===== From sshaw@fas.harvard.edu: The buildings look good, but a little barren. I can't tell from the image if the ground plan is an actual one from a Roman forum, or if you are just showing the general architectural style. Is this meant to show a particular place? ===== From sammy@cube.net: Very good work! ===== From Martin.Magnusson.7121@student.uu.se: Excellent textures! Excellent sky! Great models too. Marvelous! One thing about the ground though: is it marble too? Should it be? ===== From vandiver@tiac.net: With such an oppressive sky, you'd expect the gound to not have such sharp shadows.. ===== From jerry@hoboes.com: Very, very nice job on the buildings and the sky! The ground looks a bit odd, though (a bit too flat?), and the bases of the trees look like the trees might not be real; too sharp? ===== From gregj56590@aol.com: Wonderful architecture. Like a few other entries this round, just a few problems prevent this from being a masterpiece. Use of same unbroken texture for ground as used in building ruins contrast and creates confusion. ===== From jull43@ij.net: Overall quite nice but everything but the sky and trees have a sameness to them that distracts. Particularly the ground which I thought was paved and if not why would plain dirt look like stone? ===== From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de: Excellent scene and outstanding textures. But there is one thing I do not understand. Although you image file is very large, there are extremely strong visible JPEG artifacts. I can only imagine that you saved it at a low quality setting, reloaded it with artifacts and re-saved it at a higher setting, thus combining the worst of both worlds (big file, ugly quality). In fact, the 8x8-blocking if visible throughout the image. Rendering with a finer radiosity meshing and high quality will make for a stunning image. It's a bit sad to see such a great scene ruined somewhat by using the image conversion software carelessly. ===== From gmccarter@hotmail.com: An impressive structure. Great modelling, but difficult to see a strong connection to "History". ===== From davidwilkinson@cwcom.net: The buildings are good, but the trees and courtyard let it down. ===== From ethelm@bigfoot.com: Has a very authentic look. Well done. ===== From 101741.541@compuserve.com: Certes, le cote "historiciste" de la scene est evident, mais on aurait aime qu'il se passe quelque chose d'un peu plus precis (c'est long la grece antique !) la composition est bonne, la lumiere et les couleurs aussi; attention aux details architecturaux : je ne vois ni triglyphe, ni metope, et l'ordre des colonnes (dorique/ionique/corynthien) est indetectable... ===== From r@pluto.icom-solutions.com: Good texture - looks well worn. The trees are nice but seem to be placed haphazardly. Notable for textures, modelling ===== From r@98cab144.ipt.aol.com: This is a great image overall.... But, the trees cast rather unnatural shadows. Notable for textures, modelling, lighting, originality, composition