Nice detail. Only thing I’d do to it is to change the color of the daylight, which is apparently pure-white and blown-out to the point where it makes me squint. I like colored daylight. Pure-white says to me, rather instinctively, “overexposure.” If that sheet of film is totally-clear or totally-black at any point, it’s not going to print well.
I guess my point-of-view is also altered from having been, for a time, a “real” photographer who had to get inside those places and come away with a decent shot … on film, where the only approximation you had was a Polaroid. We took a bunch of lights in there. Timed the exposure so that the gaps in the roof seemed to be the only source of light but, out of pure necessity, added a lot of other, unobtrusive light too. The face of that piece of luggage closest to the camera, for example, would have been lit in the shot with “all that sunlight,” even if was later “dodged” in the darkroom. And so on.
“God-beams?” Looks cool, defines the direction of the light, obligatory maybe, but not realistic. The atmosphere in the car is obviously clear. Yeah, there is a spray that you can use (on a real shoot), but it rarely looks good.
And lns flre?" Gaack. As anathema to a pro shooter as a "sh*nk’ is to a golfer. Pore over the negative looking for it, find it, out it goes.
However … there’s also the element of drama, and of intended-use. This is very dramatic lighting. If the star of the show were fighting a bad-guy in that pool of light, why, it’s a spotlight! And so on. Very impressive work, and especially so for being low-poly.