=====
From elvish_archer@mailcity.com:
are they on the bottom of the sea or the bottom of aquarium?

=====
From darwallace@earthlink.net:
Sand texture is too coarse... scale it down.

=====
From pbourke@swin.edu.au:
Nice picture but nothing special. Looks like a bunch of geometric
objects gathered together.
=====
From panthus@xtra.co.nz:
Great little jellies. I think the main shell needs a normal pattern. The little
dots of colour in the sand (algae? ameoba? plancton?) work very well and many
people wouldn't think of them.

=====
From marlo.steed@uleth.ca:

nice model bu they need to be part of a larger context.  For instance the sense
of being beneath the water is not there.
=====
From douge@nls.net:
I'm not sure what some of the objects are:  the transparent blue things and the
red and white ball.  Also, it doesn't look like there's any water present.  The
texture on the large shell gets stretched out, as if it isn't mapped properly. 
The lighting is good, and the subtle water-like light effect at the top looks
good.


=====
From tony@j4tb.com:
A nice twist on the topic. Overall the image is nicely composed. The only
complaint is that it doesn't quite capture the underwater feel though I can't
place why.
=====
From gregj56590@aol.com:
It's not the greatest raytracing I've ever seen, but it looks like something
that people might actually buy in a local art gallery, unlike most raytracing.
=====
From alun.thomas@convergys.com:
I like the texturing on the sand and the nearest shell. Its a shame it doesn't
look more like things are actually underwater (maybe some caustics would have
helped?).


=====
From Alain.Culos@bigfoot.com:
Nice, but the object (shell ?) in the upper left corner looks a bit odd.


=====
From StephenF@whoever.com:
Nice work on the shell in the middle... looks good.  The 
broken edges on the rear shell look rather 
manufactured... could use some work to make the edges 
rougher and more natural looking.  The sand looks good 
too.

=====
From sjlen@ndirect.co.uk:
Nice image. 

=====
From went@netcourrier.com:
It is not very realistic

=====
From delfeld@mailcity.com:
Good image.   Non-step functions for angled objects (like sand grains) only work
at a distance.  They suffer in the close-up.  The specks of stuff in the sand
is a nice touch.