

                                    13glass1
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Gorgeous, intricate image.  Banding on stonework is a bit too contrasty for a
church, IMHO.  Patterns on windows are a bit too small--detail is lost.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
WOW.  Very cool. 20-20-20

=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
More to the architecture.. And the lightning is too bright.
Looks like the building was blasted with a light caster, or something.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

A lot of work in this... Good picture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bjmjcgl@wantree.com.au:
Wow... the stained glass windows look great..not to leave out the rest of the
image!  Just glad I wasnt the one creating this!


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Amazing!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow!  ...it remonds me of that "mosque" winner in the Architecture round (old
comp).

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Would love to see it rendered as you intended.  Is everything there in the
zip file?
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
In a word, stunning. The stained glass windows are a marvel in and 
of themselves. I would be interested in seeing it with the atmosphere,
but four months is a little long to render something, no matter how nice.


=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
The atmospheric effects would have helped. This image would have fared better in
an architecture
competition, not a glass one. It's stunning nonetheless.

=====
From federico@nuclecu.unam.mx:

*very* nice scene!!!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A bit too glossy


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Complexity doesn't always make images nice to look at.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like the way the light from the stained glass appears on the floor, however, I
would have like to have seen more light coming in from BEHIND the window.
Very nice though, I like it very much.

=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
Beautiful picture.


=====
From mbrown@spry.com:
Twice in a row.. you in my mind are as good if not better than Dan Farmer. 
Love the archetecture..

=====
From daxrembo@bcl.net:
When I first saw this image, I thought "All this needs is some moody
atmosphere".
I hope you get to see it rendered the way you wanted.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not too bad.   Unfortunately, some of the non-window textures are a bit
plastic-feeling, lending the result a slightly `dolls-house' feeling.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great details! One bad thing: I don't really like the big highlight over the
cross. 

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The illumination seems rather unnatural with one bright central light.
Brilliant work everything else!

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the cathedral, but I think that you are right that atmospheric effects
would have added alot to the image. The only thing I didn't really like was the
really bright reflection of the light in the center of the image. Other than
that though, great image!

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
I like this picture very much.  The white spot under the main window
is a bit distracting, though.  The reflections on the stones should
not be as strong as they are in the pictures (it looks like all stones
are covered with ten layers of varnish).  Even if rendering would be
slower, I think that some grainy bumpmap would improve the appearance
of the stones.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is excellent! It would look better with some atmosphere, but as
you said in your text file, 120 days (estimated) is a long time!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Excellent work. Very refreshing to see something besides vases and drinking
glasses!

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the shape of the big round window in the middle.  Good artistic marks,
i couldn't rate you higher technically because you admitted to 'borrowing' the
design.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition, modelling


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Wonderful Detail
Notable for composition, lighting, modelling



                                    13glass2
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cute idea, execution is a bit "plastic".  Seems almost an afterthought when
compared to your cathedral scene.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Migawd, how do you do it Nathan?  TWO images in one competition that I think are
worth 20-20-20...lovely image.
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The grass and flowers look a little stiff but the ants and marbles are very well
done


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nathan, where do you find the time to create so many marvelously detailed 
images!?



=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
This one is much better than the cathedral. It's more interesting.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Good job. Humor is so needed in this competition. Thanks. I was about to die
from boredom looking at all of the bottles and glasses.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
KILL THE ANTS!!!!!!!


=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Flowers and grass seem too stiff, artificial and regular.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Great concept, I love the great sense of motion in the flying marble and in the
ants.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very lively and original. One tiny nitpick: the ants and dirt texture in the
foreground
are very good; but the perfectly straight and vertical grass + flowers in the
bg. is kinda distracting. The depth blur helps, but randomly oriented curved
blades would've been better.
(lathe objects maybe? torus segments?)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice concept.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Hopefully not too many ants were injured during the modelling.
Notable for originality



                                    1750view
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Beautiful scene, well composed, great colors.  Just a touch too much image
mapping, but at least it was effectively used.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nice work...
The glass texture is not so good, but it is a nice picture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bjmjcgl@wantree.com.au:
Wow.. A terrific image.  7 Days to render...I dont think I'd have enough
patience to wait that long!  


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Great idea - and you pulled it off well.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Beautiful! Maybe not the most original image, but surely one of the more
visually stunning!

=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like this very much.  The image on the ceiling as well as the appearance of
the bottles is striking.  My wife even commented on how nice this one looked.

=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
I hope you win.


=====
From daxrembo@bcl.net:
Very nice!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I'm speechless. Just 20's.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Superb detail. The photo realistic quality is amazing!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
An excellent image. I especially liked the bevelled edge on the mirror.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
The white area on the ceiling is distracting.  You should lower the reflection
or ambient value for the ceiling.  Nice picture.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Beautiful! The lighting is especially good. (Hope so, after 7 -days- on a
-Pentium 150- !)
The scene composition is excellent, getting each bottle to reflect something
interesting.
I guess you do this for a living...


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for modelling, composition


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Not my cup of tea. Very realistic though.
Notable for composition



                                    1co13-12
                                    --------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Please, stop LSD...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
huh?

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I don't understand the words... or how the relate to the image.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

ethereal.  clever interpretation of the theme.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Dull.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Why did him/her submit that image to Glass?
Because the text is glass? Wow!
That bit.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
That sort of banner work would be great, but I feel there is too much empty
space to do it justice.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Well I think that a little more detail in the image could have helped out alot.
Also I think that if you had put the lighting to higlight the text it would
have made the image a little more intresting.

=====
From ingo@ibm.net:
Maybe I'm not able to give the proper interpretation to the bible, but I think
the
immages is far from hitting the topic...  

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Top idea but your interpretation of the passage fell short. 

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It would've fit the theme better if you'd used the older wording, the one that
goes
"we see but as through a glass, darkly". And maybe used bump-maps and dusty
texture
to make the reflection in the mirror -look- darker and more distorted. The
clouds are
kinda barren - try experimenting with POV's atmosphere features. (a dark cloud
with
shafts of light would really enhance this scene).

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Interesting idea.  I like the starkness but somehow i think you could have done
more...


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The text is too 'in your face'.



                                    1glass4u
                                    --------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Cool backfround effect.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I'm tired of glasses. I want a scene!


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I cannot judge well on technical merit, as you have not given any desciption of
how you created your image.

=====
From daxrembo@bcl.net:
Glasses look cramped, spread them out a little. Tilting the camera really
helped
the image.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nicely surreal feel to the image, lent by the camera angle.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice use of abstract form and structure in this image. The reflections are
nicely done. I wish that something were going on in the image though, it seems
just a little too static.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I found the camera tilt a little distracting. Without it I would have scored
higher
on artistic merit.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
Nice models, but the rendering is not convincing: the material is
something between crystal and metal (looking at the reflections).
Also, there is some aliasing around the edges of the glasses.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The shapes of the glasses are interesting. Could use some jaggie removal at the
edges; maybe different colors of glass. Some non-glass things to reflect or
refract
might also improve the scene.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice red.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Interesting collection of glass ...



                                    24dinner
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very good for a TrueSpace image.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
A very lovely image.  I liked the chandelier, and attention to detail in things
such as
your flooring, the chair rail, the graceful shape of the chairs.  The rose is
spectacular!
I did find the reflections off of the glass backing of the china cabinet a bit
distracting; it's also too bad that the glasses 
on the top shelf are so tall that we really only see their gold rims in this
same reflection.
=====
From jay@map.com:
I like the chandelier.  Too bad the targa to jpeg conversion removed the
detail from the flower.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nice work, i thought to model a chandelier also, but i did not had the time ;^)

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego
=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
I liked this picture a lot, but for some reason there wasn't enough drama for 
me; maybe more mood lighting? :)

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Excellent use of color, lighting, camera angle - great composition.

The wedding photo on the wall somehow doesn't fit though - it stands out as
looking strange.  
Just MHO.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very nice.  Good photorealism.  hint --the fork goes on the left ;-)
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
Such attention to detail. The chandelier alone would have been most people's 
submissions. I personally would have liked to have read more about how
you did it, but I'll have to settle for appreciating it.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
One of the most breathtaking images in the IRTC. The detail and the realism are
amazing. Impressive.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
I didn't think Truespace2 was that capable.. :)

This image has a rather nice soft feel to it. The only thing I'd point out is
the colour of the flames on the candles.. but I know how hard it is to get them
right, there's one in my image. ;)


=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Nice chandelier... crystals are very convincing.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like this one. The perspective throws me a bit, but it's an extremely well
done scene.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Cool.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I liked the use of the flower, and did not see where it would have lost much in
the conversion.  Many of the features were very "hard".  meaning the edges were
too refined.  A very nice image though.  I liked it.

=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
I love the flower, too bad you lost some of the detail in the conversion.  Some
image programs let you change the quality of jpegs, and if you raised it to 96%
instead of the default (usually 75%) you improve the quality a lot.
=====
From daxrembo@bcl.net:
You've done this before, haven't you. ;)

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very good - the flower is especially well-detailed.   Beware with glass
that the light is right - only problem is that light is a bit flooded,
making the glass look a bit flat.   Otherwise, excellent!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I love the rug texture.The chandelier and candle holders particularly stand out
Good work! jmills@stic.net
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I love it!
Let's try to find somthing to complain about... well, scanned images (the photo
on the wall) usually looks mis-placed in ray-traced images.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Very nice and detailed work.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
Wow! I like! Near perfect excuse for using lots of glass!
Only one thing, are those candles light points? The room seems to have a little
to much white light (maybe you should have dimmed the lights a little...)
OK, I lied. Two things. The vase in the middle seems to have a little problem.
It looks like you got polygons in the middle when you swept the vase, and you
probably should have turned up the phong and reflectiveness a little more...
(Did you use the metal shader for the glass too? :) )



=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the lighting in this image a whole lot.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Some wall paper and skirting boards would help with the realism of this image.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This has an incredible level of detail. Great job!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Good composition and camera angle. The wallpaper texture needs more complexity,
though;
and the two silver trays (?) in the cabinet would also benefit from some kind of
bump map.
The table setting is really intricate, and looks great.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice composition.  good colors.  love the pic of you on the wall, nice touch.
The plates are too flat (especially in the china cabinet; 
they reflect light too evenly (flat shadows?)


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition, originality


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures, lighting, modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A lot of detail. But should we be re-creating the real world?
Notable for modelling



                                    2glasses
                                    --------
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
nice curvy tray

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
No more glasses... PLEASE!


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
I like it! Especially the wood.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I liked the tray at the bottom, but think the top edge of the glasses could use
a bit of refining, almost like the glass is too thick.

=====
From daxrembo@bcl.net:
Clean. Nice light.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice glass textures, and well modeled.   The background land lighting let
it down a bit

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very nice glass objects, but the jar is too shiny.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
A max trace level of 10 would probably have yielded the same result.
(And saved several hours rendering time.)

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Excellent detail again. Truly outstanding composition, and use of negative and
positive space.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Your other entry is far superior. Never the less a well executed image.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
A bit too dark.  It would have been nice to put some candles in the
picture (it would also give some depth to the scene) instead of
spotlights.  The default (white) light sources in POV look a bit
artificial when reflected on metallic surfaces.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The things on the tray are nicely rendered, and the rosewood table is very
rich;
but the black void behind them is sort of distracting. A simple dark grey
marble
swirly background would improve the scene a lot.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice still life.  The picture is simple but everything so well colored that you
get high marks from me.  I especially enjoy the green vase and rosewood table.
very nice.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Outstanding clarity; wonderful composition; I'm just not sure that we should be
re-creating the real (photographed) world? On the other hand ...
Notable for modelling, composition, lighting



                                    3blkjal
                                    -------
=====
From akey@cs.utexas.edu:
The checker plane is a bit "cliche", even for a test image.

=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice blocks.  Scene as a whole looks like a test render.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Why those awfull colors on the floor ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The blocks are great, I'd love to seem the used in more than an test scene.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little dull. Spruce it up.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Boooooooooooooo!!!!! Hsssssssssss!!!!!
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice glass texturing.   THe lighting seems to be right, producing the correct
effect.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I hope the low artistical merit didn't hurt. But as you stated this is only
a test render. I wonder what took so long to render...

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Well I wish that there was something going on in the image. The blue and green
are alittle to bright as well.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I would have scored this higher on both the artistic and technical side without
the
green and blue checker plane. 

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This needs more work. The glass blocks are OK for a demonstration of
"glassyness",
(the corners are too sharp, though) BUT the green and blue "test" checkerboard
bg
ruins any hope of this entry winning an art contest. There are tons of
interesting
planar and sky_sphere textures available from older contest entries: if you
don't
have time to create a new one, at least reuse one of these.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Looks like a test image.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Too technical for me.



                                    5hearts
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice idea, execution a bit crowded.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Trippy.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
It looks like it could have been a nice picture, but I personally found that
the
lighting was all wrong. It's very difficult to see much of the details. The
fine points are hidden in the dark sky and shadows. A couple of spotlights
with a little atmosphere could have been more along the lines of what
I think you were aiming for.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
A little dark, but very artistic.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This one is just over my head.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The colour selection was good, but I think the modelling did not fit the
theme.   Possibly a nice concept for 2D work.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Cyber!

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Well you know George Lucas once said that "A special effect without a story is a
pretty boring thing." And you have lots of nice special effects, but nothing
going on.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Nice idea and some excellent texture but I found it hard to focus on any
central
image. A little extra lighting, maybe a spotlight, would have helped.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The glass hearts are very original. The sky's a bit plain (maybe add a
starfield?)
and the overall scene could use some warmer lighting. The gold thread is a nice
touch.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
The teardrops look like little sperms to me. ;)


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
i liked you use of color.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for originality



                                     aahhhh
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Looks very much like five minutes worth of effort.  At least you took a shot.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Ummm...what exactly was your point in submitting this?  You're obviously not
looking for feedback about your modeling or lighting or texture.  Please, if
you don't have a serious entry to make, don't make one at all - it just wastes
the judges time.  We're volunteers, you know.

=====
From dster@syix.com:
intestines, cow stomachs and sphincters?



=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
... and it took me 10 seconds to see that's bullshit !


=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
Is there glass in this picture?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
That's really cheap. And you didn't even make the texture!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Somehow I'm less than impressed. I feel repulsed, even offended by this image.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Oh, man.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Too much tiling, and not enough design has gone into this.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
what the heck?
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Where's the glass?

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
What's that?

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
For a throw together, its not too bad. 

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Well it took me only five seconds to vote on your image...

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
This could have gone a long way with some extra effort.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This does not seem to have much to do with glass; looks more like a block of
Jello
made from giant skin cells.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
"It took about 5 minutes".


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
All those poor tormented (naked) bodies used as textures. Have to give high
marks for that.
Notable for originality



                                    abandona
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent image.  Textures, colors, modelling, composition, all first-rate.
Top marks.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
I like this image!  Very realistically rendered - the peeling stucco and the old
curtains hanging behind the broken window are great.  I also like how the
shuuters are missing slats.  Great attention to detail in this image.  Keep
muddling along!
=====
From jay@map.com:
I'm having trouble seeing the (broken) glass in this image, though I do love how
the casement (the wood) turned out.


=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:

Interesting wood texture


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Nice picture, but the glass is almost invisible.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice Picture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Well done! A suggestion: add some depth to the bricks with either a bump-map
or another HF (you're good at those).

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great job on the window and shutters but I don't see any broken glass and what
is
that brown stuff on the walls?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Great textures!
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
The easy way would have been to have the shutters both closed, but open at
different angles gives just the right look to the scene. One comment, a softer,
perhaphs lightly orange or red, light would have done an evening look.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
hmmm I like the picture but could not see th broken glass you refer to in the
desc.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Although this image would have been better suited for the FLIGHT competition,
it's still amazing
Only you can't really see the broken glass...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Current topic is glass (yes, your image agrees, but your textfile doesn't). Nice
image.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Well, It's realistic.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like the shadows on this, and the fabrik inside the windows.  Very nice
image.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice.   I like the understating of the image.   Must admit that it took quite
a while to see that breakages, and the image was nice without!   Glass is
nice like that though.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very beautifully rendered image. 

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Unbelievable

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Beatiful!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Wow! Great image, I really enjoyed this one!
A little higher JPEG quality would not have hurt. The image shows obvious
artifacts.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice image, but aren't the bricks a little small?

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Well done. An excellent effort all round.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is so close to perfection! The only problems are that the bricks seem to
be too small, and they are too smooth. But, overall, the scene is beautiful!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Good color and scene composition. The peeling paint is a neat effect.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
photographic quality.
The only missing are little holes where the missing window slats should fit
into.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition, modelling


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures, composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Had to look twice to see what was broken
Notable for lighting


From web_user@steinkjer3-10.ppp.sn.no:
Very good textures, the wall, and the window really look old. Nice colour scheme
too.
Notable for composition, textures



                                    abstrait
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
With no description, I cannot rate technical merit.  This was, however, the
poorest of your seven submissions.

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Please please please give more description of how you create the images!!!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Incredible. Great color effects!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
There's that logo again!

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
Too many colors. My brain hurts.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Huh?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Trippy! This one is cool. Or maybe it's just midnight. Whichever, it ended in
your favor.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That's enough naxos.



=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I would have like to have known what you rendered this in, and how. 

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Wonderful colours!!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Too colorful for my taste. Nice effects, still.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice abstract image. What hardware, and software did you use?

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
I like this scene, but the text file is missing some important info,
like Renderer???, Hardware???, Tools???

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very, umm, colorful. It's shiny, so I -guess- its on topic for "glass";
but kinda abstract for my tastes...

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
lots of colors.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
i liked the interplay of light and color
Notable for originality, composition


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for originality


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
good use of color & mix of texture; visually appealing; good depth & balance
Notable for originality, textures, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
To violent



                                    acatmos
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very interesting concept, but the scene needs more development.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice lighting effect with the window (although it is a bit too orange)

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Blobby

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Cute, and a little different. Points for originality.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
This is one of my faves! It's got something really cute and warm about it...
GOOD WORK!

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Nice lighting effects!


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Injuries must really suck for them. How 'bout the T2 effect next time? Or just
melt the bugger (Reverse T2)


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That room setup look exactly like the one 
in the POV docs at section 4.9.4.3 of something.
Interesting blobs.

=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
PLEASE, Use your OWN images.  The use of the image from the POV documentation is
VERY TACKY!

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The problem with glass is that all the texture comes from the background.
Here, it is hard to see the characters, as there is very little background
to fill in the gaps.


=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Quite ugly seams and edges. Fun to look at anyway.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Well the blob people could have used a little more detail.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Increase the sample rate on the atmosphereic effect to remove those banding
artifacts.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is funny! The window and atmosphere seem to be straight from the POV-Ray
tutorial scenes. It might have been better to change that a little.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Looks more like corn-syrup men than glass men; make 'em more angular and
crystalline.
You might want to add caustics, too. Nice, rich lighting, though.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
made me smile.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice colours



                                    accident
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Delightfully funny scene.  Colors and modelling could use some work, but the
concept is great!

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
LOL! - Very amusing image.  I like the resigned look on the little man's face. 
I'm wondering not only how he got in the bottle but why he's naked too *GRIN*.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The texture on the table-top is most pecular.  It looks like a highly reflective
surface reflecting various coloured lights, but obviously these lights don't
actually exist.  nice effect.  


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good idea...
Please, take care of the wild angled camera...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Very amusing. I like the colors on the table.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Did you go to the Paul T Dawson school of Colors?  :-)
Wonderful detail!  The blob-body in the bottle looks great...

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Great interpretation of the theme!
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   The problem is just trying to decide what to look at. The guy in the bottle?
The forest out the window? It looks like a jumble of images that were
thrown in there just for the sake of having a buisier picture. In this case
though, it works.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cute. Cool image.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like the irridecence in the table top and the plants outside the window

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Heh.   Very nice pose on the character.

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
How did he get in there?  :-)

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The neon colors are a little cartoony, but other than that nice image.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Different !

