=====
From ph.gibone@wanadoo.fr:
I like all the textures, and the idea is great, and I know you wanted to pay
your tribute to Magritte, therefore a little lack of originality, and part of 
the artistic merit goes to Magritte.


=====
From rgow@lanset.com:
Interesting interpretation, and the rockshrooms look good. The similarity in
texture of all the objects is too dominant IMO, but you may have intended it
that way.
=====
From pmccombs@xmission.com:
Looks good. The rail geometry is a bit too pristine.

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

Nice looking image.  I liked the textures and color scheme.  I think the
painting on the easel could have stood out just a bit more (perhaps that was
the intent but I think it could have been more of a rounded edge just to give
it a bit more demarcation between the painting and the background.
=====
From kingofmycastle@gmx.net:
Ths best way to complete an image :-)
=====
From kevinq2000@yahoo.com:
Nice.  Subtle.

=====
From hildurka@simnet.is:
Very interesting context. Gives the viewer great food for thought. The textures
and lighting are great.Great work.


=====
From 25ct@lineone.net:
I think this is a great image. I love the optical illusion 
effect. Good luck.  

=====
From jrcsurvey@msn.com:
Well it's an entertaining take on the Magritte motif.  Appealing use of =
texture and surface.

=====
From p.gibellini@teinos.com:
Very good, indeed!
The colours and the mushrooms are impressive!
;-)

=====
From intertek@one.net:

The first thing you see in the Magritte painting is a perfectly normal =
room with an attractive view. Then it hits you that the view is a =
painting or mostly a painting. His whole image is focused on this. =
There's nothing else out of the ordinary. After looking at it more the =
canvas becomes transparent. It's there but you can some how see through =
it. But you can't see through canvas. Is there a tree in the real =
landscape? But remember there isn't a "real" landscape, the background =
and the canvas are both part of a Magritte painting. So on it goes =
asking more questions than it answers.

You don't need to have an easel in your image. Magritte needed it or =
he'd have a very dull image. Yours stands on it's own. In fact the easel =
is keeping me from looking fully at the odd place you have brought me =
to. I want to know all about these petrified giant mushrooms. Is this =
Earth? It must be a place tours go through since there's a rail around =
it. What's on the other side of the door hole? And why are these things =
growing in rows - was this a garden? That's the stuff I want to know =
about! That is I'm sure why Magritte started with such a mundane =
environment.

Listen you've got a good thing going here - you don't need a Magritte =
gimmick. Why don't you put in paving stones along the path, put some =
little details in like a small plaque maybe an empty bag of peanuts, and =
work a bit with how the mushrooms and rocky hill behind them join with =
the ground (they look like they are sitting on a table top rather than =
going into the ground).

-- Michael


=====
From shay@simcoparts.com:
Even though the main theme of this painting was 
"borrowed", your mushrooms and scene provide a lot of 
interest for the picture. Your setting is very intriuging to 
me. The fence, the "doorway" in the wall, the 
mushrooms themselves. The whole thing is very 
beautiful. I think that you should have left the easel out. 
The picture is certainly surreal without it, and the idyllic 
setting of Magritte's painting is IMO much more suited to 
that type of sentiment.


=====
From file:
I didn't praise this picture enough when I voted for it.  If I don't win (and I
don't think I will) this is the image I want to win.  It's beautiful and
intelligent.  A work well done.