Interesting, but confusing (the text) and too green.

The weird "scratch marks" also show a seam line on the RH side where you flipped the layer.

Nice chop, but the base of the cups is far too narrow. They would be highly prone to falling over, and scalding coffee is no fun!

It would also be nice if you added some color to the coffee beans on the cups. B&W just looks somewhat blah...

VERY nice composition, the visual flow is quite entertaining!
My only critique, is that the moonlight needs to be more consistently bright overall. The distance of the Earth to the moon means that the illumination is pretty much equal, like sunlight - not brighter on the horizon, fading to darker towards the viewer...This means the mermaid, the rocks, the ship, and all of the water need to pretty much be the same value.

Otherwise, this is really good work!

There is a very old song by the Moody Blues, "Nights in White Satin" with the lyrics:
"Cold-hearted orb rules the night,
Removes the colors from our sight.
Red is grey and yellow, white,
And we decide which is right,
And which is an illusion... "

Your lightening of the ambient light has improved this quite a bit, lifting it from the ubiquitous black void so popular in too many entries.

Great concept.
A bit too purple overall, and the bottom planet needs to be better illuminated to match the lighting on top of the "ships," since they are not angled downwards to show such a well lit top surface.

It's too dark overall. The plane looks like it could be jammed in the rocks, or perhaps behind the rocks, or ???
The brown sky with the too dark clouds on the left doesn't help, either.

Nice job, but the dolphins are too far up and too dark to really notice. The bright center of the sea visually dominates the image.

The doves just don't work as a substitute, since doves don't fly at night...Maybe some bats or owls or a jet in the sky...

Merely commenting on the "simplicity" of an entry isn't very constructive...
Perhaps you can suggest ways to improve it.

I thought it fun, which was the intent behind this particular contest, no???

Too dark. All I can see is some yellow ground with a couple shadows walking on it. The lamp isn't illuminating very much...

I like the dimensionality you gave them. Nice work!

Would be better if it wasn't all green.

Nice!

Very clean work, looks quite realistic. Well done!

Very NICE! Great concept.

Those look more like mice than rats...The gray on on the left needs some adjustments, he looks like he is floating.

The two windows on the left are leaning, while the one on the right is correctly perpendicular...
Also, if he is looking down on the children, the reflections in the windows would not show the faces from a "straight on" view, they would be angled down, showing more of the tops of their heads due to perspective. For them to "reflect as they are, you would have to see the children in front of the windows.

Interesting idea, but the execution needs more work.

Excellent work, beautiful detail, very realistic!

Very good work. As dark as this is, you have the contrast high enough that the image is visible, not just a sea of black with some vague shapes. That alone makes this above many other works...Really nice job!

One of your best!

Ooooh! MUCH better!
Now you've improved upon the tutorial with the sky behind the owls, and the eye is drawn to the tree, and then moves around the image.

Nice work.

Hard to see where it's going with those blinds drawn!

What a fun looking entry! Nice tutorial you found, good job!

Powerful image, but really wonky anatomy in the neck and shoulder area. If you wanted more accurate proportions, the shoulders are 2 3/4 head widths across, and the neck should be 2/3 of a head width...His trapezius muscles just have me totally freaked out!

Her right arm is missing an elbow, or else her upper arm is really short...

It's more discernable as a woman, but the LH edge could still use a little more emphasis of contour, perhaps just a bit lighter along the shoulder, since the back is in darkness?
She should also have some light along the edge of her neck on the LH side along with the shoulder edge. Her head is somewhat floating...

Overall, the whisker wings are a great idea, I like them alot!

The flowerpot looks very realistic! Good job.

Too dark overall - I thought it was a flower of some sort until you explained it was a woman's back...It's so dark, you can't see where the "wing" on the RH side is attached, or if it even IS attached to anything.

Great, imaginative concept, just too hard to see what it is.

