Looks good! I especially like her expression, which neatly sums up the mood of the whole scene.
Another virtue is the use of depth of field, and the contrast of sinister blue light vs. the warm indoor light.
I do have mixed feelings about that blue light, though. It's not a lack of realism - even if it were a cheat, it's "realistic" if it enhances the impression of reality, whether or not it follows some set of rules. But it seems somehow unmotivated: what is it? We don't need to know, but we would like to have some basis for speculation. It also confuses things a little; is the woman merely suspicious, or is she seeing something with a blue glow and is actively scared?
One other small thing: I would suggest some postwork on her shoulder, to eliminate the bits of skin and the irregular hem. Texture mapping is hard! Her neckline is completely successful, IMO.
Overall, it's dramatic and highly effective. Good work!
I agree using DOF would make this image more effective, though I can see to some effect (table and props) it was used (or post worked in), just not strong enough!
I have to also agree with the blue light there, it's simply too strong and from the angle of it, it looks like there's a door open with a full, bright moon light outside. If there was actually an open door behind her, that would be different, but she's right in front of the wall where there shouldn't be any lights coming in from behind her, at least not that strong.
People try that trick of "realism" with blue lights, and most really don't achieve, I've seen plenty where it just looks rather like a different color lighted up stage instead, and it especially kills the quality when they don't add shadows to all the lights. In this case, he did apply shadows to the blue light, but looks like deep shadow maps which are extremely ugly and unrealistic.
I do disagree with the shoulder post work, however. If you download the image, you'll see that the dress is actually "cut" and sown that way (if that's what you're talking about on her right shoulder). The only problem I see when I zoomed in is it's missing occlusion to make this image look more convincing. The shoulders and other areas do look "blah" without occlusion present. Either there's no UberEnvironment light (IBL in Poser language), or if it's present, there's too many distant lights used which killed the effect, or the Maximum Trace Distance is set very minimal, or the combination of too many distant lights and MTD being set too low. Using too many distant (or other Daz default) lights do kill the purpose of the UberEnvironment light.
Bumps, you'll notice a lot of it on her eyes and dress when you download the image, especially on her eyes. They look way too hard and very odd. Don't know if that was the purpose or not, but the eyes do look scary lol. Everything else looks fine.
All in all I gotta say pretty good work.
Just looked at this critique again. Two years later, I would rate the image higher, especially on vision and technique. Maybe just a little lower on impact, since the factors I mentioned haven't changed, of course, and impact is really where they have their effect. Overall the rating would be higher, though - at least a solid 4 in the general rating.
Sure enough, the dress shoulder is correct. (I hadn't downloaded it before, to see it that close up.) OTOH, it was rather "obviously wrong" at the much smaller full-view resolution. I don't know if I always succeed, but I do like for all the essentials - everything except really fine detail - to be visible at a scale where everything is visible on the screen at once. (Which is what I use full-view resolution for.)
True about the eyes - in contrast to the hemline, it really is a problem, but it doesn't look like one at less than the highest resolution.
I've struggled with IBL in Poser, and have not reached the skill level where I think my work looks better with it than without. I'd love to have radiosity, but that would probably make renders take weeks instead of hours. Will keep working on it though!