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I found the colours to chaotic.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Cool iridescent texture for the table! And the tree outside the window is
impressive
(before I read the text, I assumed it was a scanned pixmap). One nitpick: the
unlucky
guy in the bottle either needs toes, or a sock texture-map.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice theme.  But what was the doing shipbuilding naked?


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
it made me laugh. thanks! your window was too dark, sob.
Notable for originality, modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Wondeful humour. I think the toes on his left foot have found a way out of the
bottle.
Notable for originality



                                    akstaing
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice scene, if a bit sterile.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The wood on the desk and shelves (I can sort-of see a wood grain pattern) is so
fine that it seems just to be a plain tan texture.  Is this what you were
after?

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice wood texture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great image. Very realistic. I like the nicks taken out of the edge of the
glass.
The dark red curves in the wine look kind of strange, though.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The big empty counter space on the front right part of the image doesn't fit,
was something removed?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Unexciting and unoriginal.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I have a 183 of these things to look at. Too many glasses. Be more origional
next time and you'll do a lot better.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very nice lamp!

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
Oh look, a glass dart board!  :-)

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Nice ideas, I like the dart board lamp shed. The wine glass in the foreground
looks somehow "flat".

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice photorealistic quality.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The scene was a little to sparse for my liking.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The glasses and the lampshade are nice; but the wooden counter is a bit plain;
needs more complexity in the wood texture; + maybe some coasters or something.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Glass darts?



                                    albufam
                                    -------
=====
From jay@map.com:
The white/black speckled strip behind the table seems a bit too reflective, and
the
reflection of the snow globe on the picture seems rather bright.  If I recall
correctly,
raising the diffuse parameter for the finish of the glass on the picture will
correct that.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice baby, anyway!
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
very nice snow-ball

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Smoking near your kids? Shame! ;)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Ditch the photos. They are annoying. It's not that they are bad photos, but that
when making a piece of reality, it's rather cheesy to throw in a piece of
reality. Now if you could model Irene, you'd win (provided you could fit the
topic)


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice texturing - well done with the cigarette smoke :)

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The cigarette smoke is great (except that I don't like smoking ;-)
The background appears a bit boring and too brightly lit.
But for a first-time, I can only say "Wow!"

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The reflection of the snowglobe looks a little too bright to be realistic,
almost as if it were its own light source. Other than that, nice composition.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice scene; fairly realistic.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice cigarette smoke.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
All a little too perfect.



                                     alone
                                     -----
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nicely done.  The rose is quite good.  The foil label on the neck of the bottle
looks particularly realistic.  I like the shape of your wine glasses - very
nice.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Nice scene, but the blue background manages to take over the whole scene

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Crisp, rich colors. Leaves a nice impression. But the bubbly should have bubbles
in it, don't you think? :) Good work!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice rose. everything else isn't very origional.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Nice rose!
Why is the top of the bottle sealed off?

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Well modelled, though many textures are a bit plastic.   One tip for glass
tables is to ensure that there is some pattern on the floor below (it can
be extremely simple).   This will help the eye perceive what's going on.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
As to your problem of keeping the champagne yellow in front of a dark
background: real champagne has very little color of its own and really
looks very dark when viewed against a dark background.
Best solution is always to choose a viewpoint where the liquid is seen
in front of a white background (like a table cloth or a napkin e. g.).
So as a result of your trying to make it yellow it looks very much
unlike champagne.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Well I wouldn't say it is that bad, the liquid in the glass is a little too
yellow for me, but thats certainly only a matter of taste. Nice image.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Feeling a bit blue? Nice rose + bottle

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The yellow champagne in the glass contrasts very nicely with the blue
background;
but the other shade of yellow in the lampshade doesn't go as well. Maybe a red
velvet lampshade (to go with the rose) would have been better.
The rose model is very lifelike; and the foil texture on the bottle is good
too.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice rose.  The leaves need some texture work.
Overall good color.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition, modelling



                                     ammo-5
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Need some description.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nothing to see...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Why the small version?
=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Deja-vu .... this appears to be a test render for your other entry. Please don't
enter the same image more than once -- some of us have slow connections and
it's difficult to get through all the images as it is.


=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
I can hardly see this thumbnail.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Same as other. Be careful in the future to avoid this. Repetition generally
hurst scores.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Submitting the same image twice, no matter how bad they are, doesn't increase
your score.

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Ya, that was REALLY good.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
This is extremely boring.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
Should spend more time on scene setup.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
What exactly is it?

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
This is almost identical to your other image ! Big mark down on this one. I rate

the best of the two as if this one wasn't submitted.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Hmmm. A shot glass with a bullet in it. This should win an award for "most
tenuous
connection to topic". If you're going to do an "ammo" + "glass" crossover, I
would
recommend something more challenging, like maybe a glass cabinet in a gun shop.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
size too small.



                                    ammo-51
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Better than the other scene, but still very unfinished, and in need of
explanation.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
not understood...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Without a description I can't judge anything!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Im not sure that I understand what this is supposed to be. A bullet sitting in
something?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Good lighting


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Looks good! A little too plain for my tastes.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Yeah. That was great. </sarcasm>
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Again, boring

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Two images of exactly the same thing, just isn't too interesting to look at.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Looks better than ammo-1

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
See "ammo-5.jpg" above.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
size was too small. it does not seem to use antialias. it does have potential.



                                      ants
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very attractive image.  Seems bashed to fit the topic, though.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice ants.  I'm looking forward to seeing future submissions of yours.
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Be carefull with the back scene...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Give more info in the description sections! Why ants? Why glass ants?

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I like the ants but what's the story behind the pictures?

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Good lighting, color, composition...  A great "first try"!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Glass insects!  Good idea!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice job. I like the image a lot. A little plain, but really nicely done. The
whit border on the photos is a bit much. try something a little less bright. 


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Where is the glass?????

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is nice and quirky.   Major point to note is that especially when tracing
glass, check that the object fits its background, as this looks a little
flat.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Nice trace!  Good use of lights.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Excelent work for a first try! All Right! :) jmills@stic.net

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
My first thought on seeing this picture was "what glass?"  It was only by
looking at the shadows that I could see that then ants themselves were glass,
possibly because the ants and the table you see through them are similar in
colour (both brown!)  Other than that, not bad.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the ants, there placement makes them look really interested in the
pictures. Nice image.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
OK, for a first try. The color, ant models, and the posing of the ants are all
good.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice construction on the ants.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
i did'nt understand what this had to do with the topic.
Notable for modelling



                                    apelsin
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very nice image.  Oranges seem a bit too shiny and bumpy, but not too bad.
Need more explanation of how image was created.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nice glass texture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Very pretty, but without knowing what was used to create it, I can't judge 
technical merit!!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great oranges.. I mean apelsins!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
No description?  -- go ahead an write it in Swedish!
Scene has a nice realistic-clean aspect to it.  I'd like to see more orange 
though.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Great photo-realism
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Tasty! Nice, simple and crisp. I love it. Oh, and 'apelsin' is also Russian word
for orange!

=====
From gpig@prometheus.hol.gr:
Why don't you comment your entry ? I can not evaluate your work, you
know.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice (whatever that word was for orange. I lack the will to scroll up to see
it.)


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Nice orange texture.

=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like the image, though the way the oranges are positioned in the bowl they
would have ended up in the bottom side by side, not resting on the side of the
bowl.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The main bowl is a bit ordinary, though I do like the mini-bowls.   However,
there is not enough of interest in the scene to make the glass really stand
out.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow. Great objects...

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
V_ldigt snygga sk_lar, fast apelsinerna _r kanske en aning f_r blanka.
Tummen upp!

=====
From nirschl@scripps.edu:
Am I seeing this wrong, or does the large bowl actually intersect with 
one of the oranges? I love the shape of the large bowl... wish we knew 
what renderer you use.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
What you did was good but there was nothing done for background detail needed
to complete the picture. 

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice textures on the orange, and great refraction in the bowl.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
A sublime image. Remarkable realism.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The frosted glass texture is nice, and the large bowl looks glassy and
realistic.
The green background is soothing; but more complexity would make the scene more
interesting.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the texture on the little bowls.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
I really liked it. Esp. the fluted bowl!
Notable for originality, textures, composition, lighting, modelling


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for lighting, modelling



                                    apwindow
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent work.  The artistry is quite evident, and the result is a serene,
moody feeling.  A window I wouldn't mind having in my home.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Like one of the other stained glass images, the lack of lighting on this side of
the wall and the lack of any objects give the scene a really flat look.  

The window, though, is quite good.  Love the colors.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice effect...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice stained glass.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
elegant

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the texture on the glass!  --Could be an interesting room if each of
4 walls had a stained glass window depicting a different season!
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   A simple image, yet that is part of what makes is attractive. 

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
It would be nice to see the actual (parts of) wall that the window is in.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
I am a strong proponent for the "artistic" value of a scene, and this one is
rather striking from an artistic point of view. I like.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Actually, I like some of your other work better (The summer bubbles). This one
is a little too simple. There is a fine line between scerenity and boredom. You
should try for the grey area between enough detail and bizzare


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Adam, I like the fact that you pondered over this.  IT DOES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Well, artistic was what you aimed for, and what you got.   Well done for
breaking out of the realm of `If I just use CSG lots it will be good' ;)
I love it.

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
VERY well done!  You did a great job!  I love the frosted glass effect.
An idea I saw on someone else's pict that you might play around with:  putting
a simple landscape behind the glass and let it just barely show through.
(And yes, I ranked yours high artisticaly, among other catagories...)

=====
From nirschl@scripps.edu:
Excellent choice to go ahead and make this image portrait view. Personally I
wish
I could see the remainder of the light coming from the window (i.e. at the very

bottom).  

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
As you can see, I clearly find you effort very "artistic".
Excellent work that once more confirms my opinion that "less can be more".

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is a really great image, I think the dark negative space outlining the
window really add to the winter dreary feeling your going for. Excellent
image.

=====
From roth@ens.ascom.ch:
you really got that atmosphere right!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
You certainly did get that artistic effect right. 

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very evocative and moody. I started to comment on all the unused dark space
around
the window; but on second thought, it is as important as the window itself. Good
scene.  

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
nice art. good color, good composition.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
the size was too small and it was too dark.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for lighting, composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
I like this.
Notable for lighting, composition



                                     araml1
                                     ------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Hmmm.......It is ..... Hmmm...... Interesting !
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Strange.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
How interesting... (and I thought I was weird)

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
I didn't really get these...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is extremely spooky looking. Great job. I'm rather impressed. I think I've
had nightmares that went something like this.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That blowed. The other is worse.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The main point of the image would be the people, but the walls are far
too distracting.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A lot of reflection, maybe too much I think...

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
The glass cylinder and the brass sphere are too "perfect", so I get a bit
lost in the picture because of the reflections and refractions.  Some kind
of crackle bumpmap would have helped (maybe).

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very different. I dunno about all the spheres, though; to me, glass means sharp,
angular,
crystalline.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
interesting.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition, originality



                                     araml2
                                     ------
=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:

It's a great image but looks much like the other one.
I simply cannot put this one to, say, 1st place and the other image to 2nd,
other people tried hard as well.
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Hey guy,
In the irtc rules, they say NOT to submit 2 pictures of the same scene !!!


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Even stranger. I like this one better.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I liked the other one better.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
People generally do better if they only enter one image of the same stuff. I
gave you the same scores, but the other judges seldom do. In the future, decide
on a single image and go with it. Your scores will generally be better. I
actually like this one more.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That really blowed. Why in the hell would you 
shove a big glass sphere in front of the scene and re-submit it?
=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Golly Gee wilkers, maybe if I do an extreme closeup of the reflection off one of
my chrome balls, they'll never know that it is exactly the same scene as my
last image...

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
the best of the two as if this one wasn't submitted.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This is much more "glassy" than araml1.jpg ; the fisheye refraction helps a
lot.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I liked the first one better.



                                     araml3
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cute concept.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
I liked what I could see of your lamp; too bad you did not make this your
central focus; it's shade
in particular is very stiking.  I also liked all the various-shaped vases on the
glass shelves.
=====
From jay@map.com:
While glass may contain silicon, might this be pushing it a wee bit?  :-)
Though aside from the pictures (*could* have used some previous competition
traces for the images... ) it's a well balanced scene.

=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:

What about silicone (a polymer...)?


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
I don't see much GLASS here... Neat lamp shade, though, and decent setup.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Tasteless...
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I like the shelf with the vases.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I have this knee-jerk reaction to pictures of pretty women added to scenes.
In this case, I really think it looks strange.  They don't fit in the scene 
very well.  I do get the "implants" joke, but I don't think it was worth
disturbing the atmosphere of the scene with it.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Most textures are good.. except for the wood. The floor is okay, but too
regular, and the wall textures could use some tuning up.

That lampshade is interesting.. gonna have to figure out how you did that.

And yes, I chuckled at the title. :)

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Relating silicon to glass doesn't work for me. It's a nice picture, well
rendered, but your reasoning is a little too scientific.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
The lamp doesn't look quite right - it appears the neck of the lamp
is offset from the base and the point in the neck where it enters the
shade is too distinct.  This latter may be on purpose if the top of the
neck is made of brass or some other metal and it enters the rest of the
neck at that particular point.  Also, the shadow under the table on the
left looks too clear considering how dark the table glass appears.  That
might be ok, though, depending on the glass and my point of view with
respect to the light source.

Other than that, looks very nice.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Ok, I have a problem with the photographs in the image, but you get a 20 on
origionalitly. A bit of Chemistry: Silicon dioxide is the sand for glass. That
isn't the same silicon compound in the body enhancements (hey, that almost
sounds PC)
However, it IS the same silicon compund used in the pottery, so that was
actually a good interpretation of the theme.

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Lots of lathes.

=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
Nice pictures of Pamella Lee

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad - my basic quarrel is that it doesn't seem to suit being traced.
Try to decide on a scene which suits the method, before going ahead.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow, there's a lot going on here. I'd like to see a little less repetition in
the floor texture.Excelent texture work.
     jmills@stic.net

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The pictures of Pam look stretched, but otherwise it's a nice image, especially
the lamp in the forground. Pretty vague connection with the theme, though.

=====
From nirschl@scripps.edu:
From your text file: "No further comment dared". Why do you think the Baywatch
pictures are necessary, or why did you put them in? I find them to be 
offensive and completely out of place. 

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
Nice shot overall.
Few suggestions... First, add a little bit of randomness to the spacing of the
vases. This will help it look more natural.
Second, your little kinectic ball thingy is slighty out of scale(yeah I know,
real biggy)
Third, you need to make sure the pictures are kept at the correct aspect
ratio(Pamela comes out looking more distorted than normal)
Oh yeah, nice lamp!
=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice concept I like the inclusion of all the different silicon objects.

=====
From efry@zeta.org.au:
The lamp shade looks nice. I think that the wood grain used for the walls is a
bit heavy.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I would have scored this higher on the artistic if the Pamela Anderson pics were
not there.
Not that I dislike the pics, but they done fit the scene.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice collection of vases. (I won't make any "jugs" puns :).

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
This would have been a much nicer pic without those silly breasts.
I don't mean that in an anti-breast way.  The embedded gifs are out of
proportion
to an otherwise well colored scene.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
women are not trophys. i do not see what this has to do with glass.



                                     araml4
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
The best of your four entries.  Nice mood, good subtle colors.  Needs a focus
or a "reason", however.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Love your use of my tree-creation routine ;) - also like the cold glitter of
the
glass trees, very sharp.  The wind chimes are a nice touch.
=====
From jay@map.com:
Lovely tree.  That's a nice way to make it look icy.  

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great Tree!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Nice solution to your rendering time problem.  Great trees.
=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
A nice 'fantasy' feel to this... kinda reminds me of one of the Narnia books
(can't remember which one).


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I think it's pretty, but not really glass.


=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
Beautiful tree

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is not bad.   The idea of splitting inside/outside was good for
trace time, but is apparant in the lighting.   Check the lighting, and
image maps look *far* better than here.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Great work.I hope to someday achieve this level of craftsmanship.
jmills@stic.net
=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
The tree and everything beyond looks reall good. I just don't like the porch at
all.
I think a wood deck style porch would have looked better and more appropriate.
The wind chime came out nice though.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I love the use of the dark porch to seperate the fore and middle grounds.
Excellent image and theme.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Too flat. A little foreground lighting would open the scene out.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very icy and crystalline. Good interpretation of theme.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I gave you high tech marks because of your description of how you got around the

slowness of your machine. :)
Well composed pic.  I love the wood texture.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
what has this to do with the topic, glass? Nice trees.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for composition



                                    article
                                    -------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice image.  Liked the marquetry edging on the desk surface - repetitive
material map?

=====
From jay@map.com:
The faked magnification doesn't correspond to our (the viewers') point of view.
- It really sticks out because of that.


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
The glass is floating?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Good attention to detail
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This image seems incomplete. the placement of the objects appears haphazard.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Cool, liked the floor.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Some nice stuff - I like the balanced magnifying glass.   However, is it just
me, or is that wine-glass floating (I may be missing something...)

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Awesome use of mapping!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Nice table top!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Really nice table.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
How was the magnifying lens effect done if not by real refraction?
Why did the lens refraction blur the texture?

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice refraction.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The textures on the magnifying glass look a little out of scale and unreal.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
A bit literalistic ("wine glass", "magnifying glass", etc.) ; but not bad.
The curled-up textured newpaper clipping is quite impressive, and the other
object models are good too. 

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the wood texture on the table.


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for composition



                                     astil
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very good colors.  Table is a bit *too* reflective; no boundary between
glasses and their reflections.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice textures... Try to make the edge deformations for the white wine,
and to make the red wine more transparent...
Also, try to prevent to have a pure reflective floor, it acts against the
readability of objects...
That picture seams to imitate the famous Electro-GIG's fabulous picture... :^|
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The white wine looks great but the near perfect reflections make the scene look
a little strange.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The glass of Chablis looks especially good.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Something very real about this one...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Be more origional


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Booo.

=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
The objects seem to be hoving at different levels, though it might be the
perspective.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Some bubbles in the wine would probably look good.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I don't know what can cause this with CSG and bezier curves but a lot of
the edges look like polygon based meshes. (i. e. the silhouette is not round)
As to troubles with white wine as opposed to the dark red juices: it was worth
the effort, the wine really looks good. The red liquids look very turbid, but
this might be desired.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
What I liked: All of the individual objects.
Not liked: The objects were not arranged in any real design ?
It was more of a collection rather then a picture.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Not too original, and maybe you need to anti-alias some more, or if you are then
find another way to make the image look less pixelly at the edges.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The swirly glass textures are neat; but the table is too reflective; it makes
the
base of the red glass look really wierd. A less reflective smoked glass surface
would let the drinking glasses show up better.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures



                                    attable
                                    -------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
*VERY* nice scene - a real jaw-dropper on first viewing.  I did notice a couple
teeny details that could stand to be tweaked; the top of the candle is too
smooth, and when a candle melts at an angle like this it invariably gets a
blobby dribble of wax running down the side.  The canld eflame itself is too
narrow from side to side.  The lighting is spectacular; very atmospheric *G*. 
I think the only other thing you could try to acheive perfection would be to
slide the window open a little and put some very simple filmy white curtains
blowing just slightly in a breeze.  But maybe that would be gilding the lily. 
20-20-20 anyway.
=====
From m-kolb@uiuc.edu:
This image kicks ass.  : )
The candles could use a little help, but other than that, I've given your 
image the highest marks so far. Well done!
- Michael J. Kolb

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Not so original, but very good ambience...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
This scene is similar to some of the others (window with sunlight, eyeglasses, 
bottles, etc...) - but it's done very well.  Very well done scene.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
There is a certain atmosphere to this image. It really has a mood. I especially
like the beams of light coming from the window. Feels like someone is about to
get knocked off. :)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Amazing. All the objects I've grown to hate somehow work in this scene. Nice
job.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
How.. Misty..
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
A good all round image.   Watch your contrast with glass, and most especially
with atmosphere - the colours can get a bit flat.   Also, you probably want
your halos to be a bit fatter - the candles look almost like lit dynamite ;)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Nice lighting...nice

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great pic! Just one thing - I think you should have used a higher ambient value
for the candle.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Very atmospheric setting; great lighting! The wine bottle seems too reflective
and the wine a little bit too light, but the overall work is excellent!

