=====
From chris@bluelectrode.com:
The flowers, butterfly, and tic-tac man could stand some more detail.  The grass
is well done and very realistic.  The adequate use of the theme is a little
sparse.

Overall, good job.

=====
From soulmates@gci.net:
A brave effort. However, doing a scene this close-up, it 
would be nice to see more detail in the large yellow 
flowers and the butterfly.

=====
From YaelParis@operamail.com:
Nice layout, but it seems (and you said!) that you didn't make the thoughest
part of the work. The body of the butterfly is far too simple (especially
compared to the very detailed wings !)


=====
From tom@tomandlu.force9.co.uk:
Seems off-topic and the yellow flowers are far too angular. Like the little
pink ones.

=====
From ameede@madmac.com:
ameede@madmac.com
=====
From CHRIS_DARCY@YAHOO.COM:
The Grass and white flowers are wonderful.



=====
From Alain.Culos@bigfoot.com:
And many happy returns to your 'happy new year 2000' in your comments section.
OK, that's nice, but that's not a garden per se, you say 'field' yourself,
where
I would rather have used meadow, still ... not a garden. You were really
targeting the hexagon topic ;-).
OK, I'm playing on words, your submission is not bad at all after all, to say
the least of what is an impressive meadow, very well done, really.
If the big yellow flowers were not as geometrical, then the whole thing would
look a lot more realistic.

=====
From albiaprime@aol.com:
Technical - lovely varied grass, however as there is No description of how you
made it, so 
 we cannot comment, thus half marks (if we had knowm that you did all that grass
yourself....)
Artistic - not bad, butterfly a bit over bearing
Theme - the country field is not a garden, sorry

=====
From mar@physics.usyd.edu.au:
That is indeed a powerful grass macro - it looks great. The butterfly wings
look more like a low-quality scan, and your flowers are a bit simple and
unrealistic. More work on shaping and texturing more original objects would
improve this image.