Your color tones are a bit off, with your tree somewhat yellow and sickly looking, and the hand too pale. You can (if you wish) correct both of those with Image>Adjustments>Selective color, choosing yellow adjustments for the tree (increasing the cyan and decreasing the yellow) and the reds (slightly increasing the magenta and black) if you have the hand and tree on separate layers.
Your overall composition is somewhat compromised because you have the background lighter areas too large, resulting in a whitish "halo on the RH side of the sickly tree, and too much light above the hand on the LH side. This subtly pulls the focus outwards.
The owls are also now a bit too large and distracting within the overall image.

A very nice tutorial you found, the effects used can be applied to many other types of images.

NASA images are .gov, so they are considered public domain, I believe...
From the NASA website:
"NASA still images; audio files; video; and computer files used in the rendition of 3-dimensional models, such as texture maps and polygon data in any format, generally are not copyrighted. You may use NASA imagery, video, audio, and data files used for the rendition of 3-dimensional models for educational or informational purposes, including photo collections, textbooks, public exhibits, computer graphical simulations and Internet Web pages. This general permission extends to personal Web pages.

This general permission does not extend to use of the NASA insignia logo (the blue "meatball" insignia), the retired NASA logotype (the red "worm" logo) and the NASA seal. These images may not be used by persons who are not NASA employees or on products (including Web pages) that are not NASA-sponsored.

NASA should be acknowledged as the source of the material except in cases of advertising. See NASA Advertising Guidelines."

But I agree, that a "premier" tutorial that can't be publicly seen shouldn't be allowed...Just like tutorials in a book can't be used, because those without the book can't see the tutorial...

Without the tutorial to compare to, it looks like your exploding moon is wonky.

Very original! Would look better with a background image, tho.

I like the "Warhol Pop Art" effect. Nicely done! Sometimes, simpler is better.

Too funny! Nice concept.

I found everything but the picture frame...Nice work on the end table!

Excellent shadow work, nice effect!

The image looks badly composed, although it has improved by adding color to the bird.

When you adapted the tutorial to include the house, you changed the overall composition.

The branches in the tutorial "framed" the focal point (the colored bird). Your house, with parts of another house on the side, throw the focus off the bird, and visually "weigh down" the image at the bottom. I would suggest eliminating the house(s) entirely.

Above the cat's ear, the beads are gray and odd looking, instead of golden. The shadow on the beads would not allow them to be reflective yet desaturated...

The edges of the weave are too "hard," making it look like like rectangles floating at different heights, rather than integrated.

Very surreal and interesting!

A lot more stars in the sky would help this image, since there are billions of them. The few you have are hardly visible at all...
Technically, of course, there would be no smoke trails, since there is no atmosphere in space, but you've created a very dynamic scene!

Great effect on the dog's fur, but the contrast is too dark on the shadows - You can barely see the man's feet. If you lighten the ambient light, the image will be more successful by not looking so overexposed.

Way too dark, hardly any ambient lighting, which is really weird for an outdoor image.

Hard to identify this as a shoe rack. By not showing the front bottom, the angle is hard to determine, especially since it is parallel to the floor, instead of slightly raised at the far end; and the "shoes" do little to help sell the image. It just looks like a shelf photographed at an angle.

Between the pose and the "mist," he looks like a male ballerina wearing a tutu...

Inconsistent lighting. The dagger/photo show lighting from the top, while the desk and globe show the strong flash from in front. Matte finish or not, the typewriter should show more light refraction on it than it does - It looks "dull" in the image.

Metaphor or no, consistency and believability is what a good chop is all about. That's why they made the Burn and Dodge tool...

That said, I think this was one of the best "tributes" I've seen, in that it is identifiable with the idol.

Nice angle!

Too dark, the sides are almost impossible to distinguish.

Too dark. I never would have guessed that was a lamp if not for the title. All that darkness = too much wasted space. You could've cropped the image in by 2/3 and still gotten the point across.

Doesn't really look like her at all.

The bottom LH corner of the case is skewed to a weird degree, but I really like the mask.