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little too dark.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Excellent lighting !

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
I like all of the shadows, and the atmosphere - nice scene!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very suave; you can almost hear French accordian music. 

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
very nice colors.  Great use of "dark".


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
It was so dark, it was difficult to understand.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice atmosphere. But the red (?) wine looks a bit insipid. Or is that port?
Notable for lighting



                                    azjoaca
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Okay, I'll bite--how did you do it?

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Intriguing image!  I'm guessing that part of your secret is that it's rendered
from INSIDE a CSG object of some kind, possibly looking towards a corner or
edge, and what we're seeing is both the inner reflections and a wavy plane
outside???

=====
From jay@map.com:
I'm not sure *how* you made that.  Looks like a pyramid, but that doesn't seem
to explain quite all the reflections and odd shapes there.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Too 'carpet-smoking' for me, sorry :^)
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Great looking image, but hard to tell much about its technical or conceptual
merit without a description of those processes for you! Neat image.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Trippy, man!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Help! I'm incased in glass!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I give up, how?!
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
I find the best renerings come from "unexpected" results...and then go with
them!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Whatever.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
No idea. How did you do it?
This image is really quite good for its simplicity.


=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Lots of movement here, which is nice to see in raytracing -- too many pictures
(including my own!) are far too static.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
Its not bad, but you should keep in mind that images like this don't
display well on 8bit displays (like I'm using).  True, judges *should*
have better displays than that, but here at work its the best we've got.
The problem is that range of change in colors is small along edges of
the glass, so I lose some of the detail in the dithered view that I
have.  Other than that its quiet artistic.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little too dull.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Excellent - I love simplicity in glass modelling - the glass does it all
itself!   I wonder what some more colour would do to this...

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I'm diggin' it... :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Weird

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Looks very interesting, I kinda like it. Not overloaded with objects, but
nice effects achieved by very simple methods.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Too abstract, and a little too busy. Not very interesting.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is completely abstract... that's good! I like it!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very crystalline and abstract. And it's -not- another wineglass. :) 

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
It reminds me of an Andrew Pollack. :)


From web_user@173-127-214.ipt.aol.com:
Notable for originality



                                    azpahar2
                                    --------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nothing to say...Nothing to look at... Nothing to rate...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great melting effect!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I'm sick of glasses, cups, and winebottles. None of those are very origional.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice look to the image, caused by a well-chosen limited colour-scheme.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I love the idea! Dal_-fan, are you?

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I liked your first entry better than this. Still very nice to look at,
has its very own feeling.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little too surrealistic for my tastes, and not very innovative for this
competition's topic.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The glasses and the sky texture are alright; but the ripple ground texture
doesn't look so good. Maybe a green glass fractal heightfield instead?


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
very creative!
Notable for textures, lighting, originality



                                    azprisma
                                    --------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice picture, but most of it dissapears against the black bakgroun.  Perhaps a
standard "two shades of gray checkerboard" would have worked better?

=====
From jay@map.com:
Can't actually see the prism all that well, but - cool!


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

The dark side of the moon... All my youthness...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Pink Floyd!
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
Much too dark. Try Putting the resultant rainbow onto something.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

way too dark!!
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Too dark. Hey, I like Pink Floyd too! :)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Please handle gamma correction before entering. I tend to lose color depth when
doing it myself.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
try making it visible next time


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That bit. Why did he submit it?

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The prism either needs some fake texturing, or a lot of background, since at
the moment, most rays are passing straight through, and coming up black.
Spectrum effect is nice though.

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
A little dark.  I didn't see the prism at first.  Otherwise, gorgeous image!

(Kinda reminds me of a CD cover.)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
O.K. I won't even bring up the Pink Floyd thing...

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Ok I have some tips for you so you can do better on next months competition
okay. Here we go. First spend a little more time putting some thought into the
rounds topic, and trying to find some innovative idea to use for your image.
Second try to include a story of some kind into the image. Glitz with no
substance just isn't very interesting to look at. If your really into abstract
expressionism, and surrealism then try to give a little more information in
your text file so people can begin to understand what your shooting for. Well,
I wish you luck in next months competition.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Too dark to see the prism

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
Reminds me of some music album...  Nice, but too dark.  You should increase the
intensity of the spotlights.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The colored light beams leaving the prism are very rich and colorful;
but the incoming white beam and the prism are almost impossible to see
on my monitor, even with heavy gamma correction. You might need to adjust
the "assumed gamma" when rendering your image (or maybe I just have a
bad monitor :( but the other contest scenes didn't have this problem)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I've seen this picture somewhere before....


From web_user@dd42-218.compuserve.com:
needs gamma correction


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Well, I suppose that somebody had to do it.



                                      bar
                                      ---
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Pretty image, but like most of your others, without feeling.  Next time, go
for more quality, less quantity.  Also, no description, no tech merit.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
*VERY* cool picture.  Gave you the ol' triple-twenty treatment, I liked it so
much.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
You submit too many incredible images. 

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Stunning realism
=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very nice image! Please be sure to fill out all fields in the submission 
form (hardware?  renderer?
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
The best image in the competition. I would have given it higher marks if you
said what you used to create it. :(

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Be more origional in the future.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Pick 1 scene and make it good naxos!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!



=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Very Busy, but also excellent

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is a rather nice idea.   Unfortunately, I feel that you slightly
`overcrowded' the image, which seems to put the eye off.   Toned down a 
little, this would be an excellent image.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Super design and lots of objects together make this one of the best. Nicely
Done

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
It's gorgeous...  But a little too busy.

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Oh boy, hundreds of the same glass...

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Top stuff !

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This image just makes me weep! :-) It is sooooooo nice! 20-20-20!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very photorealistic. The green edges on the glass shelves is a nice touch.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Photographic quality...
I think i've been to this bar.
Excellent colors.




From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for lighting, composition, modelling, originality, textures



                                     bauble
                                     ------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Be carefull about the choice of textures...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Is that blood splattered on the walls?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Cool idea

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Interesting image -- a bit confusing and the topic gets a bit lost but
interesting nonetheless.



=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I don't really see a glass city. I also am having difficulty finding the crystal
ball. I can't really offer any advice other than to start earlier.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
no, no really, tell me, i can handle it, what is it realy?????


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Right.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Hmmm...   I can see the way this image wants to be, but the concept really
does not say enough to be convincing.   Also, please work with light-sources
better, as this image looks a bit (lot) flat.

=====
From nirschl@scripps.edu:
corn?? =)

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
It's not to clear where the viewpoint is from. And the wall paper is a bit to
"busy" Use more sedate tones next time.


=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice concept, but you could try to put a little more detail into the objects,
and the wallpaper of the room just doesn't do it for me.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The "glass city" is a neat concept; its just not dense enough to look realistic
yet.
Skip the spiral-stair towers, and add lots more copies of the simple square
tower.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
too manyh speckles.  Saurat perhaps?



                                     biere
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very nice image.  You're right, that's not Guiness.  Looks like a nice amber
bock, though.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice one...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
That aint no Guinness, but at least it's amber and not clear-yellow.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Well done!  It is too bad that the Amiga hasn't kept up with modern speed
requirements.
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   The backwards neon letters are a great touch.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Makes me thirsty...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice attention to detail (the random drips)


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Guiness is much darker than this....

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice modelling - the textures need a bit of work to make them less plastic,
though.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great beer glass!

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Loved the image, definetly one of the best this round, in composition, and
exectution.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Guinness have heaps more foam, and it's brown.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The beer glass is very nicely modelled; since the theme was "glass", you should
show it off more by adding more copies (maybe on the window ledge under the
sign).

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
very nice pic.  My only complaint is that the head of the beer is too "clean".
It should be clinging to the inside of the glass (having studied many ;)


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for modelling, originality


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Lovely clean lines. Well modelled. Like the neon sign.
Notable for modelling, lighting



                                    blckdmnd
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very pretty picture, and good concept.  The diamond seems secondary to the
scene, however--put more focus on your subject.  Too much use of lens flare;
even though it looked nice, it dominates the image.  Good work overall.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Nice image.  However, do watch your lights.  The lens flare is much too bright
for there NOT to be a light in our view of the scene.  I can't see an
off-camera
light producing that great a lens flare.  Keeping the lights under control is
what
will make or break a ray-trace.  

Another thing to watch for:  wood textures.  Both textures (on the table and the
wall)
look rather odd outside a certain area.  If this isn't intentional, play
around with a scene with just the wall and table, one point light, and a camera
until you get the textures looking the way you want to.  

Creating good scenes is often (I've found, especially with a modeller
available)
a matter of designing a scene, then pulling it apart until you get each piece
right, then putting it all back together.  This does help reduce render times
for
test renders, which will help speed things up.


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
The lens flare eats the rest of the picture.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow, amazing work for a 13 year old.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Bien fait! Take it easy on the lens flare next time, though.

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
I had no problem reading your english.  I'm glad to see so many remarks in
the text file!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Buddy, the lens flare should be a subtle effect. Don't dominate your image with
it.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Nicely done.  I hope to continue to see more from you.  Most 13 year olds would
not have even tried.  I think you may want to limit the amount of turbulence
you place in your wood grain, it will remove the "twice over" effect you are
getting here.

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
Umm...

Pardon me for nitpicking...  It's a gorgeous lense-flare and all (though maybe
a little bright).  But...

There is NO LIGHT HITTING THE JAR WHERE THE FLARE IS!  Lense flare is caused
by a light source pointing straight into the lense of a camera.  Hence, there
should be a sun or a very bright reflection at its center.  But, even if this
were to simulate a reflection from a camera "flash", there are no OTHER
reflections from the flash on anything else!  (Like the magnifying glass.)

Maybe put an extra spotlight in the image, with no atmospheric scattering,
and turn up the specular settings on the glass.  I think it would help.

Other than that, I love the image!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Too big lens flare.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
Nice picture. The only bad part is that the lens flare was way too
bright.  

=====
From uvasst00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice concept, and good modeling techniques. I think that the lens flare detracts
from the scene in this case though. Lens flare is created in real life by a
fault in the camera lens and for many years was considered very bad style if
seen in an image. Now a days people use lens flare in their images but most of
the time it is only to increase the dramatic nature of a scene or to give and
animation a sense of motion. The key to using lens flare is to use it so that
it doesn't take center stage. Put it in if you like but don't have it dominate
the scene. You have some great talent for a 13 year old. I look forward to
seeing your images in future competitions.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Nice lighting effect

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is -very- impressive, especially for a first entry. You are probably
the youngest competitor in the IRTC - cool! Keep up the good work!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The diamond display looks very nice, but there's too much empty space on either
side.
It would look much better to either add more things (maybe some velvet drapes)
or
else just crop the image to zoom in on the diamond.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Well done. Too much lens flare though.



                                    bottle11
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice idea.  The sail is very distracting.  I like the rest of the scene.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
VERY nicely modelled - I'm impressed!  Only thing that looks wierd to me is the
ice cubes; maybe because ice maker ice is an unusual shape or something...

=====
From jay@map.com:
While I do like this image, I do wish the wood-grain on the desk/table was done
a little better.  Looks like a slice was taken out of a very large tree and
turned into a desk.  Try rotating it 90 degrees and scaling it down a bit.

The bottle in a bottle is a nice touch.


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
bottle in a bottle, neat.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Clever interpretation of the theme!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Great image, but increase the max_trace_level next time. 

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice job. The textures could use some work A plain off white for the sail would
be better, and the wood texture should be scaled differently. But hey, good
work.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Try for a better ship next time


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
uhuh.

=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:

Shoulda antialiased it :)
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The ship in bottle is very good, as is the glass.   Excellent glass texture.
Only shame is that with the ice and glasses, the image starts to become
cluttered, with no clear center of attention.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Not only a nice design, but it also has some interesting things such as water
in the bottle.  Nice touch!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow! I love this...Great picture

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Nice pic. The texture on the ship's sail looks weird, though.

=====
From nirschl@scripps.edu:
That bottle is really nice! However i'd have no idea what the shiny stuff in the

bottom middle was if you didn't explain it. I think the image might be better
if
you had just left out the eyeglasses, since they don't really serve a purpose,
and
instead focused on other things: perhaps a fancier base.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The sail of the ship looks quite bad, like made of very few polygons.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The textures on the ship in the bottle left a lot to be desired. Some extra
effort here
would improve what is an image with a lot of potential.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice modelling, especially the canoe.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great bottle.  Nice touch with the ridged bottle bottom.
I don't like the ice.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The bottle looks to be well modelled. Unfortuantely I got a damaged file when I
downloaded and couldn't see the bottom half of your picture.
Notable for modelling



                                     broken
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great concept, nice image.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice picture...just one tiny question - after so nicely sneaking your address in
on the wine bottle label, why'd you write your name on it?
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice job with the broken glass. 

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Ouch, nasty deuce! Great concept!  (the picture tells a story!)

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

"Of course, 
the 2 of clubs doesn't exist in a poker game, but I had to put it in 
because of its special meaning. ;)"

??? 
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Bland.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Swell.
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I like title.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Poker is usually played on green cloth, but that's just a minor detail ;-)
The cards, and especially the pile are very nice. Also the bottle label.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
I like the way this picture tells a story.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
A bit skimpy on the "glass" theme, but not bad. The broken glass looks pretty
real.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Two of clubs or two of spades? :-) Still, seems to be too tidy for the morning
after.
Notable for composition



                                    bs-frag
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Room looks close and cramped.  The lamps look filled with liquid--hollow them
out or reduce your IOR!  Colors and modelling are good, lighting is fair.

=====
From jay@map.com:
While the papryus is a bit dark, the cabinet in the corner of the room looks
washed out.  

Love the lamps.   Very nice indeed!


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Have you ever seen a petrol lamp ?????
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Rather than making the paper fragment a transparent gif you could have tried
just using it 
as an image map and then specifying within POV what the transparent color should
be.
It's worked pretty well for me.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nice use of atmospheric effects, creates a nice evening candlelit mood.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very nice lamp!  There's something strange about the proportions in this 
image.  Just how small is that chest of drawers?
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
BTW: Who's holding the magnifying glass?


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
That's quite a levitating magnifying glass you've got there.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Unfortunate about the lighting - if I could say one thing to every entrant
this month, it would be that when tracing glass, don't overdo the modelling,
but spend all you time getting light right.

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
You know, between the goblet (pretty good) and the lamp (drop-dead gorgeous),
I almost think you could have left the magnifying glass lie less notacably
flat on the table instead of propping it up.  :)  Oh well,  I like this image
anyway.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Nice lamp.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The upper glass parts of the lamps appear to be solid, or completely filled
with liquid. To allow a flame to burn, they should be hollow, I think.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The oil lamp model is good; the drinking glass looks a little too thick.
Nice lighting. (PS: POV does let you have local atmospheres: see "halos")


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
I like the atmosphere it generates.
Notable for lighting, composition



                                    bs-prism
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice moody scene.  The outside light looks too weak to be casting all those
rainbows.  But *they* look very good.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
You must have put at least 68 light sources into this picture and it still
rendered in only 4 hours?  Wow!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I kept a crystal in my window that has a simliar (though lesser) effect.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Where are the beer bottles and magnifying glass? I thought they were
required for this category? ;)

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
The 'rainbows' are beautiful. Overall, the image may have been better at night
lit by some artificial means instead of sunlight.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice job.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
More contrast is required with the lighting to really bring out the depth of
the scene.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I like the "rainbows".

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The prism effect is great! (It took me a few seconds to realize,
"hey! POV doesn't do refractions by itself..."). The outside scene could use
some clouds, maybe a little green ground-fog for grass.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
You should have done more with the green "astroturf" outside the window.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
I think you should stick to modelling items inside the house. The grass and sky
detract from the overall composition.



                                    bvship1
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool ship, nice bottle, great tile, good mountains.  Awful "ray-traced" sky,
and what went wrong at the bottom of the picture?  Also, no description means
no tech merit.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Fairly nice image, but the lighting is poor - play with my brightness and
contrast controls as I might, I couldn't make out more than minimal details of
texture of the ship (at least, I'm pretty sure you've used a different texture
for the rails than for the body of the boat, etc.).  Perhaps another light over
to the right and back towards that window would help?

=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Some texturing on the walls and ceiling would help a LOT...

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
I keep saying it... PLEASE give some description of how the image was created!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Is the ship made of glass? Your title implies so but it's too drak to tell. The
tiles on the table look
very realistic.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The camera angle could have been made such that there ws no dark area (ceiling)
in the shot.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
It's got a mood that's lacking from a lot of other images. Good stuff.

=====
From gpig@prometheus.hol.gr:
You give no description of how you made the scene. Why ?
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Ship is really nice. And the image is complete. Nice work.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cool ship.

=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Let us know how you did it.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Too bad you didn't use POV3. The ship wouldn't have been that dark then. 

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Nice ship model

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
The scene is good, but the text file doesn't tell us anything about how
you created the objects. :-(

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I don't get the black ceiling; and the ship+bottle could use more lighting;
but the blue tile looks really good.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
How did you model the ship? Or is it someone else's model?



                                    candles
                                    -------
=====
From jay@map.com:
Wonderful scene - except the wood grain texture for the table.  That must've
been
a piece of one BIG tree...  

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

A very nice picture, BUT it is said in the irtc rules that it's forbidden to
submit several views of the same scene...Sorry !
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great job with the flower.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Wow. Little details like the texture on the candles makes a big difference.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
somthing strange withe the shadows on the candles but I can't put my finger on
it.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
If it weren't for the tips of candles and the detial on the rose, you would
think this was a photograph. Impressive, like the other image.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very very nice cadndlesticks, but flames aren't pink, are they?

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Preferred 24diner

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very pretty. Gold band on the glasses is a nice touch.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Very nice. Very clear. Very clean.



                                    champgne
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice use of spotlight to focus the scene on the subject.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Scan line renderer, right?  That "objects appear to be floating above their
shadows" effect looks familair from 3DS.
=====
From jay@map.com:
Have you noticed the upright wine glass is floating above the table?  Aside from
that, it's a good render.


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The standing glass seems suspended above the table...

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Why is the glass floating in mid-air?

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
Very realistic image.  I _love_ the spotlight.

Re: spilled wine/champagne glasses.
Are we all a bunch of clumsy/drunk ray-tracers?  How many spilled glasses is
this?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
UN origional


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
How come the glass is floating?
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad - the champagne and bottle look a bit dirty, though...


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The glasses seem to hover above the table.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
You haven't drunken Champagne recently, have you? The bottle has a completely
different neck shape, has a (usually golden and/or black) metal foil at the
neck and is generally thicker and more specular and has very large dent at the
bottom (to withstand the pressure).
Champagne itself is much lighter and not turbid at all.
I'm afraid to say you missed reality by a fair amount.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
It looks like the glasses are floating over the table.  This is of
course not the case, but this effect is caused by the position of the
main spotlight which gives one hard shadow for each glass.  I think it
would have been better if the light which is on the left of the viewer
would also cast shadows on the table.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Your goal was realism!? It looks like you succeeded! Very nice scene.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The scene is realistic enough, but the bottle and glasses look a little lonely,
with
all that dark space around them. Zoom the camera in a bit, or add background
stuff.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
The spilled champagne looks like one of those plastic fake spills.
Nice idea.  I like the lighting.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The one piece that you really got right in your search for realism is the wood
grain. Outstanding. The bottle colour and transparency need a little work.
Notable for textures



                                     chapel
                                     ------
=====
From akey@cs.utexas.edu:
I really liked this image except for the checkered floor.  The texture on the
bricks was nicely done.

=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great textures, modelling, and composition.  Why isn't the light coming thru
the window colored?  If it were coming from the left, it would illuminate the
altar as much as (or more than) it does the window sill.

