===== From agage@csee.usf.edu: For other large-moon-over-water images, look up Ken Musgrave. ===== From lachie@zip.com.au: A little dark, perhaps. ===== From xeo@home.com: A little on the dark side, but very good look to the models ===== From witoslaw@kki.net.pl: the moon is just TOO BIG ===== From jerry@hoboes.com: That is a good moon image, isn't it? You ran into the same problem I did, which is that the moon looks really tiny if you make it the right size and distance :*) I think what could use the most work is not the water, but those pyramid things in the water. I don't even know what they are! The stars are cool, but you might try distributing them differently; they look too evenly distributed. ===== From Sean_Hamilton@amrcorp.com: Good first image, and I like your starry effect. the rest of the image was too dark to see correctly on both of my computers, even with the brightness turned up all the way. ===== From gregj56590@aol.com: Poor contrast and/or lighting. ===== From tlyons@gnn.com: too dark to see details, maybe change your assumed gamma? ===== From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de: I really wonder what took the image so long to render on such a fast machine. The atmosphere of the image is quite good and credible, but it lacks a bit visible details. ===== From johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu: Ok, but the rocks are too regular and geometric. ===== From Varyk@aol.com: I think a smaller moon, while less dramatic, would have looked more reali= stic. Perhaps a black disk centered on the other side of the moon, fadin= g from opaque to transparent, would simulate the brightness of the moon d= rowning out nearby stars, also a similar effect for the horizon (or even = some part of you star placement code making placement less likely the clo= ser you are to the horizon.)(or maybe reducing the size of the star-spher= es so ones near horizon appear fainter) These astronomer's suggestions b= eing made, nice first entry! Mine too! ===== From gmccarter@hotmail.com: Powerful lighting. Good concept. But the moon is at least 4x bigger than it should be, even allowing for artistic license. Did you know that the real moon actually appears to be only 1/2-degree wide? ===== From Martial@Biosys.net: Well nice work for the stars but I don't think that is better than light. Too long time rendering for me (P100). For all Good work and idea!