Here are two versions. Which do you guys think is better? Any crits welcome Thanks.
or
I like the first one better.
The second one is blurred, and some of the detail is lost with it.
The first one’s real colorful and vibrant, the second one’s nice too with more of a photo look.
i like the second one better cause it has that sorta blurred photo look. the first one is to crisp… looks quite computer. another thing i noticed is that it has no shadows. the flare in the corner should probably be where the light is coming from. and it all looks like its front lit— work on your lighting.
also work on some depth of field. the focus of your image should be a little more focused then the second image, but the backround should be a bit blurred.
Why not Greek?
Are you a sports anti-fan? Just kidding - cool work.
shadows, shadows where the heck are them?
me likes the second version better, cause when it’s blured it’s more composed with the trees, grass, leafes etc. 
regards
Thanks for the comments so far. The lens flare was a last minute add on done in photoshop do you guys think it would look better without or left as is?
I think that the whole thing is disproportional… the bath is small and the top is huge… maybe try to make the proportions better to get a more realistic object… from the two I like the first one better though… because of the colours…but I still think the whole thing is out of proportion,
md01
I agree. The first one is better. But… neither one of them is, ahh, terribly good yet.
A photographer would never let his camera be out of focus, and he would never let his lens flare like that. (Well do I know that you put that “lens flare” in… now, take it out.)
The lighting of the scene also would not look like that. Look closely! Here we have a brilliant sunlit day, enough to flare the lens in three places, and it casts no shadows from the posts. Amazingly, it lights the front face of the top of the temple perfectly, evenly, equally with all the rest. And again, no shadows. In fact, look closely at those little columns and the ones on the left are lit from the right, the ones on the right are lit from the left, and the source of light seems to be somewhere inside; but where?
Now, we look for evidence of scale. Is this a huge temple or a close-up of a Roman bathtub? First we see that the top is huge compared to the rest of it, and now those posts seem stubby. (Maybe it is a bathtub!) Looking at the trees they look like shrubbery, and since we all know how big a vine is, they must be shrubbery. Yet what you are really sending out here is a bunch of conflicting visual cues, until the eyes finally can’t accept or understand it.
I’m sorry for the hours of render-time, but you’ll need to re-design and then recompose, then relight this picture before you can proceed to doing any detailed rendering of it. I’m sure that you can keep the model-pieces you’ve built, nothing wrong with the textures and so-on, but this picture, as built now, simply doesn’t work for me.
Lol, man - that’s what 3d programs were made for - not to keep to reality as stron as we can - in 3d programs cameras float in the air and we can get shots that would be impossible to take IRL.
very nice, the only thing it needs is a pretty girl bathing there 
Is something wrong with me? i cant notice anything different.except the grass in the second photo are slightly blurred.Maybe i need glasses for near vision…