=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Not very much glass here - this would have suited better the 'architecture'.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
You played Hexen ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
With a little more attention to dramatic lighting this could have been a really
stunning image!!!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The parchment on the stand was a nice touch.



=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Where's the glass?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like this. It's a complete scene.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
What's this have to do with glass? (besides a window)

=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
I like how you did the scroll.  It is a very creative touch.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nicely done.   The lighting is pretty good, though I may prefer less of it.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
There is a lot of work here! I like the sg window particularly!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
A little internal lighting to give form to the chapel would help.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This looks really good. The illuminated manuscript on the stand is esp. cool.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Very nice.



                                    chemset
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice concept, great tabletop texture.  Glass seems rough and unreflective, and
also unrefractive.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The edges of your glass objects aren't very well defined. They look kind of
fuzzy.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The glass objects just aren't quite right.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Here is a very good example of why 3ds is not suited to glass.   A good image,
but *needs* refraction of some sort.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Some refraction to the glass texture would have been an improvement.

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
You glass does not appear to be refracting at all?!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The glass looks more like fog. I think these are the reasons: There is no
refraction so light passes straight through, the specular highlights are too
big and to blurry, there are no reflections in the glass.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The object models and the composition are okay for a start; but 3DS -really-
seems to have hosed your shadows. Maybe POVRay would do a better job for you.



                                     chess
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Ah, the old glass chess-set trick, eh?  The room is *gorgeous*; the chess set,
eh, so-so.  And that glass table-top definitely needs work--it just vanishes
in the distance.  And those books are all identical, and look like, um, I
dunno, Duraflame logs or something.  But the window, floor, mantel, and
lamp--all first-rate.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
a great start.  I would have like to see a closer-up view of the pieces too.
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Just simply well done. However, I think that making the table a 
little taller would have given it a better look.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
You should make the books on the shelves a little more random. and the glass is
about to fall right off the edge of the table!!!!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the chess set, but the coolest effect in the scene is the refraction off
of the overhead lamp.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
weeeeeeee.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is a very nice concept.   I would prefer less glass (e.g. the lamp-shade?)
and possibly a camera angle with more emphasis on the table, but nicely done
nonetheless.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Very Nice. I love the glass table...simple but elegant

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
Greetings to the *other* chess set designer :-)  I think my chess set is better
than yours - but I think your overall scene is better than mine!  Time will
tell, I guess.  May the best chess(man) win!  ;-)
BTW: is your glass table refracting?  I can't really tell, but the farther edge
seems very difficult to see...

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The wine glass seems to be floating in the air.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The table edge looks odd. A bevelled edge might fix this.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice composition; but the far edge of the table is invisible and kinda
confusing.
A different ior or a green edge would be better.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
It is a nice complete scene.



                                     cindy
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Beautiful image, good composition, great concept.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Hey !
We had (almost) the same idea !!!
Good picture !
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
That's a serious spiked heel!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Where's the pumpkin?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is a nice cinderella image too. I actually like your scene better, but the
other one was just too cool. Nice work.


=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
Very artistic.  More than a collection of nifty objects.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Some simple textures to the background and a little more focus on the slipper
and
this would be an excellent image. Almost there !

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
No singing mice ? :)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
:)


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for originality


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Good. 
Notable for originality



                                     class
                                     -----
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

The worse of this topic...
=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Interesting interpretation of the theme!
=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Yay!! Let's get a pic from kodiac's 
site and shove a stupid magnifying glass in front!!



=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Recreating the magnifying effect of lenses is inherent to raytracing, every
raytracer does that, provided the glass has a refection index other than 1.0.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I'll try to be gentle in breaking this to you: this amazing "magnifying glass"
effect is a standard feature in most ray-tracers. It's not at all innovative
or impressive, especially when there's nothing else in the scene but a scanned
photo. People might think you were just plain lazy. Sure, it's a -nice- photo,
but you'll have to produce much more than this before you can win the contest.



                                     clight
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent mood, very appropriate lighting.  And except for the opaque blue
part, that's definitely the best candle flame I've *ever* seen in a rendered
image.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice image, though a tad dark.  You loose a lot of the detail of the bottle and
wine glasses against the blackness; for example, it appears that there is wine
in the glasses, if I look very closely where they'd most lit by the
candleflame, but because of the blackness they look empty.  The upper portions
of the glasses and the bottle all dissapear against the backgroun too.  Perhaps
if you'd done a very simple background suggestive of a nearby wall (wallpaper?)
and kept the colour muted the objects would display better?

=====
From jay@map.com:
The lighting is such that the bottle and the wine in the glasses doesn't really
show.  The bottle's label is about the only clue to its existence.

Aside from that, it's a wonderful scene.



=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

good ambience...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Excellent candle flame. Nice lighting also.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   The cloth inside the case is a fantastic touch.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
I like the mood. It's very well captured. Only there is no way that ring fits
into that box closed. :)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the fire.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like the flame

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
V. nice flame, and generally nice image.   Beware when tracing glass though,
since with a black bckgrnd, you lose a lot of your glasses.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Mmmmmmm....Very nice!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I like the bottle label. The blue part of the flame if to dark.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
Nice image, but you missed the opportunity to have a light shining
through the diamond (either the candle or some other light).  A bright
spot on the diamond would probably make the image better.  Also, the
blue part of the flame should be more transparent.  The yellow part
and the halo around the candle are very good.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The candle flame looks good. I'd move the candle to the right, and the box
to the left, so that you can see both better.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
If I had a vote ... Beautiful. 
Notable for originality, lighting, composition



                                      coke
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent concept, middling execution.  The broken bottle and the table-top
are very good, the other bottle and the candle are not so good.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great job with the broken bottle. The image on the wall is a little plain and
flat
and the double flame is kind of awkward.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The lack of detail really hurts this one.

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
Love that "Dynamic Ribbon Device"!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The white powder doesn't appear very powder-like. Maybe add a few _tiny_ spheres
and set them around the edges.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Constructive criticism: the flame should be more transparent near the base,
some gradient pigment would probably be good.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The lying bottle looks like two nested very thin white plastic bottles, not
like glass. The standing bottle filled with white powder looks more convincing.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The flame needs more work, and the Coke bottle glass should be greener.
Good work on the jagged bottle edge and the candle wax texture.



                                    compass
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Oh, I see ... it's made out of glass!  (Crowd goes "Ahhhhh!")  Cool pic, good
modelling, concept sorta weak.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
It's better than some of the other images entered!

=====
From lg@pixar.com:
The judges take time to look at every image.  We're often very busy, but it's
worth it to see images when people put some effort into it.  Starting by
saying "I know it's not much.. I didn't plan on entering" does not get you
off to a good start.  I suggest either making a real effort, or not taking
everybody's time.  It's okay if it doesn't look beautiful, as long as you've
given it your best effort.  (Sheesh, I sound like a parent now.)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Hey, this is better than entering a glass. Everyone made a glass. you made
something different. And your background is nice.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Only the background was good.
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The rose shape and the sky texture are nice, but this isn't very "glassy", is
it?



                                     copas
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Shiny, shiny.  Pretty picture, if a bit bleak.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Nice image.  Like the lack of colour in the image.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

The 'copas' are too thick... and they're also levitating ?!
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
steely

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
It has that classic b/w photography touch. I really like it.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I grow weary of single objects copied many times.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Wow. Lots of the same.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice concept.   Watch your max_trace_level though.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Pretty simple, but good-looking nevertheless!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
At places, where 3 glasses are behind each other the ray trace depth
seems to be too low, it gets dark.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
A lot of artistic quality for the effort.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
I do not know which material you used, but the glasses are too dark.
Also, it would have been better to put at least two colors in the
backgroud instead of some shade of gray, so that the reflections could
be seen in the glasses.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very dark and brooding, like a storm is about to strike. (you could even
try adding lightning and stormclouds in the background)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice use of "leaded glass".  This looks like an advirtisement. :)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Somebody did a lot of washing.



                                    cordese
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Not a bad idea, but the cloud leaves a lot to be desired.  And why is the top
of the glass black?  Too little max trace level?

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Wow, an image of a glass that isn't extremely dull. Artistic Merit you have!


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Wow you linux users are just way smarter tham me apparently


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
POV-Ray takes quite some persuasion to render an outdoors scene well.   Only
for the experts...


=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I don't have the Magritte painting to compare, but this looks pretty good.
I've wondered whether POV would be a better format to store classical art
images, since it'd be more compact and resolution-independent...

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
It reminds me of a hovering contact lense.



                                    countop
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Good wood and stone textures, nice cookies, great cork-puller.  Glass looks
totally wretched--like very thin plastic.  Also, scene as a whole lacks
"depth"--some shadows or reflections might help.  I like the choice of colors.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
How'd you get the glass to look so fuzzy?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Too much wall and too much counter. And why is out of focus?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Your objects seem really wierd. I can't tell if it's the proportions or the
textures, but they don't seem a bit realistic to me. Maybe turn down the
transparency and increase the index of refraction.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Several hours of creation? 
You out did yourself.
=====
From mbrown@spry.com:
The top half is empty making the image un balanced lowering the 
camera to make the items more centered may do wonders to the image.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The blurring on this image makes the objects (poorly lit as is) look `stuck-
on'.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Pretty...A little blurry though. Was that on purpose?

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Some refraction would have looked nice.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
You seem to have messed up the glass material, it has a refractive index of
1.0,
which means no refraction at all. Looks quite unrealistic, more like gas clouds
like this. Always a good idea to look at real life objects: the contents of
glass
jars appear heavily distorted.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
All of the objects are nice, but... the blue background takes up half of the
space. It might have been better to lower the camera, and angle it so the
glass objects filled about 80% of the screen.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The objects are decent; but why ambient lighting only? Looks like everything is
made out of glow-in-the-dark plastic.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Very strange colors.  Not bad strange; interesting strange.  The objects
"glow".



                                    cross12
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Simple, yes.  Poetic, a bit.  If you don't know what it means, I sure don't!
Nice mood, but a bit too stark.  I do like the design of that cross.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Simple but pleasant.  I liked the effect of the red tinged beam of light from
the red object on (in?) the cross.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice artistic...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Without telling me how you make the image I can't give it too much credit!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I had to go to TrueColor to clear up the banding light rays.  
Neat idea though, where did the guy come from, make it yourself?



=====
From klynn@minn.net:

You need to give more info about where/how you came up with the models; was
the human figure done by you?
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Simple, yeah. Still, it says something.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice humanoid.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Booo.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is pretty nice, though I think the cross needs a slightly less cloudy
texture than the bloke.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Nice image...Time to turn up the anti-aliasing though...

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very moody!
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Extremely cool shape for the cross. Was the cross supposed to float a little
bit
off the floor? (if so, maybe the little man should, too)



                                    crystald
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great modelling, nice concept.  Figures look as much like silverplate as glass.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Very nicely done!  Your mirroring is a tad too perfect through; if you look at a
mirror, you'll notice that they generally reflect a "greyer" or slightly darker
version of whatever is in front of them; your mirror reflects colours and light
levels a little TOO well.  Try toning down the reflectivity of it a little,
and/or making it from a darker original colour.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Camera angle could have been more interesting

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very life-like and amusing. Cute little buggers!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like your creativity and style.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very nice work for pen/paper!

=====
From nirschl@scripps.edu:
I think these little figures are *very* cool. The image seems a bit too busy,
though,
with all of the objects along with the reflections.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I like the theme interpretation, but you should have turned on the antialising.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
I understand that you were probably short on time for submitting the
image, but I think it would have been much better with anti-aliasing,
because the pixels are very visible on the edges.  Very nice modeling.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The crystal figurines are very good; but the yellow hexagonal mirror looks odd;
and the light-bar just looks plain wrong. (I thought it was a drawer pull,
until
I read your text). The hedgehog is especially cute.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like your primitive crystal shape and the way you've used it.



                                    crystalp
                                    --------
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The marbles dont look quit right. I had no clue what they were until I read your
description.


=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   How was this done in 8 minutes?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cool idea.


=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Cute, very nice little story board.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
How come your glass is completely unrefractive? Makes both the vase and the
crystal ball quite unrealistic (but probably explains the very short rendering
times). Before reading the text I thought, "What's the fuzzy cloud doing on
the table?"

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Great scene. I didn't get the concept until I read your text, though; I thought
the
inset was supposed to be a big-screen TV. Maybe you could shape it like a
thought-
balloon from a comic strip...


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
This has character!  Good depth & balance, very creative & imaginative!  Good
mix of textures, very in balance.  Complicated content, very well delivered!
Notable for originality, textures, lighting, modelling, composition



                                     curio
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice work!  Only the lighting could stand improvement.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow, there's great detail in there, but the doors and the brightness wash most
of it out.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
A bit too perfect

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Anyone who lets their computer be tied up for that long deserves some decent
scores.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nicely modelled.   Unfortunately, the lighting combined with the grey
background conspire to hide a lot of the painstaking detail.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow it's quite bright! Great work!!!

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Looks like I had imagined my entry to be before I did it ! Except that mine
changed drastically along the way
=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
A little bit of wall paper and maybe some wood penelling behind the cabinet
would
have improved this image.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
Nice image.  You could improve the realism by using a glass that is
more greenish or blueish for the doors and the horizontal planes.
Using different colors for your glass would make it look more like
real things.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice cabinet. It might help if you tinted the chamfered glass door a bit, so
we understood it was there. (My first thought was "why is half the bottle
gone?")



                                    danwine
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
After your scathing review of my image posted on the newsgroups, I'm not sure
I am worthy to critique your images, but here goes anyway.  The bottle is very
nice; the glasses aren't bad, but the two standing glasses look like they're
capped over with a sheet of glass.  The cork looks very authentic, although
the corkscrew seems a bit out of proportion.  The wine looks more like blood
or tomato juice--too light red and opaque.  And I gotta ask--is that the
world's largest board they're sitting on, or is this scene taking place on
WoodWorld?  <g>

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Fed-up with all that fuck'in glass objects just standing in the middle of
nothing... Try to think Photography, try to add some scene stuff, try
to act like a Director...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The wine is too opaque. the spills are flat, is there no wine left in the
bottle?
The bottle is nice and the wood is great.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little too plain. The scene would have been helpful if the wine and such was
on a table, or somewhere in a room, anywhere where the environment wasn't a
single plane.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Watch lighing - notice the back end of the `spilled' glass.   It is near 
invisible, due to the overlighting.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The wine ought to be more transparent.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The glasses are somehow "solid", even the parts not filled with wine.
Although not realistic, I like the bottle neck, looks vert "three-dimensional".

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
More work on the wine is needed.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The corkscrew and bottle are nice; but the glasses need to be hollow. (Make a
new
SOR, shaped like the inside of the glass, and subtract from the outer SOR). A
label
for the bottle would also help (just find a .gif, and image_map it)



                                    dbdiffra
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Interesting scene, but too ... something.  Or not enough something, I can't
tell.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Your patterns from "Diffract" are very interesting, with a bit of a "seventies
pop-art" feel to them.  I especially like the tones in the stained glass
window.  The dodecahedral glass object is also interesting.

=====
From jay@map.com:
While certainly a nice image, I think the busy walls detract from the rest of
the
scene.  Might be nicer if they were muted somewhat.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

"Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds"...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Interesting, but I thought not dramatic enough; perhaps more moodily lit? 
Or a higher IOR in the sphere?

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Incredible textures!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Takes me back to my youth, the 60's...  Wait! I was born in the 60's!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the pedestal.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Seems to me I'm looking at a sphere, a dodecahedrally symmetric object, and a
bunch of nifty textures. I'm not impressed.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Narf.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
It's difficult to focus on an image which looks like a stereogram ;)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I'm blind! heh heh heh  :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very many colours... Perhaps too much

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
When I first saw this picture I didn't know whether to like it or hate it.
I decided to hate it - but it's grown on me :-)  I still don't know what
it is though!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The lighting inside the room is very sterile.
The stone does not manage to accentuate the stained glass window, for that
purpose it should have been much darker. As it is it almost outshines the
window.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Like, trippy! Seriously, this is one of the more original scenes yet. My only
nitpick is: since the glass object is so exotically shaped, maybe the walls
should not be so flat and euclidean? I'm thinking they should be parallel
cylinder sections, to make a curved hallway that disappears behind the object.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Very cool concept.  High marks for writing your own programs to
support/generate
your image.  Well done.



                                     dinner
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent chandelier and plates; ceiling texture is nice.  Rest of glass looks
dull and unreflective.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Very nice image!  Your plates are a little flat though - they look more like
round placemts than anything else.  The glass vase and bowl look almost like
they're glowing - perhaps too much reflection from the white walls?
=====
From jay@map.com:
Very nicely done, though the pitcher on the table looks rather ghostly.  I'm
guessing you used 3DStudio as your renderer?

Love the wood textures.  Great job with those!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Be carefull with the shadows...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Sorry, but that is one ugly chandelier.  The pitcher seems ghost like, the
glass
texture isn't quite right.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Your lighting seems really awkward. Not even a glint of light on the glasses or
the chandelier jewels. Why is that?


=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I would like to know which program was used and why spline objects take up
_that_ much Memory on that program.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The glass wasn't convincing. But the table, chairs and plates were excellent.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
The scene is nice, but what renderer did you use? What modeller?
What hardware? It's difficult to give a technical score without this info.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The chandlelier came out really well; the silverware could use some tweaking,
though; and the walls might look better with wallpaper or some pictures, etc.
(right now, looks like they just moved in and didn't finish unpacking)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice use of textures.  I love the ceiling, carpet and wall shadows.
The pitcher in the center is way too transparent. The "ghost pitcher" detracts
from an otherwise fine scene.


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
This rendering seems to invite one into the elegant & romantic, yet cozy &
comfortable scene. Pleasing & appropriate distribution of color & texture, all
in proper perspective.  
Notable for modelling, textures, lighting, composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for composition



                                    display
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Interesting idea, didn't quite come off.

=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:
Well, 57 Chevy Belair model comes with 3DStudio, and can also be found on
Avalon.
I guess you have not modelled it yourself, have you?





=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Baaaad....
Not your model, nothing to see with the topic, bad colours...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Just plain ol impressive. I can't imagine modeling that thing.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I think the image is a bit to skewed. try backing up the camera and zooming in
more. That should fix the perspective problem with car.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Wonderful camera work :)   Seriously, though, I love the perspective effect,
and the exaggerated background reflection is a nice touch. 

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Wonderful model! Did you really make it yourself?

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice car model. The only major flaw is that in the giant reflection, you can
see the polygon edges on the tail-lights. Perhaps you could tweak the marble
texture to hide that spot, or add some fog or something.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great picture.  As an image, it has value.
good concept, good colors.
(BTW: i had to mail this to my dad :)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Interesting and colourful
Notable for originality



                                     divein
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool concept, very catchy scene.  Serene yet tense at the same time.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very blue!  I do like this image, though the surfer's board is a bit hard
to discern.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice one...
I liked the artistic part of it...
I think you should not have put the surfer...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Neat looking image! You have a way with color.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I especially like the way the water appears to be flowing into the hole.
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Very clever results using some basic techniques. It's going up as
wallpaper soon.
=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
This is really a very attractive image.


=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Beautiful colors...


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
So far I think I like this one the best. 20 on Artistic merit!


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Really nice to look at.


=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:

some neat lighting effects in this 1.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good - does the image really need the person though?

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
What can I say, this is simply very Artistic and Concept is outstanding.  As
for Technical Merit.  Hey this is awesome!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I love the colors and textures here!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This looks really cool; you might try experimenting with blobs on the glass
surfer guy; but the rest of the scene is perfect as-is. Very original.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice concept.  I would have liked to have seen better definition of the 
surfboard. (Black pencil outline if it were a print) It gets kinda lost.
When i first looked, i thought he was just standing there.


