=====
From jknepley@nyx.net:
The sky looks like a backdrop (the clouds don't fade away on a plane, but rather
colide with the ground).
=====
From djconnel@flash.net:
The airship is a nice piece of work!  The hanger is also quite nice.

Re schematics -- I am surprised nothing was available.  Perhaps a check of the
library would have helped -- books aren't dead yet :).

The factors holding this one back were, as noted, the sky and the tarmac.  A
bit
more elements to the scene would have helped as well.

Overall, though, it is an impressive shot -- I find myself looking at it
over and over, as the representation of the airship is quite striking.

Dan
 
=====
From castlewrks@aol.com:
The three items in this composition are excellent objects in and of themselves.
However they are the only three objects in the picture.  The flavor of the era
and the intensity of the image could be helped by the addition of other ground
vehicles, possibly figures in the distance, all of which add to the viewers 
interpretation of the scale of the objects and image as a whole.  

=====
From sonya_roberts@geocities.com:
Well done...the dirigible is very nicely modelled, and I like the wierd,
science-fictionish look of the airship hanger.  Your background is a bit too
spare though; it has that "I used an infinite plain" look to it.  Some hills
and distant mountains, or a couple outbuildings and a fence, would have
improved the image.  Overall, quite nicely done.

=====
From kaustin@tgn.net:
Despite the inherent 'emptiness' of an image of a blimp landing, your image
has the feel of an old photograph. The building could use a bit more detail,
but overall I like the image.

=====
From daves@wkpowerlink.com:
Neat idea, it's a thought-provoker for sure. The ships looked great, but 
something was needed in the foreground, if nothing else, for contrast.
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Textures could use some work.  Modeling on the airships is quite good.

=====
From bill@apocalypse.org:
I love blimps, great subject material!

=====
From gmccarter@hotmail.com:
Wonderful modelling, but the poor sky & featureless horizon ruins the image!
Scene desperately needs a few (very distant) trees, buildings, poles, etc.
I would also tilt the camera up slightly, to emphasize the sky rather than the
ground.
This scene is a great example of how fine textures helps to enhance realism.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Good book - read it years ago !

=====
From wozzeck@club-internet.fr:
Good idea. I think it could be improved by adding "life" to it: jeeps, people,
cables lying...

=====
From ethelm@bigfoot.com:
Very well done.
The image weakened by the unnatural appearance of the sky, 
the ground and the too perfect finish of the hangar.

=====
From jaime@ctav.es:
Hey, Bud, nice first entry! Good Luck!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
There was never such a huge gap between the fins and the rudders on real
airships,
even the first Zeppelin LZ1 had a better solution there :)
Nice modelling otherwise, though the hall looks a bit artificial.

=====
From c_et_d@club-internet.fr:
Great work on the airship, but as you say yourself, you are not very =
satisfied with the floor texture and it takes half the scene. One more =
time the airship is great, use it in a other scene.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The airfield is kinda barren; could use a few cracks or dandelions in the
extreme foreground. Or some soldiers and jeeps would be even better.
Nice modelling on the airships and the hangar.


=====
From r@dial-up27.webbernet.net>:
I find the design of the hangar quite interesting.  Is that real or did you
dream it up?  Is it realistic for the dirigible to fly in without tiedowns or
lead lines?.  With no people/vehicles/equipment/etc. visible the image seems
just a bit sterile.  The second dirigible in the background does help.


=====
From r@bowerbird.cc.uq.edu.au>:
Perhaps a smoother airship?
Notable for originality, composition, textures, modelling