===== From spanky@wpi.edu: The swans look like wooden toys and everything looks like you added crand to it, but otherwise decent scene ===== From mikko.oksalahti@dosetek.varian.com: Good autumn mood. ===== From gregj56590@aol.com: Excellent image, except for unnaturally fat branches on tree. ===== From d97ta@efd.lth.se: lovely fairy tale atmosphere... this one also (like sunset.jpg) has none of the all too often seen sterility of raytracing. too bad about the hovering trees though. the forest skyline in the background has no forest behind it... ===== From ewgr@abaddon.globalnet.co.uk: You've made a Christmas card. ;-) Swans bodies should be a little larger in relation to neck/head. Nice pic though. ===== From buck@cs.byu.edu: Nice swans, trees. It looks kind of barren, like a forest after a fire or something. The haze does a lot to reinforce that idea, I think. The leaves are a nice touch. ===== From djconnel@flash.net: More detail on how you rendered this is critical to receiving full credit for original work. It is very nice, but at least two of the swans look identical. It is important to vary poses, details in pattern, or etc to avoid the photocopy look. Still, it is an interesting image, with a very non-photorealistic feel to it. ===== From bill@apocalypse.org: great swans, water looks odd, I wonder how you did it. ===== From ethelm@bigfoot.com: Unusual and artistic. When the same object is repeated such as trees and swans, a change in scale and rotation helps make this less obvious and thus, more natural. ===== From fisher2@pobox.upenn.edu: Looks like a painting. :) ===== From gmccarter@hotmail.com: Really awful water texture, but everything else is pretty nice. Swan bodies seem small compared to their heads, and seem to be sitting too high in the water. Trees are skeleton-like. I like the fog and the various objects on the water surface. ===== From r@fermi.lancs.ac.uk: Quite atmospheric, a bit sharp. I would have had one swan instead of three identical, or put the others further.