From web_user@dd42-218.compuserve.com:
wow! Looks great!
Notable for originality


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for originality, composition, lighting


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
This is one of my favorites this round, but does not seem to fit the topic.  It
is incredibly beautiful.  I would like to see this rendered with a more "fluid"
figure, less robotic looking.  I think that's why the figure appears as
metallic, rather than glass.  Beautiful job though.  I look forward to seeing
more of your work!
Notable for originality, lighting, textures


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Sometimes the colour becomes more important than the content!
Notable for lighting



                                    dolhouse
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Beautiful scene, cool concept, but tenuous connection with glass.  Nice work
even by 3DS standards.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Wow.  Excellant image!

=====
From jay@map.com:
However, your use of glass in the scene (and 3DS' lack of good glass support)
in
no way detracts from the scene.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Very nice, but not focused on the topic...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great job! I cant believe that this is your first raytraced image!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
nice arrangement

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   First time? First time? No way.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Cool! But... where's the glass?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice image.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Stunning, especially the clock and the fireplace. But frankly I think it
would have been better without the doll.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
You missed the surface normal to the dolls head (but got the body). Otherwise a
well executed image.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Very nice picture, especially since you were just starting with 3D Studio!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
At first I was going to give this fewer "concept" points, because hey, it's
just
a fancy mantle scene with one or two glass objects. Then, when I realized that
it
was a -dollhouse-, I thought "Wow! The looking glass changes the entire meaning
of the scene. It is the most important part.". So you get a 20 on that too.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
All of the objects have really rich texture (very
nice BTW), but the doll head, which is a central object, has none.  I find
this distracting.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Well modelled
Notable for modelling



                                    dshglass
                                    --------
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

too busy.... 
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Origionality is better.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I don't really like the texture on the table. The green bottles are good,
though.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice arrangement; but the wine glasses need to be hollowed out more.



                                    emerbox
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very cute concept.  Colors are a bit off, though--boards are darker green, and
the contacts are narrower, longer, and darker gold.  Not bad for TrueSpace,
though.  Made me smile.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

original and funny concept... try to get better in picture now ;^)
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Ha! ...but where's the Pentium Pro chip?  :-)

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Great interpretation of the theme!
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very cute.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cute. I laughed. (That is a good thing) Please enter again. Your image was one
of the few entertaining ones in this month's competition.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Hehehe!

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
I'll take it!  I'll take it!  (Now how 'bout some 72 pin SIMMs?) :D

I love this one!

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
How very true this is!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Ugly aliasing artifacts at the case/glass edges.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Too true !
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The concept is OK, but the scene needs more complexity.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great concept.  I think you could have done more with the textures and colors.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice original idea.
Notable for originality



                                    emr2000
                                    -------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Like this image.  Especially like how you snuck in your signature as part of the
scene.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The wood on the desk looks like a slice was taken out of a tree.  A very big
tree.
The wood texture needs to be scaled down quite a bit and rotated 90 degrees.

Is the blue shelf thing supposed to be as reflective as it is?  (Not only that,
the
reflection across it doesn't even stop when it hits the wall sockets - it
continues
right across it.)

The scene's lighting would probably benefit from an area light.  If you are
using a
spotlight, then turn it into an area light.  This will soften the shadows a good
deal.

The lighting could probably be turned down a shade.  The scene appears far too
bright.  

I do like what you did with the screen image/peg board thing.  Nice technique
with
that.  The "photo-sensitive screen" is nicely done, too.  

One of the most important things you should pay attention to in ray-tracing is 
the lighting.  Very important.  Both too much and too little can hurt a scene.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice and original picture, but where is the glass topic ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Fantastic idea!!!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Ha! neat idea.  The blue workbench backsplash seems too reflective though. 
The blue color itself is too strong I'd say.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   For someone doing it all by hand, this is pretty damn impressive.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Way over my head, professor.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Kudos for your origionality! And the Lite Brite ain't bad either!


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Lite Brite 
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good theme - just too plascticky.   The glass matrix is good, but ruined by
the rest of the texturing.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Pretty, but meybe you should have used another texture for the table.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I tend not to read ALL-CAPS texts. Why do you need to scream?

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
To me your image has no central focus and appears to be to cluttered.
As an example you talk about the comp -> litebright thing.
I would have worked more detail into that path and cut down the brightness/and
or
used softer patterns for the stuff on the back wall, that way someone looking
at your picture sees what you want them to right off.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It's a great scene and all, but it just doesn't say "glass". There's a monitor,
an
Etch-a-Sketch, and a Lite-Brite, all with glass panels and bits; but none of
these
have a single specular highlight or reflection like you'd expect from glass.
Even
the countertop and the parts bins look glassier.  

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice composition.  The only "flaw" i see is that the parts box is too
reflective.
You should be able to see your abundance of 2N2122(s) in the drawers.
It would have been nice to have some flaws in the lite-bright(tm). 
i.e. the red pegs should not all have the same color/reflective values.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
What an imagination! Kids can be so inspiring.
Notable for originality



                                    endofday
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very pretty scene.  Those brown things look tasty!

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
VERY well done image.  The only problem I could see was that the glass shade is
TOO transparent and brightly lit; it's the only fake-looking object in the
whole image, IMHO.  Through the texture on the glass candy dish (?) is also a
bit distracting. Giving you a triple-twenty anyway.  Very impressive.

=====
From jay@map.com:
In my opinion, the glass shade on the lamp ought to have been done differently. 
I'm not sure how, but as is, it currently looks.. odd.


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
The lamp shade is too luminous.. 

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

nice picture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
A nice collections of objects, but I want more!  ...a stronger sense that this
scene has meaning, some indication of action, or irony, something to evoke an
emotional response from me - that would be art.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Most desk lamps aren't quite that transparent. It looks artificial. The other
objects are quite nice, as is your image as a whole.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Some nice modelling and texturing.   Only points to note are that the drink
is a rather odd colour (compared to anything I am aware of ;) and you would
probably do well to add a border to the floor/wall edge, to smooth the
straight line.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Good lamp...Lens seems a little too transparent though (opinion):)

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
The light is rather bad, perhaps a shade could have been constructed to
cut the glare down to a realistic level ? 

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I liked everything except the lamp. The Green shade was just too green and
formless.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very nice, especially the candy dish. Quite photorealistic.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I think the room lighting is way too soft considering how BRIGHT you've
made the GREEN lamp shade.  Either that, or its a really disgusting shade of
green contrasted to the gentler earth tones of the rest of the pic.
(BTW: My candy dish is never empty at the end of the day ;)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Dobar dan. Not sure that I like the light. The rest is well modelled.
Notable for composition



                                    exutilit
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
I like the way the light comes through the stained glass window.  One
complaint about it--after all the scenes which look too flat, your window
looks too three-D to be a flat window!  Great mood and colors.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
I like the image, very atmospheric - unfortunately, the lighting is such that
it's difficult to impossible to make out the chandelier object.  Overall, good
marks.
=====
From jay@map.com:
I can't really knock it for being too dark (didn't gamma-correct my entry), but
you might want to try adding point lights just above the candle flames -
emmitting halos, while generating light, don't really make all that much
light.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I like the concept of this image, but it's too dark I guess. I know that it is
suppose to be, but I think the image should be more filled with the light from
the window rather than the dark wall.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Very nice atmospheric effects.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I'm beginning to think this wasn't the best choice of topics. Many people
(including the creator of this) seem to think that dull and peacefull are the
same thing. This isn't awe inspiring, it's just boring. A little more attention
to the specific models, the color scheme used, and the lighting could help
these images a lot. Yes, that's virutally every aspect, but it doesn't take a
whole lot of time to drastically improve these images.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Lame.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I think the problem here is not darkness, but low contrast, caused by the 
atmosphere.   Ideally you would want something which gives the desired beams
without greying out the rest of the image.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Kinda' Cloudy...But very nice picture!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I like the yellowish light effects.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
From your description it sounds very nice, BUT on my monitor, it is so dark I
can't see any glass Sierpenski chandeliers or "glass hurricane" objects; you
should maybe adjust the "assumed gamma" setting.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I wanted to say something but all i come up with is "interesting".


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice atmosphere.
Notable for lighting



                                    fairytal
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great scene, very cool story.  The two together make an excellent intriguing
combo.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Wonderful imagry for this.  


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
What's to say? Beautiful!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Cool story

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Good job. I feel obligated to thank you for not doing something like the "other
half" of the images. Origionality is good.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very nice image - well modelled, and for the most part well textured.   Not
sure it fits `glass' all that well, though...

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Great story...Bravo! Nice picture too...heh heh heh :) Lovely. 

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The lake and ground fog are very good, and so is the fairy tale, but the castle
doesn't really look like a castle. Maybe if you would have let the walls go all
the way down to the ground.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
One of the best.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very exotic and detailed. The brown cavern background looks kind of jarring,
though.
Maybe grey+white would be better.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Wow.
Conceptually, I have to give you perfect because the "Description of Image"
tells such a vivid story of this image.  Very thorough.
Artisticly, i would have made the background wall darker (it is in a cave)
and i think the castle should have glistened like crystals of coal.
Technically, i have to subtract one because the text (which adds to concept)
is formatted poorly.

You do great work. "Every Picture Tells a Story" don't it.



                                    fameduse
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very nice scene.  The jellyfish look a bit mechanical.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice image; I like the way the tentacles made of cones have a "ribbed"
appearance; I'm using you used a union rather
than a merge for these, so the interior surfaces remined visible?  I like the
way the near jellyfish
refracts the light onto the sea bed, but it's just a tad bright and therefore
distracting at the same time.
=====
From jay@map.com:
First off:  Wonderful scene.  However, perhaps softening the highlights on
the water and jelly fish would help a great deal.  The water doesn't look all
that watery due to the hard highlights.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nice work...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego
=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Wow! Beautiful objects, but I thought more could have been done with the 
lighting.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Incredible picture. Excellent textures and lighting.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I can't decide if this image is frightening or beautiful.
=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the lighting in this image.  Unclean on the interpretation of the
glass theme, though.  
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very original and neat.

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
The jellyfish look like something HR Geiger would have done...



=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
glass? Also, I can't think of jellyfish that look quite like that. And, wood
underwater is only that clean in a "clean harbour," one that is so polluted
that the jellyfish couldn't live (nor can barnacles, hence the name). Try
adding barnacles, then a couple extra fish. Then your scene would be complete.
In other words, don't ignore the fine detail.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
not quite glass, but i liked it anyway


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Very nice.

=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
The jellyfish are very good!


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like this image.   Possibly could have done with a lower light value, with
more top-lighting increasing the shadowed effect, and some work is needed
on the water surface-normal, but otherwise v. good.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very interesting concept with the Jellyfish type creatures.  Nicely done!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I think I like it! Wonderful work on the jellyfish...jmills@stic.net

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
Those jelly fish don't quite look organic, although they do look real cool,

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
The scene is beautiful, and you do have transparent objects,
but nothing is really made of glass.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice to see something besides yet another wine glass. The caustic under the
left
jellyfish is a good touch.



                                    fantasy
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Fantastic image indeed.  Very interesting colors.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Very roiginal. Great textures.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I like it!  Fantasy is a good word for it, unreal but appealing...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little to bizzare for me. Nice placement of shapes, though. Too many colors,
but that's better (for me) than too few colors.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Whatever.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice use of colours.   The top of the image is a bit linear, but otherwise
excellent

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Very pretty! Wow.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
colourful

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It's original and its got glass in it; but that's about all I get from it. The
iridescent bezier glass thing looks nice, but its obscured by the relatively
dull spheres and rods hogging the foreground.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
low tech marks because there was a long discussion about the black spots
(if you use POV, but you don't say).
I like the picture though.



                                    finnely
                                    -------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good idea...But...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Can't rate much on this image without more info as to how it was created!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
THe fishbowl looks super thick - or is that just an illusion?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Something wrong about that fishbowl.

=====
From gpig@prometheus.hol.gr:
How am I to supposed to evaluate your work ( Technical Merit )
if you don't give any hint about the construction of the image ?


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
That texture is a little loud for the image.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Hmmm.... Some texture work needed, but nicely modelled in places.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Good work! jmills@stic.net

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Too much refractions, imo.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
I have to give a low technical score, because the text file does not say
anything about how the scene was created. It's an interesting scene, though!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
That is one THICK fishbowl :)  The wall texture in interesting.



                                     fishy
                                     -----
=====
From jay@map.com:
Love it!  It does contain glass, though the fish certainly steals the show. 
:-)


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good idea...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I like it! It's simple but it tells a story. I especially like the drop of water

rolling down the side of the bowl.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
It has an almost Warhol quality (repetition), and the colors are very
airbrushed
(which is appealing).  This would make a great poster for a professional's
office.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the interpretation of the theme.  --might make an interesting animation!
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very original. Cute, too.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
What a strange scene.. definitely an original idea.


=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
Wow!  Finally a real breakthrough in the competition.  I love this 
non-perspective view.



=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
As for your image, I think it's great. Don't knock yourself in your textfile.
With a bowl, water, and fish, it's seems pleanty of glass to me. It reminds me
of looking at storyboards for cel animations. Good job!


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Slightly amusing.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I will give this image credit for the daring format!   Pretty well done, but
I am not sure that this is the format for multi-frame images.   One idea would
be to have delimited boxes around each frame (cartoon-style) to keep the
`story' clear.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Looks really interesting, but  you could have put in some sort of backdrop.
Wood
panel or wallpaper ?

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
I like it.  Especialy the water drops on the bottom images.  And perspective?
Who needs it?  <Grin>  Ever use a telephoto lense on a camera?

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I don't know if it's art...but I like it!
-Jack Nicolson

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Wonderful idea!


=====
From ingo@ibm.net:
Hello!

First of all: For me you didn't just get away with this one, it's a bright light
among
all these tables, shelves and rooms having something glassy on top, beside,
underneath
or around them.
I'll definitively check you website (when I've finished looking at all these
drinking
glasses) to see whether there's more cool stuff like this.

Bye, 
   Ingo.

PS: Greetings to Frank!

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Probably looks quite good as an animation, nice humour

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is cute, and the animation-in-a-still-jpg idea is very clever!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Cute! Is there a web page with this as an animated .gif file? I don't think
the heavy refraction in the lower left image is a serious flaw; that's the
kind of thing real light rays would do in a fishbowl. 

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the picture.  It reminds me of some ad somewhere for something.
I think its a good concept.
Love and kisses to Frank for me, OK?


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Say "hi" to Frank. 



                                    fountain
                                    --------
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
What renderer?  I wish you'd put more info in your .txt file

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very realistic, especially the feeling of depth. Excellent job. But get Pinoccio
out of the picture -- it ruins every image!!!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
be more origional


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
This is the only submission fro naxos I've not put 1,1,1 because this is the
only
one that he put some work into.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I like the blur of the image in the background, in addition to the near
photographic quality of the glasses.  Well done.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Good lighting!

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
Very nice image, but the glasses are packed to tightly.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Beautiful background! The depth blur is really used to good effect here. The
champagne fountain would have looked better if the glasses had champagne in
them (not even a particle system; just plain liquid) But that's a very tiny
nitpick; this is a way fabulous picture.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice pic.  I like the depth of field.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for lighting, modelling, originality, textures, composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice modelling. You do it for a living?
Notable for modelling



                                     gio22a
                                     ------
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The glass bottles look too transparent, liek they are going to just fade
away...

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Don't get too verbose with the room description there...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Your table seems a bit too reflective. Also, try backing the camera out and
zooming in a little. That will fix the skewing caused by zooming out and
bringing the camera too close. It's just that getting closer to a normal human
perspective 
has more asthetic value.

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
This one's not_bad_. Why'd you go and submit that other hunk of junk?

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
You should *really* switch on refraction ;)

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Great design, but the reflection and textures are a little dule.  Maybe a bit
more opaque on the glass would have helped along with setting reflection a 
little higher on the table and chairs.  Otherwise super design!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
A description would be nice...

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
Your glass objects do not appear to be refracting!  Either you did not have
refraction turned on, or you had an ior of 1.0.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Looks kinda Magritte-like, with the ghostly glasses and bottles. :)



                                     gio22b
                                     ------
=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Where's the IOR?
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Why is this called Gallery?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

surreal!
=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
The concrete texture isn't bad.
As a whole though, this scene is pretty bland. It needs details... like, not
quite so flat a horizon, more intricate gallery arches..
You get the idea.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Oh yes, I remember the game out run. They never had glass though.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
This is the lowest I've ever rated.
The first one wasn't bad.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Without refraction, the arches look ethereal.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
why no description?

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
Same comment for this one: you did not have refraction enabled.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The glass is non-refractive which looks very un-glass-like

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Hey! I remember this section of road from Atari's "OutRun" racing game...
Seriously, it's okay to experiment with concepts, but this needs a lot more
refinement before it is ready to win any contests. Keep working on it.  


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Not sure what it's meant to be. 



                                    glasdice
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Glittery but sterile.

=====
From jay@map.com:
A bit bright, but it works.  Very Very good job with the dice.  

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Good idea...Just look out for better colours in the scene...
And try also to round all those sharp objects...
Try Rhino3d for modeling...
http://www.rhino3d.com
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Ah, reminds me of my old Dungeons & Dragons days...

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Man o man. Does this bring back memories or what?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very attractive image, but isn't checkered floors out of style already?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
It seems like you just are displaying your models rather than making a scene.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Excellent work - this is probably the first image I've seen with decent 
colouring and lighting.   I feel the checkered floor was a slight let-down -
I would have liked a more random pattern to contrast the regular shapes.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Neat idea!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very realistic dice, nice sky. Don't like the Russian Constructivist red&black
checkered floor, though (maybe a tabletop with some D&D paraphenalia instead?)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great dice.  Excellent colors.  I love the curve to the "earth".
I'd like to see this pic with a more busy background. (It might not work,
but it might.)



                                    glassbox
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very attractive picture.  Bookcase texture is a little too flat and shiny.
Other textures are excellent.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
A very nice image - the stained glass box is very realistic.  Too bad the broach
is not made out of bits of opaque glass like much ancient Egyptian jewlery was
;)

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Ahhh. at least another good picture !!!
I liked the dynamic croping, the almost unseen details that bring realism,
and most the use of RHINO 3d, the BEST modeler on PC...
And i use ALIAS every day, so i know what a good modeler means...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great box! The lead looks very realistic.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Stunning detail...  Nice subtle use of textures...

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very real.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
The texturing in this image is excellent. If TextureMagic is that good I'll
have to check it out :)


=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Nice textures and the chain is well rendered.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The lamp, pen, and glasses are really nice models. Question: What is the lamp
sitting on. It looks like a 2 dimensional square. I can't make out any depth to
it. All in all a nice bit of created realism.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Well textured.

=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:

some very nice textures. especially on the box. good stuff.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Pretty good - I would have liked some smoother edges on the bookshelf to
avoid distracting detail, but otherwise good.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
This picture is awesome! Wow!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Excellent!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Perfect. The objects, the arrangement and color balance, all of it. This one
should probably win.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the mitered joint where the shelf meets the riser.
The lamp shade is too transparent.  The binders have a great texture; but
they need words.  The binders also would have benifited from a rand() function
where you could vary a tiny bit, their spacing (distance apart),
 their depth (into the shelf) and their color.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for modelling, composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice detail



                                    glasshop
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent intricate image, great textures.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very nice!  I'm glad to see you paid attention to the woodgrain.  (Some people
didn't
seem to take that into account, to the image's detriment.)  Can't quite make out
what's
just below the desk.  A broom/brush, perhaps?

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Good work, a little too much of things...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Very nicely detailed, complete scene.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the windows
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Wow. I especially like the window! I can't believe it only took you 16 hrs!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice work. I like the broken stuff. Too many "perfect" models.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Too Busy

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow...the windows are awesome!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Nice scene!
Things I like: the blur effect, the windows, the statuette and the lamps.
Things I don't like: the cracks on the mirror (they're very black)and the
objects
in the leftmost bookshelf (they're too close to the light source).

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
That's what I call phtorealistic. I can almost touch things.

=====
From quinet@gamers.org:
Very nice.  Lots of details.  I think it would have been better if there
was no reflection of the floor.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Damn! George sure has a well-stocked collection of object models in his shop!

