=====
From djconnel@flash.net:

The cathedral is nicely modeled, but it doesn't really interface with
the rest of the scene.  Also, the texturing could be improved.

The trees and the terrain are a bit weak.  Also, the lighting could use
some improvement.

Topicality : No engineering aspects are really stressed here.

=====
From sonya_roberts@geocities.com:
Very nicely modelled, but the texturing is too unrealistic to match the amount
of work you've obviously put into creating the stucture itself.  There's also
something a bit odd about the lighting.  Work on these aspects, and I expect to
see you scoring in the top 10-20% in future rounds.

=====
From daves@wkpowerlink.com:
A good model, but the textures come across as too cartoony...

=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Textures on the cathedral were a bit too smooth, thus it lacked a sense of
scale.  Looks like a model of a cathedral.  Nice design and good strong
colors.  Those trees have gotta go! <grin>  Nackground landscape is very nice.

=====
From gmccarter@hotmail.com:
Good modelling and detail, but placing the sun behind the camera
makes a flat, shadowless rendering.

=====
From ethelm@bigfoot.com:
A nice image.
More work needed on trees.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Although the overall construction and design is nice, the model seems very flat
and boring. Here's why:
- The camera angle is is far too high and suggests that the building is very
small.
- The surface lacks structure
- The lighting is very boring.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nicely modelled, but the colors are a bit garish and unrealistic.
It's made of stone and metal, not Legos.


=====
From r@dial-up42.webbernet.net>:
I really like the roof and the buttresses, and the background is nice, but the
overall proportions of the building seem very strange, narrow and unstable.