=====
From rgow@lanset.com:
Interesting interpretation of theme well executed.  High marks.

=====
From shay@simcoparts.com:
Very well done. The layout of the entire screen is very nice to look at. The
mountains appear to be several miles high due to their scale in relation to the
planet. I'm assuming that the planetary dimensions, etc. are genuine. This
makes the image very interesting, and it held my interest long enough to
carefully read all of the information.



=====
From maarten_hofman@hotmail.com:
This image demonstrates that even within the limited scope of the described
topic, it is still possible to have a result that is both original and
beautiful.
=====
From ruy@hipernet.com.br:
Wow...

=====
From batronyx@alliancecable.net:
I imagine this is the sort of thing Spock and T'pol see when they look into
their little viewfinders during planetary surveys.

=====
From charliemc@prodigy.net:
good idea and well done

=====
From martin@simaltech.com:
Neat idea with the overlay, but it kind of detracts from the 3D image we're
trying to judge.
=====
From jrcsurvey@aol.com:
An interesting take on the art of landscape.  There is a sense of awe 
generated by use of actual data for the reconstruction.  The raytracer 
becomes an active link in creating a visual impression retrieved remotely 
from the planet.

=====
From chris_hormann@gmx.de:
Nice work although quite far fetched interpretation of course.
I'm missing information on:
 - how far the height scale is exaggerated
 - what data you used for texturing
 - where i can obtain your processed geometry data :-)

=====
From clem@dhol.org:
Borderline for topic.  A simple planet surface would be 
better.  The "survey" junk just detracts.

=====
From p_chan@shaw.ca:
Excellent work creating the surface of the planet.

=====
From glenn@mccarters.net:
I like many many things about this image.

=====
From hgregory3a@aol.com:
nice image