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Excellent pic.  There is obviously a lot of (raytrace) work in this scene.
I *love* the walls.  I guess my only complaint is that in a shop this old 
and well used, especially with stone walls, the floor is way too shiny.
It needs to be scuffed, particularly the walkway near the chair.
Objects are great. Especially the cracked mirror; you've "aged" it well.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A lot of detail



                                    glassman
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool idea, great storefront.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very well done people.  That's one big gin glass, though.  

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Bad... You did not modeled everything by yourself,
and just taking a scene and put glass in it was not, i think, the meaning
of that contest.
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Strange.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
How odd.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

surreal!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice picture. A little more attention to the wheels of the truck and other
places would have made this a good contender for first place. Those small
details are important.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad.   Work on the lighting, and I feel a better camera angle could bring
out the important details more.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow. :) 

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Nice idea, but quite bad artifacts on the bodies. The car is ridiculous, the
image would have gained a lot by just deleting it. The building is not
spectacular, but somehow looks "just right".

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
overall it's good but needs more detail work esp car. Like
adding chrome half sphere to the center of the tires for hubcaps would have
helped 

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
...So how come you can see what he's already eaten?

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The building front is nice; but a few other details need touching up, like
the truck tires. Not sure why the people are made of glass (other than as
an excuse to be on-topic), but at least they are decently modelled.



                                    glasswar
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Again, we meet, Darth Clegg. <g> Four comments on this image: (1) Were those
black patches in the bottoms of all the glass items intentional?  Something
new in lab glassware?  (2) What's that big spirally thing in front?  (3)
You've got to resist this urge to put your scenes in the foreground of an
otherwise fetureless infinite plane.  (4) I really like the wood texture on
the base--most people scale that one wrong, but this one looks very realistic.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Very nice objects...
You should have passed more time on the lights and the background scene...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
A better description would be appreciates ("look at the source, if you dare" -
is pretty irritating).

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice. A little boring, but at least it's not a bunch of glasses, wine bottles,
etc.


=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:
I like how you got the pyrex writing on the side of the beakers.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This image was well put together.    The background unfortunetly lets it 
down
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The wood texture is great, but the light is a bit too bright, and you should
have used "merge" on the probes

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The wooden thing and plane look a little out-of-place and too brightly lit in
the
distance, but I really enjoyed the glass containers (I guess that's what this
round was about ;-) )

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very realistic, esp. the black gunk at the bottom of the Pyrex flask. The
granit
floor goes a bit too far back (you can see texture aliasing in the distance);
maybe should add a wall or something before that.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice concept.  You should have made the table more than 6 inches from the
floor.
(Japanese chem perhaps ;)


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures



                                     globe
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very nice image.  The bricks need mortar, or at least *more* mortar.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Unfortunately you didn't have very much in the way of glass in this image, other
than the globe itself; on the other
hand, it's a very nicely done scene.  I liked the very 3-D brick wall, the
cheerful grin on the snowman, and the lego-like tree.
Reminds me of an animation by Pixar, the title of which does not unfortunately
spring to mind.  I'm looking
forward to seeing further, more ambitious submissions by you in future.
=====
From jay@map.com:
Wonderful snowman.  The tree almost looks like a Lego tree.  Is it?

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

I like the theme... Just because it makes me think about John Lasseter's
Knick-Knack...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From warwick@cs.uq.edu.au:
Round flakes?
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Great image.  Simple (not filled with random items), detailed, nicely arranged.
Great job!



=====
From klynn@minn.net:
fun idea

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Hey, that snowman kinda sorta looks like its creator! :)

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Simple and well executed. Doesn't confuse with pointless detail.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A pieceful image.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
if it would've been frosty, you would've gotten all 20's


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Lighting is essential in any glass based image.   Here, the glass and
background are over-lit, whilst the base is under-lit!   Other than that,
pretty good - I like the snowman.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
This looks really nice, only thing I would like to have seen differently is the
reflection of the globe itself in the table top.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I hate those snowglobe things! heh heh heh :) 

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The "snow" "flakes" seem to be too shiny. Just my thoughts. Very nice
otherwise.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
That's one fat snowman!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
A realy like this.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
All that red brick is a bit overpowering. The snow globe is very nice.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Simple, yet elegent.  I like it.



                                    glschoja
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
The road is a bit too smooth, but the rest of the scene is truly gorgeous.  I
love those spirals--very reminiscent of Roger Dean.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

I liked that magic like scene...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow, great image, but... The "muddy" road, looks smooth (marble?), which is bad
because it takes up a large area of the image.  The temple and mountains in
the background look better than the stuff in the foreground.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the surreal quality
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Wow. Cool mountains. I like the mood of this image.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Hey, it's origional. You'd be amazed at how much this pleases me.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Doesn't have much to do with glass, but one of my favorites.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice background...

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The mountains and the dome are really nice, but the trees look pretti stiff.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The scene is quite lovely (although just having the glass road posts and the
temple is sort of tip-toeing thru the topic for "glass")

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Very nice.  I don't like the single "poured" walkway.  It should be bricked.
It's sort of plain, being a foreground object.  In fact, i didn't even notice
the superior Alps until i read about them.



                                    glsmenag
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Should have been on a table at the end of the couch, not on a mirror in
timeless space.  Pretty nice otherwise.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice concept, but the models unfortunately came through looking pretty chunky.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Not your models... Shame on you !

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Is it just me, or is there no IOR/refraction used in this glass?
Other than that, a good looking image!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

glass animals!  I like the interpretation of the theme.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice effect! Cool image too!


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That just blew my mind.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice lightning - needs work on the textures and lighting though.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I like the lightning effect. How did you make that?

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Most of the glass objects seem to be non-refractive, which looks very
un-glass-like.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The animals look okay and are a good theme; but the lightning is somewhat
distracting.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Seems to be an easy way out!



                                    glsmona
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool idea, excellent glass shards.  Too many of them, though.

=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:
WOW!
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

original :)
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Very dramatic, but maybe more needs to be happening, or better lighting, or 
something.. :)

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The broken window looks kind of strange but the flying glass is great!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Stunningly original!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
It looks like something exploded in mid-air, with a paiting of a kettle on the
wall.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I am rather impressed by the outcome of your shattered glass attempt. I think
you succeeded.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
admit it, what you really wanted was just to break a window, not have classic
objects


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Spoooon!!

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
A very good attempt at broken glass!   One watch point though is that the
shards are flying a bit too far, which confuses the viewer as to the perceived
motion.   In a way, the shards look almost like a trail left by the teapot
flying *out* the window!   Nicely modelled close-ups though.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Exellent...The glass fragments are particularly outstanding 
One bit of critisism though. I would have put the pot farther inside the
room...
It looks out of place. :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very nice glass shards.

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
I have only one question: why has someone thrown a teapot *in* through the
window?  :-)

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Like the breaking glass



=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
The flying broken glass is great!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I guess Leonardo didn't want any tea... :)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great first image.  I like the little touch of the "cocoa" in the latte.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The glass shards look good; but I'm not too sure about the window.



                                    glsseggs
                                    --------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
What??? Corel ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nice job, the scene really has a "mystic" quality...

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Would have liked a closer look at the eggs and chandelier
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Scrambled, not glass. I don't get it.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
fear the mystic chicken!

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Cool!!!!!! 
Get a load of those mystical scaled spheres man!!

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
There's a lot of detail here, and that could be to the detriment of the image
as a whole.   Make sure that your central theme is visible over the background.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very interesting use of fog I think. 

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow! What's in the eggs? Tell me! Tell me! :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Anti-aliasing would have been nice, but then again 180+ hrs might be slow
enough...

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Too low antialiasing threshold.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is fantastic! Thanks for the complete text file, too.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Cool. This is one of the better abstracts in the contest.



                                    gnldream
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Just a bit *too* simple.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
image has a painted quality - odd for raytracing.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Wow! Kind of trippy if you are on acid. Actually, so is this text box.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I still remember magic lamps


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That blowed.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is a nice looking image, but I'm not sure that it needed to be traced,
since 2D methods can fake this sort of thing often better!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
These dreamlike glass bubbles would have much better hope of winning the
contest
if they were accompanied by something (anything) that took genuine effort to
model.
Two dozen plain spheres, even with iridescence (the only reason I even consider
it
barely on-topic) and nicely arranged on a pretty sky, just do not cut it!


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
And the glass?



                                    gnlprimi
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Pretty pic.  Looks like a test render.

=====
From jay@map.com:
A nice use of color in this scene.  Would've been nice, perhaps, to see some
of the primitives overlapping...

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Very bad...
I don't find any creativity in it...
You should make some Glass sphere standing on a checkered floor...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
pretty but boring (I've seen scenes like this in so many examples and demos...)

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Too plain.

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
A bit dated...


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Kind of cool looking, but a little uncreative. Decent artistic, everything else
not so good.




=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
ooh, lets try to do something a little more interestin next time,  k?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
At least it look nice.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The image has very little to make it stick out above the rest - to get truly
fine results, more than simple radiosity is needed ;)   Seriously though,
when modelling glass, most of the detail comes from the refracted background,
so more than a ground plane is to be desired.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
come on...

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Again; it's pretty; it'd make a great quik-test image; but it does not
demonstrate
enough creative effort to deserve a prize yet. Keep trying harder...


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
Very nice use of color, light, and depth!    
Notable for lighting, originality, textures


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Primitive best describes this.



                                    gotmilk
                                    -------
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The white centers of the oreos are so bright!

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
hmm I would have liked an empty milk bottle(glass) and some spilt milk ...but it
is good as is!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Simplicity and a little artistic touch will go a long way. There is something
classic about this image. One of my faves.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice, but spilled milk would have been even better than the empty glass.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Hm.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Too Boring

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Notice the distracting line along the glass, caused by the two-tone wall/floor.
This would be removed/lessened by different camera/object placement.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
A bit sparse; some crumbs or something would help out.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice concept.  I don't like the seam on glass.  Too distracting.



                                    gr-lucky
                                    --------
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The red-dice in air look great, a real sense of movement.

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
Challenge of the day: turn the dice toss into an animation! (not on your
486 probably ;-)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the dice in motion. Better than the other dice entry.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The dice look very good, but some extry background would have been nice.


=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This'd be more on-topic for gambling; but granted, the glass dice look real
good.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I had to knock off an artistic point because the borders are too big,
especially
the bottom one.  It would have been cool to have your sig running along the
"pay"
line.  Nice pic.



                                     heart
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great pic.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The beveled glass on the display case is a wonderful touch.  


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Have you ever seen wood ????
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Very pretty image, but without more description I can't rate your Tech Merit!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Good composition. I like the beveled display case glass.  I like that the heart
is not centered.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Great pillow.  
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Wow, Ophelia must have been the size of a medium-sized farm animal! No wonder he
affections went unanswered. :) I love the simplicity of how the image was
created. Great job. Cool pillow, too!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A rather "pure" image. This is a well cleaned place!


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice modelling, and I like the glass case.   Try to avoind flooding the scene
with light, though.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Now I like this image!  Not only did you show super design, but you also have
a complete scene.  (Some images are nice, but no back ground) 

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Great Image! Unbelievable! Bravo!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Excellent idea! Good execution, too. Especially the pillow and the heart.
Some extra details and this would have been a winner!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The heart was done realy well.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Good modelling, esp. the heart and the silk pillow it sits on

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I would have moved the camera a little bit up and to the left.  Up would have
brought your central object more to the center.  Left would have 
reduced/eliminated that
way-cool-rendered-beveled-glass-but-what-the-hell-is-it-really
reflection. (What *was* the curator thinking putting that cheap linoleum floor
under
such a fine rare object)



                                    heartgls
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Delighted to see you working with POV-Ray.  Excellent image.  I too share your
frustrations with POV.  Your concepts and artistic sense are excellent
regardless of your medium.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Liked this image.  Your little "depressed 3-D guy" doesn't show up very well
against the dark desert, unfortunately.  Maybe the objects could be rearranged
with the heart slightly to one side and the 2-D and 3-D guys positioned so that
the 3-D guy is partialy in front of the grid paper?  Then the contrast would
make him pop out of the picture.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The 3D depressed guy is a bit unlit - the rest of the image comes out fine with
the lighting, but he's left in the dark.  (Another reason he's depressed?)


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Think positive...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I can relate!  
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Too dark and too corny.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little too dull.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Whatever.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
More contrast to the lighting would make the guy at the front stand out
better.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Great Idea! Wow... Happy valentines day!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The cracks in the heart are impressive.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The cracks in the glass are very realistic. Cool graph-paper effect.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I just love this picture.  I might like to see it without the little blob man,
but the heart, the B&W, the graph paper, and the coloring are all terrific.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Wasn't there a Blondie song? Ooops, showing my age!



                                    hglass2
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool design.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The handle looks like it could have used more faces.  Is the glass hollow?  The
refraction doesn't look quite right.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice one...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Cool design for the hourglass!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
clean.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Why am I suddenly reminded of a crack pipe? :)

=====
From federico@nuclecu.unam.mx:

love that sand texture!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A few more objects would be nice. This is a little plain.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very nice.   The sand is very good - only problem is that the top half of the
glass looks a bit solid.   Possibly it is just too thick, though with the
checkers, it is bound to be hard...   Nice coulouring BTW.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very nice design!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The only suggestion I have for this image is to add a little CRAND finish to
the
sand.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very elegant; though there's a bit much checkerboard showing in the background.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I wish you'd included the poem.



                                    hornland
                                    --------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Very nice picture.  I guess one of the benefits of Focal Blue is that you didn't
have to model every single detail of the ship, either *G*.  I you might want to
reposition your light source slightly though; the way the sahdows are currently
falling, it looks disconcertingly like the horn is floating above the table,
rather than sitting on it.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Looks very nice with the background.  The out-of-focus quality is just the right
touch.  The lighting in the pavilion is a bit dark, I think

Oh.  One of the first images I've seen where someone took their time with the
wood on a table!  Great job.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice direction...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
GREAT IMAGE! Very moody, great depth.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Your background doesn't seem very navigable.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Verry nice looking

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice refraction, with a well placed model.   Not much to make it stand out
though.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Interestingly blurred background

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
This is the better of your images.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Wow! The lighting and the object models are really good.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The other is much better.



                                    horntabl
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
I liked the other one better.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nice ambience...Nice picture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Much too dark

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The other one is better.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   The other one is much better.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
too dark to see

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Too dark. The other one is better.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I'ts a little dim to really notice any cool glass effects, but a nice image.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Too dark!

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
The image is almost to dark to see.

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Bit too dark to see it properly

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The horn model is nice; but this scene is too dark; hornland came out much
better.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like hornland better.  I think this one is too dark.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice lighting and wood of the table(?).
Notable for lighting



                                      ijs
                                      ---
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Very nice image!  Love the "soft" look of it; just like a snowy day, as
intented.  Excellant work.
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Most snow ive seen isnt made of glass. The snow does look good though except
for
the sudden cutoff line about two-thirds of the way down. It would have been
better
if you could have had some snowflakes floating on the water

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Needs more going on in it.  Also, the snow seemed to just stop hafl way down
the screen, looks un-real.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Cool! Snow could use a little work.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This isn't quite right yet...


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
hello? Glass?
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Maybe disks would have been better than triangles for the snow flakes.


=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The water does not seem to refract the light, or you are using a
"near-parallel"
projection (i. e. camera very far away)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Good scene, but spheres would've been better for the snowflakes.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the wake behind the periscope.  The snowflakes look like a "curtain";
there should be some snow in front of the periscope, or at least down to the
water level.
I read `ijs' = eyes at first :)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A very nice picture with a tenuous link to the topic.



                                     inssph
                                     ------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
An interestingly dramatic object; did you try what it would look like using a
merge instead of a union?
=====
From firestar@eskimo.com:
It's a really cool image, except for the bottom of the spheres
I wish that I could explain it better, but they just don't look 
quite right.
=====
From jay@map.com:
Almost painfully bright.  What is causing the "white" areas on the bottom of
the spheres?


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
I smell too low MAX_TRACE_LEVEL... The dreaded 'Black Glass' ate the scoring.

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Not bad... I wish you'd given more detail on how the tracing was
accomplished...
Did you use caustics, etc?
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Is that a fractal?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The white (from the cieling?) is a bit distracting, but otherwise it's a really
pretty picture.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That must have took a lot of work.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The idea for the image is good - I have not seen such an object before, and
like what I see.   Unfortunately, the background is a bit disappointing - I
would have preferred more contrast in colours.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
yawn

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Fancy; but what does it mean?



                                     items
                                     -----
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Love the texture on the walls; under that lighting it looks amazing like a
rough-textured silver metal finish of some kind.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The decanter and glass have a very nice, realistic look to them.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
table looks splotchy.  I'd like to see some of those objects closer-up.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Love the decanter

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Impressive for something done by hand.

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Technically, this image is fine. From an artistic point of view it's a little
dull though -- it's just a bunch of objects on a table. How about working from
a theme?


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is rather dull. I don't have anything against such a display, but more
effort ought to be paid to the base and other fine detail.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
ooooh  lets just throw some random objects together, and say it's a picture....


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The image was well-modelled, with the decanter being a particularly well
put-together object.   However, textures, placement, colours and lighting
need a good look-at.   The area-light on the tripod is good - adding to the
effect of the image, but many objects are difficult to see, due to colouring
and lighting.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I can't imagine doing all my modelling without a graphic interface.
that kind of raytracing is on another level and beyond me...for now. :)
high points for technical merit. jmills@stic.net

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Nice details! 
Constructive criticism: you should have used caustics in the Glass finishes, 
and the marblish look of the wood looks a little bit strange.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The lighting looks inconsistent, the sharpest shadows are cast to the rear left
part, but there is a bright spot at the centre of the table.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
The objects look good, but it lacks a unifying theme other than glass, and
there's very little composistion.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The models are very nice; but they don't tell much of a story.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I don't like the short stumpy legs on the table.  I like the tabletop.
The rest is nice.



                              janfeb97-additional
                              -------------------

From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
I am thoroughly impressed with some of the fine examples here of artistic
talent!  This is new to me, but I plan to visit very, very often!  I admire
everyone for their efforts in bringing their ideas to "life" in this forum!


From 9BDAACC0908F:
antialising option. It's very sad to see how many picture that are
destroyed by not useing antialising. Please take the time it takes to do
this.



From 9BDAACC0908F:
antialising option. It's very sad to see how many picture that are
destroyed by not useing antialising. Please take the time it takes to do
this.



From 9BDAACC0908F:
antialising option. It's very sad to see how many picture that are
destroyed by not useing antialising. Please take the time it takes to do
this.



From 23F0FC409D8C:
Too many images with non-refractive glass, which does not exist in reality.
As in previous rounds to many entries with almost-blank txt-files.


From 9BDAACC0908F:
antialising option. It's very sad to see how many picture that are
destroyed by not useing antialising. Please take the time it takes to do
this.



From 9BDAACC0908F:
antialising option. It's very sad to see how many picture that are
destroyed by not useing antialising. Please take the time it takes to do
this.



From F74395E0959E:
Hey! I've downloaded all the images this time without any problem. I've now
a Frame Relay at work, and it works properly. I expect to have a real and
free email in few weeks, and a web page is comming to show other off-topic
scenes I've developed at same time as these for IRTC.
P.D.: Thanks for your fine competition admin! Great Work!
Jaime Vives Piqueres


From F74395E0959E:
Hey! I've downloaded all the images this time without any problem. I've now
a Frame Relay at work, and it works properly. I expect to have a real and
legal email in few weeks (jaime@ctav.es), and a web page (www.ctav.es/phreal)
is comming to show other off-topic scenes I've developed at the same time as
others for IRTC.
P.D.: Thanks for your fine competition admin! Great Work!


From F74395E0959E:
Hey! I've downloaded all the images this time without any problem. I've now
a Frame Relay at work, and it works properly. I expect to have a real and
legal email in few weeks (jaime@ctav.es), and a web page (www.ctav.es/phreal)
is comming to show other off-topic scenes I've developed at the same time as
others for IRTC.
P.D.: Problems with voting form. After 2 attemps, I've downloaded again and
noticed that they has changed a bit from the first I've downloaded. (?)


