I'm voting Entry 2.
In Entry 1, I understand what the participant was trying to accomplish, however I don't believe they have pulled it off. The C4D brushes behind Paul seem a little off, with no connection with the rest of the background. The colours used in the sig are also slightly off the mark. Instead of using a light and dark brownish red color scheme, I would have preferred to have seen more use of the stronger orange and yellow which is used very sparingly behind Paul. I think if the entire sig was heavily based around the dark C4D and a stronger red, orange and yellow color scheme it would look significantly better.
Entry 2 isn't too bad. It's nice but I feel as though there isn't much connection between the background and the render.The white lines which are used in the sig seem as though they were used in order to disguise the lack of connection, sort of an attempt to bridge the two separate pieces. I also believe there can be a greater amount of depth which could be created in the background, it seems a little too one dimensional. A few darker brush strokes, or even fiddling around with the levels should fix this. Though with that said the background is nice, simply needs a bit more work.
A minor detail, but this can make a sig look significantly more professional. But why no border in Entry 2? The participant simply forgot?
Score Check!
Entry 1: 4
Entry 2: 10
In Brisbane, Australia and wanna battle? Send me a PM and we can sort it out.