=====
From sshaw@fas.harvard.edu:
I am impressed that you got the two solid illusions to line up in the same
image.  Since you show three different illusions in the image, your area
is large enough that the perspective gets screwed up by the parallel rays.

=====
From trioker@wanadoo.fr:
It's noticeable that three of us had the same idea of the "impossible" cube :
Jack Kelly, John Hoerr and I (JMarc Genevey). 
Of course, nearly each and every of Escher's picures could fit perfectly the
theme !

=====
From nijman@nmtrix.com:
Well done.

=====
From gregj56590@aol.com:
Nicely draws viewer's attention for a while: two simple tricks and one complex
ones.
=====
From mar@physics.usyd.edu.au:
Nice illusions, well constructed. I want to know what's on the third table!

=====
From johnson@pharmacy.arizona.edu:
Like it! The shadows on the cube give it way, slightly, but the triangle
illusion is flawless!

=====
From gmccarter@hotmail.com:
I like the attention to detail in areas such as the reflective floor, woodgrain
orientation, and soft lighting.  The top-down viewpoint is disturbing -- either
the camera is 10-feet high, or the scene objects are only a few inches tall. 
Also, there is no clue as to the purpose of this "exhibition".  A good first
entry.

=====
From clem@dhol.com:
Nice use of the impossible object theme.  The John Cage 
pictures are clever, much like some of the things he did to 
music.

=====
From sdevet@istar.ca:
Wow.. a lot of these boxes this round.

The triangle looks great, but I don't really get what the illusion is in
the face...

Nice work!


=====
From file:
Nicely done.