From F74395E0959E:
Many dificults to vote. I've noticed that form changed from the first I've
downloaded. I must re-write all rates, but no time to rewrite comments!


From F355F4909C97:
Many dificults to vote. I've noticed that form changed from the first I've
downloaded. I must re-write all rates, but no time to rewrite comments!


From F74395E0959E:
Many dificults to vote. I've noticed that form changed from the first I've
downloaded. I must re-write all rates, but no time to rewrite comments!


From 96E0F4F0C6CC:
Is it my imagination, or is there an image that was not in the vote file?
PETESKAL.JPG is the image in question. Ah well.



                                      jars
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very cool concept.  I've been there!

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Great image, even without dust!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

There is a spider web, but objects are very clean ???!!!
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great scene but the glass seems a little thin. All of the mason jars Ive seen
are made of thick , heavy glass. If you could have given your jars that sort of
feel
I think it would have made your scene look a little better. Love the spider!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
"very aggressive..." - Arachniphobia (sp?)

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

When you work out the dust thing, let us know how you did it!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
One way to accomplish dust is with the textures. Just add a noise image (like
television static) to your surface. If the noise is fine enough, this works
out. Adding a light brownish (or light grey) color also makes things look
dusty. The trick is just making sure it's not perfectly even. if the whole
thing is the same color, you assume that the object is that color. But if the
color is not continuous, it looks better.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
The spider web is not attached to anything in places. 

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Some of the jars appear solid or completely filled with water. So does the 
upper part of the oil lamp.
You seem to have daylight floating into your storm shelter.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Those jars are absolutely perfect - great job!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
To get the "dusty" texture you wanted, try a granite texture with partly
transparent beige color-map entries. The bottles are very realistic.
The spiderweb is a nice touch; you might even want to use depth-blur to
separate it from the bottles (probably have the bottles in focus, since
they are more intricate).

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice pic.  At first i thought it was simple, but the spider made me smile and
is a perfect touch.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Add a bit of dust and you would have an outstanding picture. The front bottles
seems to be a little to transparent though.
Notable for modelling, originality, lighting



                                    jeweller
                                    --------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice :)
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Its kind of hard to see the window glass.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I think I've liked all of the broken glass images. How 'bout a broken school
next month?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Yay! Another Glass submission based on a Glass Window.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
The bricks are too far set out of the mortar, the glass does not look like
glass

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I found the colours inside the gewelers window a little too unrealistic. They
made it hard to see the broken window.                                          
   

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
The scene is nice, but what did you use to create it???

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice job on the broken glass.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I think this could be a star picture with some texture work.



                                     juliet
                                     ------
=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Please give a description of the tools you used!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
great movie, Claire Danes is great.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Original. Great crisp colors, high artistic merit.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice concept.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The colouring of the image is pretty good, but the depth and feeling are
a real let-down


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Iridescent blood?

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The colours were a little too unrealistic.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Until I read the entry form, I thought this was a spilled lava-lamp. :)
At least it's an original concept.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great use of color.



                                     klein
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great idea; needs more anti-aliasing, I think.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Klein bottle for rent, inquire within?  :-)

Very nicely done;  The reflections are quite convoluted.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Beautiful texture on the bottle but what's up with the background?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very effective image
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Interesting. That alone gets you points.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Weird.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice - more proof that glass does its own detail work.   An interesting
excercise would be to highlight the line where the surface crosses itself :)

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Nicely created image!  Should have added something in the background to perhaps
reflect the object or maybe a simple table top ?

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Beautiful.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Ugly edges to due polygon-based geometry (I guess)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It's kind of plain, and there's some minor jaggies on the bottom.


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
A bit off in scale (where the curl meets the shadow on the body of sculpture),
but nicely done otherwise.  Nice 3-D presentation - the main topic takes center
stage.
Notable for textures, originality, modelling



                                    kmcndls
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Is there glass in this scene?

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Interesting image.  The oil lamp is nice, but I have to admit I found the shape
of the knife in the background more aesthetically pleasing.  On the other hand,
the angular shape of the oil lamp does rather fit in with the "occult" theme.

=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Too bad 3DS4 does not do IOR... Some would have certainly improved 
the scene, the glass is barely noticeable.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice original model
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Arggh! No refraction! The glass object just looks smoky...

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice. I could see this scene being in one of the Ultima games!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The scene as a nice atmosphere to it.  The flames look phoney though.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Origional (Satanic?) and bizzare... a volatile combination. I liked it.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Nice knife.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is well modelled, but the age-old 3ds problem of glass looking ethreal
rather than...well...glass has cropped up again.   Also, especially with
this being the case, the image needs more definition of light.

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
I _LIKE_ this one!  :D

Great concept.  The candle is really well done, as are the scrolls.  Dagger
could use a little work though.
(Kinda reminds me of a Gil Hibben knife...)


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Cute...

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
You can tell 3DS from the non-refractive glass. Use raytracing, please.
This does not look like glass at all.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The purple candelabra thing is odd; but the scrolls and the dagger are
really cool-looking. (P.S. scene is kind of dark, could use gamma correction.)



                                     kmroom
                                     ------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Pleasant pictures...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Neat image but many of the details you mention don't show up well; maybe a
different placing of the room's objects would help, as well as lower lighting.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Video image: (Wes Craven's) Shocker?  Bottle image: Naked Lunch.
...and I must know where I can get a print of that Dali image!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The objects seem cluttered, and the perspective is a bit odd. Tracing "vertical"
edges downward, I find that the point of cenvergence is arbitrary. Have you
checked your placement carefully?


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good modelling - but try not to clutter an image, especially when working on
a glass theme.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
You've got that "Naked Lunch" thing goin' on...I'm diggin' it

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The glass "ball" and the ashtray look great, but I think the little pink tree 
is too shiny.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Nice job, really!

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
How about "Shocker?" - psyco murder, botched electrocution, ability to pass 
thru electric wires - for TV 
Good picture

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Hey, that's a nice tree! 8-) Thanks for including it!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice smorgasbord of glass stuff. The crystal ball might look better sitting
on top of the speakers. (Just in this scene, not necessarily your real home).



                                    krunasgn
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Glass?

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Where's the glass?

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow, stunning.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Glass? Cool image, though.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Often a good substitute for heavy ambient is simply to add an extra light,
or to increase the contribution of the extra lights.   Too much abient can
make an image look flat, especially when glass is involved.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I really like the glowing ball.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The orb looks really cool (at first I thought it was meant to be a solar
eclipse).
A tiny nitpick: the orb glows where the front two claws touch it; since it is
made
of glass, shouldn't a third glow from the back claw be shining through the
center?
The columns and the tiara model are very nice.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the eclipsed? sun.  I think the rest of the colors are too washed out.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Dobar dan. Better English than my Croat. Not my type of picture though. Cheers.



                                    krystlkl
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Nice idea.  Scene is a bit too barren.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
A lovely example of minimalist work - the picture looks greyscale at first, then
after reading the text file and re-examining the image, subtle tones of colour
become noticeable here and there.  Very nice!!!

=====
From jay@map.com:
I think the image would have been much nicer if the clock had been included.
But it's a nice piece of crystal even so.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Very nice use of B&W effect, liked it !!!
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
What is that squiggle in the lower right corner?  (The raytracer formerly known
as p. Prue?)  The scene has a nice crisp realism to it, but it's lacking some
content.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
should have included the clock...could not have guessed what this was without
the description.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Where's the clock? And the rest of the scene?


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
if you would have taken the time to model the clock, i might have cared


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad - I find the colour sceme `hides' the object, and loses depth.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
uummmmmm...no clock? :(

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great work on the colour effects.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It would be easier to see the shape if it reflected something; even just a flat
blue or green plane back behind the camera.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
You should have put the clock in the crystal.  I think the different color
would
have added to the scene.  A very nice object, yuo should have done more with
it.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for modelling, textures



                                    lantern
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Great image.  Love the way you showed everything except the lantern only via
reflection.  Excellent composition, textures, colors, lighting.  Only
flaw--the lantern itself seems to have just a bit too high IOR--looks like
solid glass.  Minor nit in an otherwise gorgeous scene.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Impressive image!  I especially liked details like the spiral lamp post, the
realistic parquet floor, the soft lighting. Everything is very nicely modelled.
 20-20-20
=====
From jay@map.com:
Did you use anti-aliasing?  The reflected image looks a bit grainy.  A possible
solution would be to increase the max-trace parameter for POV.  It would
increase
render time, but would undoubtedly result in a better image.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice scene direction...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
But what did you USE to create all these objects?

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
nicely arranged, complete scene.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Next time, put a little effort into the text file. It really detracts
when all you say is, "Well, I did stuff."

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice perspective.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very nice modelling.   The image is kinda confusing, with the mirror being
so perfect, but oddly enough, this does not detract from the whole!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
niccccccccccce! :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Cool idea, and nice execution, but why is the wallpaper on the wall different
from the walls in the mirror?

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Your image has a nice surreal feal about it. The only thing I could think of to
improve it would be to add a little more texture and form to the heightfield 
landscape.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
I really like the helix-floor-lamp over in the far corner! Great scene.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The parquet floor texture looks really good; but the clouds look sideways
or something. The lake might be more realistic if it had a bozo texture
instead of ripples.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Is this house for sale? :)
I love the camera angle.


From web_user@dd42-218.compuserve.com:
Notable for composition



                                    lasi01nb
                                    --------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
You seem to be very fond of blob-objects *G*.  I like a lot of the details in
this image; the fish, the flowers, and the grasshoppers in particular.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very nice scene!  I think the area light was a good choice:  Looks quite good.


=====
From dster@syix.com:

the vase's shadow might have been a good chance to use caustics

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
nice pastel colours
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
I have to confess I'm not convinced that no tools were used to create this
image - you must have gone through a LOT of graph paper :)

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very cool!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cool. Nice job. the plant looks a little too plastic, so my only advice is to
pay more attention to your textures.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
The details on the bowl are outstanding!!!

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like it!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
You did all of ths BY HAND? Excellent!!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
I love the little fish.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This amazing scene gets 20+20+20 from me. From an artistic standpoint, it's
incredibly beautiful. Technically, it was all done in a text editor (cool!).
For originality, there are *many* original things here, but the best part
is the fish blobs molded into the glass. The grasshoppers are perfect!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
You did this BY HAND?! You ought to get 25 points on tech. merit alone... 

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the vase.  The fish "texture" is terrific.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Outstanding.
Notable for lighting, modelling, originality



                                    latenite
                                    --------
=====
From jay@map.com:
Did you use planes for the post cards?  You could probably get a bit more
thickness
out of them (as well as being able to curl a corner or two) by using a bezier
patch.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The cigarette is perfect.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Try to be more origional, both in your models and in your interpretation.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good stuff - enjoy Oz!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Is that a Stargate in the background?

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Not bad, esp. the smoke model.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Gruetzi Martin.
I love the cigarette smoke.  It has a great curve and density.  Nice lighting.
The stem on the cherry looks more like a cherry bomb then a cherry.
Have fun in .au!


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The atmosphere is well captured.
Notable for lighting



                                    lavalite
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool concept.  The beads are a bit too regularly spaced.  Love the lava lamp,
ashtray, and shadows.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
A good beginning image; the carpet is especially nice.  The double shadow of the
lamp on the wall is a bit distracting.
The large expanses of unbroken wall surface are crying for something - perhaps
one of those huge, loudly coloured
wallpaper patterns that were so popular in the seventies ;)
=====
From m-kolb@uiuc.edu:
I see you figured out how to get the shag to work. Nice job. : )
Michael J. Kolb

=====
From jay@map.com:
I do like that lava lamp.  You might want to try an area light for the
light coming in the door - would soften the shadows.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Good idea... But you should have use that special lamp to light the scene,
to get a better atmosphere...
You have also a problem with shadows...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego




=====
From warwick@cs.uq.edu.au:
Lamp shadow has no blue; lamp casts no light.  Room too light to highlight
lavalamp.
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Love the beads.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Yes - this reminds me of my childhood (in the '70's)...

The lavalamp shadow looks odd - and area-light would help to soften it.

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Carpet looks great. The beads cast a nice shadow too.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
Its a nice image but the focus of the image is not the glass object.
The focus of the image is the doorway with the light coming through
it.  My suggestion (for what its worth) is to highlight the topical
objects in some way - more direct lighting, centralized to the scene,
put in focus with other objects out of the focal length, etc.  Just
a thought.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The carpet is absolutely amazing! I tried to get good carpet and spent hours
rendering MANY random cones, (Don't try this, NOT worth the wait). I like the
ashtray as well. a couple more items in the scene would have been nice, but
overall I like it. ONE KEY NOTE: the shadow for the lava lamp is  wrong. the
glass should cause a shadow, especially if it is filled with a colored liquid.
Also, where are the light sources (and why are there more than one) for the
scene. Your shadows can't make up their mind.
=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Swell.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
There should be some light emitting from the Lavalamp

=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:
Neat Lava lamp. 
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Here the image is slightly marred by perfection.   I would like to see the
same scene traced with the beads slightly random, and the table at a slight
angle.   Not bad for a first render though!

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
This trace looks really nice.  Needs more glass objects!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I'd have liked to see a closer shot of the lamp...as it is it only takes up ten

percent of the picture. Keep up the good work! jmills@stic.net

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The mat looks nice.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
The carpet is great!
The room, contrary to your intention, looks brightly lit.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
groovy!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
A little skimpy on the glass, but not bad for the 1st effort. Some future
improvements might be to have the glass beads of the curtain casting little
refractions and caustics (by putting a fake texture map on the wall) Oh, and
fix the shadow for the lava light. The shag carpet looks very good.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
The color of the lavalamp is awesome.  The shag carpet has a great texture. 
Good camera
angle and placement of objects.  I thought the room looked a little barren and
decided
it's missing a wall switch next to the poster and an outlet under the table.
The carpet should be darker in the doorway (high traffic area, those shag
carpets always
matted down easily. remember ;)  And i think the beads are too regular.  Only an
anal 
retentive hippy would have gotton each column exactly the same; they should be
staggered.
Great first pic.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Interesting.



                                     licht
                                     -----
=====
From jay@map.com:
Like this image quite a bit.  Love the shinyness of the table, though I think
the
grain of the wood could be scaled down somewhat - it looks like the table was
made from one VERY large tree.


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Beautiful but I think the atmospheric effects may be too subtle; I didn't even
notice until you mentioned it in your comments! Also, a more complex wood 
texture would improve the table, but on the whole I like it!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The window in the background is really nice.  I wouldn't have made the table
so reflective though.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the texture on the marbles.
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

not judgeing you on english! great light/color balance!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
You earn a twenty on technical merit just for letting your computer be tied up
for that long. Quite a beautiful picture.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Wouldn't the marbles roll off that shelf thing?

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very good - I like the goblet esp.   Watch your pigment mapping, and 
especially try not to have cloud pattern on sky run vertically.   Sky_spheres
are ideal for this.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Beautiful trace with some really good textures and colors.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
That dust thang...I'm diggin it!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The glass and the marbles are great, but I don't really like the texture on
the walls.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Could use a little gamma correcting (can't see the shelf beside the window
without it). The glass dish is a good model.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great marbles.  I love the sky and clouds.  I like the wall next to the window,
its a nice
effect, but i think it looks too 'acidic' over in the corner.  Interesting table
top...
is that a cross section of a redwood?



                                    litebulb
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Delightful scene, excellent visual pun.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Very realistic!  Darn near photorealistic, in fact.  It's too bad the lower half
of the bulb doesn't have as many interesting refractions as the upper half
does; it makes it very hard to judge just where the screw is (ie. is it in the
bulb or is the bulb resting on it).
The multiple light sources are also making the shadows a bit confusing, whihc
may be contributing to this effect - on shadow seems to suggest the screw is
right down on the
table, another that it's floating in space a good bit above the inner surface of
the bulb.  Perhaps if the screw was embedded point-first into the interior
glass object that holds the filiment?

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very well done lightbulb.  Would like to know how the screw got in there in
the first place, though.  :-)

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice... but a light bulb does NOT refracts so much...
Why the screw???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Very cool.  I really liked the way it was signed (on the bulb's reflection).
The screw seems oddly placed though, looks like it's in the bulb?  Am I not
getting the joke?
Also, the bulb seems to not have enough "neck".  Still, it looks great!



=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Internals of the lightbulb are very good
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   So how long did it take?

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
k00l

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
hah hah hah hah hah. :)


=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
This really sticks to the topic. The qualities of glass (transparency,
refraction etc.) are so obvious and in your face, yet the overall image doesn't
come across as a laboured technical picture.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This one is really nice. The floor texturing is a little wierd, but hey, my room
floor has an even uglier pattern, so I won't press that.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
so, how many hours was it??????


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Realistic.
=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I think this is one of the most amazing images I have seen rendered.  VERY
NICE!

=====
From mbrown@spry.com:
like the joke 
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This isn't too bad.   Modelling of the bulb was pretty good, but the background
(as is usually the way) was a bit of a let-down.   Also, glass is best in
lower light...

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Nice design.  

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
How can I compete against work like this...I give up. 
Beautiful work. One of my favorites in this round.
jmills@stic.net 
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great idea! Good execution, too.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I don't think that any maxtrace level above 15 or so will make any visible
difference.
Did you test that? The "black glass" parts must have other reasons.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
...how many?

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Enlightening.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very technically impressive model; nice arrangement and background texture, and
I like the visual pun.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Cool.  The glass base is great.  
"Max_trace_level 35...still black glass".  I don't think the black glass is that
unnatural.
Plus it gives the bulb a nice definition that might otherwise not be there.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Very life-like. But why not put something "odd" inside it.



                                       ls
                                       --
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Guess ya hadda be there.

=====
From jay@map.com:
the flat and curved surfaces DO create a nice contrast for refractions and
reflections.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Our only faithful loves in our lives are our love of Raytracing and computers.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Rough Valentine's?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Love is grand.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Shure. Someone's in a bad mood.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice example of how you can get great effects with well-modelled refractive
objects.   Unfortunately, I am not sure it has been used to best effect with
pure text inside.   V. nice use of bckgrnd texture.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
You are right, love does suck!  And I do love this image as it has several 
interesting aspects. Nicely done!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This is more of a bumper-sticker message than a contest entry. I guess it
doesn't suck, though. The bg texture is nice.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the font.


From web_user@dd42-218.compuserve.com:
...yes it does...


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Looks good, although I can't agree with the sentiment.



                                     magic
                                     -----
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice textures...I liked them.
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Looks like black magic to me...

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Neat candle lights

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
nice flame.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Those candles look a lot better than most other ray-traced candles.
Lovely flask, too!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Really good, esp. the spooky lizard floating in the iridescent flask
(bong? --> hallucination from "magic" chemicals? 8) The crackled granite
is very cool looking.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Excellant center vase.  I love the color/texture of it.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Dobar dan. Who asked for a rational explanation. It looks good and that is all
that counts.
Notable for composition, modelling, lighting



                                     marble
                                     ------
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The marbles look good. The fence is well-modelled, but might look better with a
different wood texture.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the staggered nails.  The grass is a little bland.



                                    marbles
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very accurate textures.  Proportions a bit off.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice textures... Except the reflection map used...Makes you think that the
marbles are all made of sort of marble !
Maybe the ground texture is sort of a stereogram ;^D
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
funny how this is similar to marbles1.jpg (pavement, weeds)- though done by
completely different people.
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
looks real!!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very real pavement.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Another nice marbles image.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad - some of the marbles look as though they are hanging in space.
This is possibly to do with the lighting choice.


