=====
From spanky@wpi.edu:

The three trees look like clones, and the bird looks out of place.  These two
factors take away from what I think is a lovely scene.
=====
From gregj56590@aol.com:
This image shows the power of Bryce!  Might have been better to leave out the
bird.
=====
From dale@midnightgarden.com:

Rotating the trees around would give the impression that they are 3 different
trees.
=====
From ewgr@abaddon.globalnet.co.uk:
I hope you do give yourself more time next spin around, you show promise. The
elephants and tusks would have been excellent.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Concept ok. Need to rotate the trees to prevent them looking like clones


=====
From buck@cs.byu.edu:
Nice sky and plants.  The bird could use more definition and perhaps
some texture.

=====
From jaime@ctav.es:
Don't be so hard, it's not a bad idea. But some hours after dealine aren't
enough to make something better. Give it more time next round!

=====
From djconnel@flash.net:
You clearly had a good concept, and for 3 hours did a nice job,
buy I recommend trying POV -- it produces consistently better
results than Bryce.


=====
From fisher2@pobox.upenn.edu:
Bird is flat and really discracts from the rest of the scene.  The water
could use some ripples.  

=====
From gmccarter@hotmail.com:
Yes, the bird looks hastily made.  The rest of the scene is fine: serene and
well composed.  The closeup plants are particularly good.  Keep up the good
work.

=====
From peter@table76.demon.co.uk:
The style of this looks almost like old Japanese paintings :-) .