomes like a movie and the real/unreal nature of the renders becomes style/esthetic. We here tend to imagine the renders up on a studio wall next to photographs, or composited into film. A still and a animation are two entirely different monsters.
In the case of Dune's work here, I think it is very important to remember that the images are a series, where the images will be seen together as individuals, so the consistency between the individual images will form a context to view them in, like an animation.
Taken as a whole, and with a little imagination, its easy to see the work as an exhibit. And in that context I think this work is very very good, so as to become a stylish design, a creative series, ART. However, if the renders do not look like they were made by the same artist, if the renders are not consistent, than the work will fall apart.