=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
 I really like the chalk and asphalt textures.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
By far the best of all the marble images.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The marbles look good; blacktop is a fraction too dark (gamma?). Weeds growing
from the sidewilk crack is a nice touch.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Very nice blacktop texture.  Chalk is great too.  Very realistic.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, textures



                                    marbles2
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very accurate backdrop.  Beautiful marbles, although I never owned any that
were quite so pretty!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice objects...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great job with the twirly things inside the marbles. I had forgotten about
those
until I saw them in your image.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
good pavement, nice marbles, nice weeds.  Still the scene is rather drab - it
doesn't grab me - I'm looking for being grabbed.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice image. I like this one.


=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wonderful!!!!!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Everything in the scene is perfect, EXCEPT that the transition between the curb
and asphalt is too sharp of a contrast. Maybe if the sidewalk was a bit greyer
and grimier. The ribbon texture inside the marbles is especially nice.



                                    mcborbss
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Way cool scene!  Could stand a bit more anti-aliasing, I think.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Quite a nice image, though the reflections on the wall with the window play
tricks with the perspective and the angle of the window.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow, I want more... write a novel and I'd read it.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Cool!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Interesting image.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Hmmm... This scene looks a bit flat, I'm afraid.   The main piece (sunrise)
is good though, and would stand well on its own.
=====
From jmills@stic.net:
WoW! :) Awesome...great concept! Keep those great ideas coming!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The window shape is a little hard to understand at first glance. Earth's
atmosphere looks really nice. The computer screen looks way too small; but
I guess it could be a tiny videophone or something. Ditto with the pillow;
hope it inflates larger at bedtime. But all in all, this scene uses "glass"
very effectively, to show the rigid boundary between the boxy little room
and the vast intraplanetary space outside.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I think the bright color of the bed draws to it as the central object, yet it is
much
too plain for an otherwise great picture.



                                    melting3
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool idea.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
good textures...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The glass was actually plastic and the liquid is acid - slag!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Neat idea.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Not very origional


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good stuff - I'm not sure about the camera angle though, since the ground is
a bit basic to have tiling off so much.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Is this a scene from the philidelphia experiment? Heh heh heh :) Love it!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Cool idea!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
A higher JPEG quality setting would have improved the image a lot. All edges
have quite prominent artifacts.

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
Something this hot must have some kind of exhaust or fume.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This would be more believable if the metal deck was glowing red hot.
But at least it's more original than the other drinking-glass scenes.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for originality



                                    mhfgcup
                                    -------
=====
From jay@map.com:
The torches look o.k., but the candles' light reacts far too much with the
atmosphere.  It looks like there is a heavy fog in the room, but this
effect doesn't appear anywhere else in the scene.  

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Could be right out of a CD-ROM game, very nice.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

What is the orange stuff in the holes in the floor, and how did you make it?
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

strange title ,cool picture
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice job. Stupid title, nice picture.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Yep - lighting is a problem, though my guess is that the image would look
pretty cool were the lighting to be turned up (nd the ambient down).

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Moody image. Constructive criticism: The torches all look the same. Some more 
variation would have been nice.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The flame haloes could use a little tweaking. The green glass things along
the walls are very intriguing; and the red marble texture is good too.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the "jade" carvings in the wall best.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
All that marble. So depressing. Nice story though.



                                      milk
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Get a new renderer!  Way too blurry.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The milk makes this picture.   It's very well done, but the glasses look too
blured.  


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Ok, you should either change software, or stop 3d pictures...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Why waste your and our time if you yourself didn't like the image?

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

So how did the PC image compare to the Amiga verions?
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
As you can see from the competition, your PC can do excellent glass, if
prvoked properly :)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
If you -know- that the picture is jaggy and ungood, please skip entering it
next time; I already gotta grade 178 other ones! Keep practicing with your
renders, and only enter the BEST ones. (The coffee-colored background does
go nicely with the white milk; with a LOT more refinement, this'd be an OK
contest entry.)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Bonus points for mentioning 'Amiga'.



                                     mirari
                                     ------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Very nicely done - excellant lighting.  You only forgot one teeny tiny thing
that I can see...when a bottle falls over and spills, the shape of the bottle
traps a small amount of liquid.  Your bottle appears to be completely empty. 
Also, the reflection of the wall in the mirror is odd - it looks bumpy.  Was
this intended, or did it just happen?
=====
From jay@map.com:
I do wonder, though, how the table, which appears to be parallel with the floor,
appears to be at a 45 degree angle to the floor  in the reflection in the
mirror.  Really odd effect.


=====
From dster@syix.com:
well composed image
the lighting effects worked



=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Your description was truncated -- how did you di the reflected light spot on 
the wall?

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
*GASP* ... it's "marvel"ous...  :-)  Now, go beyond the medium and tap into
you artistic ability...

=====
From gpig@prometheus.hol.gr:

If you like realism in closed environments , why don't you try radiosity ?
You can model naturally looking soft shadows and ambient light.  
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Hey buddy, "Marvel" is a word to shy from in your descriptions. Nice lighting. I
agree that often artists don't pay enough attention to their lighting. I'm
often guilty of this myself. You seem to be guilty of the "obscure placement of
random objects", however. Enter again in the future, you have talent.
=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Marvel at how the light reflects the low scores you get.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This image is reminiscent of some of the example images I saw to show off
specular radiosity.   Well done with the lighting.   The only let-down is
the bottle+stain, which look a bit flat.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Looks good.  Add a little wine in the glasses and some reflection on the table
top.  

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Nice floor texture!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Wow! Everything except the bottle (which seems to matt) and the table (boring)
looks great.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
It's a great scene, and the lighting is perfect!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It looks a little artificial ( not unrealistic per se; but like someone's set
this all up for a photo shoot). The lighting effects are interesting, as
promised.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Yes, it does have great lighting and shadows.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Stark, mechanical and yet believable.



                                    mjktools
                                    --------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nicely modelled - I especially like the fine details of things like the bubles
in the boiling
beaker, and the shaping of the base of the bunsen burner.  That orange around
the base of the beaker; is
that the mesh being heated or a cooler flame wrapping around the beaker?  Also,
it looks like your test tubes and beaker 
have metal rims; is this the case, or is that just an optical illusion?

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very nicely done!  Love how the bunsen burner's flame was done.


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
The image looks a bit too dark for me.. Maybe some more background would help.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice, and original...
Just, you should have had a background wall or blurred pic...
And also, in my time, chemistry things was stand on white tiling...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great effect with the steam and bubbles.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
It seems a little dark - though the darkness does give it character.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
way too dark, lots of details lost...

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
I really am amazed it took *that* long to render this scene...


=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Nice n' moody. The lighting and the handwritten notes add much to the
atmosphere.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
Nicely done.  The focus of the image is the glass, which helps this
entry alot for this particular round.  Other entries were nice but
the focus was not the glass.  You're use of resources is rather impressive
too, although you'll forgive me for hating you for having an entire
lab you could run this through.  :-)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little more ambient light would have been nice. I can see everything in the
image, but I think that the burner flame on the metal gauze ought to illuminate
the scene a little. maybe a red-orange point source at 20% the intensity of the
other light would have made for a better lit and more realistic "glowing hot"
effect for that half of the image. Other than that, it's nice.
=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:
Some very neat effects here, i like the heated metal and the steem.
the scene may have been a bit better with a background maybe ??

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
A good image.   Only point is to remember when tracing glass/mirrors, 90% of
the perceived texture comes from backgrounds.   Forgetting this can cause
`plasticcy' textures.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Nice concept!  The image is a bit dark, but I think this was done to show the
glass ?

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I can almost feel the heat off the top of that beaker...heh heh heh.
Gee, I wish I had the equiptment you used to make this...:( Jmills@stic.net 

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great flame!

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
Needs something in the background. Nice bubbles and steam...

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Excellent! The flame and the bubbles are absolutely perfect.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Could use a little gamma correction. The boiling beaker looks -really- good,
esp. the interaction of the blue flame with the gauze, and the realistic
bubbles.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the bubbles in the beaker.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures



                                    morning
                                    -------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice picture, but the glass cup is only there to fit with the topic...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
very nice

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the tile texture
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
The doughnuts look yucky. :)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Most of your objects need a little more work. Spend more time making the
textures. a few crumbs would help too.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Quite nice - I am not sure about the donuts, though, and the ripples on the
side of the mug look wrong to me.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice scene. (It took me a sec. to recognize the red apple design on the plate.
Good, it's -not- a bizarre dab of ketchup and relish to eat with the doughnuts
:)


From web_user@dd42-218.compuserve.com:
hmm... good image, but those donuts look a little thin...


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Stretching the glass theme a little?



                                    morning1
                                    --------
=====
From jay@map.com:
One thing about image maps and Moray:  If you want only part of an image to
show, such as a label, select one color that you don't use in the rest of the
image, find out its palette position (index), and create a filter for it. 
After
Moray exports the .POV, change "filter" to "transmit" for that image map.  You
end up with a small label that doesn't wrap around.

The beer bottles look more metallic than glass.  Perhaps increasing the
transparency
on the glass would help?


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Be carefull with empty backgrounds...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Glass?  The bottles look metallic?

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Pretty good modelling on the glass. (But a real party does NOT leave such a
tidy floor the next morning ! :)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Much, much too tidy for the morning after. And shouldn't it all be a little more
blurred?



                                     mouse
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool idea.  Picture would be at home in an ad.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I'd like to see how it looks without the sun-glasses.

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
COOL!!!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is extremely good. Not as good as your glass shoe, but good.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Amusing, but too many submissons
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
GOdd modelling, and the texture/lighting combo is very good.   Nice fun.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Almost all of your pictures have excellent models in them. How on earth do you
make them? What renderer/modeller do you use?

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I wonder how a single-layer glass cord works ;-)
A higher JPEG quality setting would have done good to the image.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is very original, and perfectly rendered - nice!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Cool! Do they really make transparant mice, or is this an "x-ray" view?

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great idea.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, lighting, originality, textures, modelling



                                      mtn
                                      ---
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
The glass mountain is a nice concept, especially since it's also a traditional
element of many fairy tales.  It's too bad you didn't include other elements in
the scene, as overall it's rather sparse.

=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:

200,000 years ago?
=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
If only the mountain got under the 'water' over at the edges... 
GFORGE would have done better job for creating the height field.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good concept, be be carefull with colours...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Very interesting. I like the rock formations and the sky texture.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

GLASS MOUNTAINS, COOL!
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   A simple enough image, yet different and striking enough to really
set it apart from the others. This is proof that complexity is not
necessarily better. What a difference having no bottles or 
wine/champange glasses makes.

=====
From timothyea@worldnet.att.net:
Please include some info on what tools you use...

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Great concept and a powerful image!


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This image doesn't look complete. Perhaps if you cropped a little off the top
and the bottom it would look better a little too much water at the bottom.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Looks cool. Not exactly what I would call complex.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
More could have been done with some more test-rendering.   The sky-text is
beautiful, but the rest of the image has a blocky, buggy feel to it.   Well
done with the lighting, though.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I dig the Idea,man...keep the imagination goin' !!!
jmills@stic.net

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Why are the mountains hollow?

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
Try not to let the edges of the height feild show. 

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I don't really get it, but it looks nice and is made of glass, so here's some
points.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Huge ... imagination.



                                    nd-feb97
                                    --------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
No wonder the glass fell over - the bases of your glasses are *MUCH* too small
in proportion to the top.  If you cut off the top 4/5 of the glass you might
have a reasonable liqueur glass ;)
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Have you ever seen glasses ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Not bad for 2 days...

=====
From kharrima@pcc.edu:
I would suggest that the font size for your signature be smaller.  The text is
too dominant and really detracts from your composition.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
We have to judge over 100 of these things. Did you really think we wouldn't get
tired of glasses, cups, or wine bottles?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
No way! 2 lathes!!! Exciting!

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Pretty nice textureing, but I'm sure those glasses look top-heavy!

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
I found the copyright really destracting.  Nice texture and design otherwise!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Neat glass texture.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
You win a prize for being the zillionth "still life with wineglass entry"!
It's a lifetime supply of little cocktail umbrellas. At least your glass
texture is mildly interesting.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
The reflections came out really well on the glass.



                                    neopunk
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very classy idea.  I'd have liked it better if (1) you had done it without
benefit of thousands of dollars worth of commercial software, and (2) this had
been the only image you entered.  The refractions through the top of the boot
look very badly aliased, but that may not be the case.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
LOL - love the "slipper".  Too bad the details of the shape of the sole aren't
visible through the upper part; perhaps if a different glass texture had been
used, such as a smoked or coloured glass?  Very nice.

=====
From jay@map.com:
I can see Alias's problems in the scene.  But... how did you get the wrinkles
in the pillow?  (Height field?)  

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Is the boot model yours? How did you create it if it is? Unfortunately this
affected my technical merit rating.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great pic. The indentation on the pillow from the shoe is great!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Glass Doc Martens?
=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Good idea!
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Hey, that was my idea!!!

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Easily the best image I've seen so far.
Actually, I did notice the fact that the d-o-f blur disappeared through the
slipper, and came to the same conclusion, before I read your description.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
OK, this one wins. I'm stunned by your modelling ability. That is awesome. I
went to your homepage and checked out your stuff. Your talent is amazing!
Thanks for the English translations, I don't speak French that well.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
This is the ?'th from mr.naxos?
Congrat's to him he won a grand 1,1,1 for submitting about 7 images.

=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:

Very realistic pic. 
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Ho boy I like this!  If I really need to complain, I'd like the glass 
slightly darker, but otherwise excellent!   Fabby cusion.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Nicely done. One of the top traces

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I need this girl's number! She has great taste in footware :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great work!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Yaay! Something besides another #$% wine glass. Nice job on the yellow sole
stitching and laces. I give it three thumbs up.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, originality, modelling, textures, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Very nice. 
Notable for modelling, originality



                                    nkreflct
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent image, very wistful mood.  Good feeling of depth.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
What an exceptionally well-done scene!  Extremely well-rendered, great attention
to detail, very realisitc in appearance...high marks.
=====
From m-kolb@uiuc.edu:
The fallng snow needs a little help -- it looks perhaps a little too much like 
a 'bozo' texture. However, I think your interior is great, and I really like
the frost effects on the windows. I've given your image some of the highest 
markings out of the images I've seen so far. Nice job!
- Michael J. Kolb

=====
From jay@map.com:
Wow!  Not much I can pick at in this image.  The wood grain on the desk (and
perhaps the far wall) seems a bit large, but in no way detracts from the
overall picture.  Well done!


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice work... Beware of the lights.

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Excellent job with the snow. I like the frost effect also.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nice depth (all the way back to the chair and floor lamp!)  icicles was a nice
touch too - a form of "Glass" that I hadn't considered.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
how did you do the falling snow?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
The only image I gave perfect score to. I am amazed by how such realism is
achieved with such simplicity. I also love the melancholy mood of the scene.
Great job!

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Actually.. it's 'poetic license'.. not to be anal or picky or anything :)
I like this image.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Another beautiful image. I'm impressed with the attention you pay to detail.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Lots of work.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good.   A tip for icicles is to use a lot of ripples, since mostly they
are so bumpy as to prevent any clear refraction at all.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Awesome! The cracks and chips in the paint really make this image stand out!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Thumbs up!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Very nice! I especially like the wispy snow on the windows themselves.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Nice tree! 8-) Really, *everything* in the scene is excellent.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I like it, just like the orbital bedroom earlier; it uses the glass to form a
powerful barrier between two very different realms. Nice job on the snowflakes.



From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
I like this one. The snow looks good. But then, I live in a part of the world
where snow is not seen!
Notable for composition, textures, modelling



                                    oillamp
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool lamps, excellent fruit, nice table.  The composition seems a bit
contrived, and the lens flare is a little bit overdone, especially for oil
lamp flames.  Very good use of color.

=====
From m-kolb@uiuc.edu:
Impressive. Perhaps a black atmosphere could be added to darken the scene
slightly and separate the foreground from the background. However, overall
I give this image high marks. Nice job!
- Michael J. Kolb

=====
From jay@map.com:
The only thing I've got a problem with in this scene is the lighting:  Way too
bright, in my opinion.  


=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Oil lamps? Way too incandescent.. A more modest lens flare would have been
better.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

There should be a "meritorious" rating... Just because you used Amiga/Real3d

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Very nice composition and colors!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
The fruit looks great!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

viva amiga!  
=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
The only comment I'll make here is that the lens flare / glare is a bit too
emphasised.
The rest is very good :)


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like the star filter you have. I just hate it on this image. You have a
"quiet" image with rally "loud" lens flares. Why bother? A soft glow with the
lens reflections might have been nice, but for this image I would have omitted
lens flaring altogether. It makes your image almost annoying. My inner child
wants to cover your image with spray paint.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
it takes more than lens flare to make a good picture


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Coooooool! Verry pleasing to look at.
That's got to be some kind of volitile wax for that
size of lense flare.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nicely modelled - shame about the lns-flare ;)   Seriously though, the image
is a bit light-flooded, which detracts from the nice modelling/texture work,
and the flares are *far* too bright.   Good otherwise.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
It does not matter to me what render engine you are using.  The image looks 
wonderful.  

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
Gorgeous image.  Absolutely great, except for the lense flares.  You mention
photography - take a picture of a candle sometime, and see how the flare comes
out, even if overexposing the flame.  (Not even the sun itself can produce a 
flare that large).  Other than that, I love this one.  :)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Long live the Amiga!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The fruits are great.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
It's a nice scene! Don't worry about it being non-POV, it's actually rather
cool that you made it on an Amiga!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very nice modelling, especially the green apple.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Excellent overall lighting.  I think you should have staggered the grain on the
wood
edging of the table.  (Its not possible to saw a piece of wood and line up the
grain
*that well*. :)  Bonus points for mentioning 'Amiga'.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nice apple.



                                      oven
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Startlingly realistic, especially the syringes.  The lettering on the flasks
looks blurred due to the reflection from the other side of the glass.  Very
good use of subtle colors.  Excellent effort for "a novice"!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Too pale...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
the shadow effect of the markings looks like TV "ghost" images.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very nice!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is nice and real, but dull.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Very simmilar image as I did! (Glasswar.jpg)

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good glasswork, shame about the lighting, and colour scheme.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The glassware is very well modelled, but the scene could use some more color.
Maybe a pair of orange gloved hands reaching in to get one of the cylinders.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
I don't think you want to make the shelves into stainless steel. It would
detract from the final image.
Notable for composition, originality



                                    paperrea
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent flame, cool paperweight.  Good lighting experiment!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
did not liked it :(
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like your idea!  Might have been nice to have some text under the 
paperweight.
=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
The flame is a nice touch. Good composition too.


=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
A great study in light.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is rather dull.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Looks nice. Is the floor a crackle with a slope_map on it?

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
The poem gives a nice touch to the scene.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I think the fire casts to little light on the scene.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Not much to do with "glass" apart from the mere presence of the paperweight
thingy.
But the burning poem is an interesting effect, and I like the deep green tiles.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Yes.  Very nice lighting.



                                    parties
                                    -------
=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Where's the monster that ate IOR?
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
c'est a chier !

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Be more origional next time.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I's like some refraction in the glass finish.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Before reading the text file I would have sworn you used 3DS.
Typical 3DS "ghost" glass. Looks very unnatural due to lack of refraction.
I did not know PovRay could actually make that bad looking "glass".
Remember to turn up refraction index. (1.3 is a good starting value for glass.)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The pink and RED! textures are sort of overpowering and radioactive looking;
I halfway expect Satan to crash through the black stained-glass windows and
ruin the wedding party. The sparkly hexagon effect on the punchbowl is nice
though.



                                     pavil
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Excellent sky!

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little dull. I do like your pillar bases, though.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Nerg.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Hmmmm.... I want to like this image more, but I feel that glass has a real
problem outdoors - the refractions are too sharp in that sort of flood-light.
Nice concept though.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very nice use of colors and textures.  I like it!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I love your clouds,but your objects a little primitive...great work!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The yellow glass looks like it wants to be a vast sluggish river; in which case
the pillars ought to be more sunken looking, with ripples trailing off of them. 



From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Stretching the glass association a bit. Dali would have liked the colours
though.



                                    peteskal
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
I really like this image.  The colors are stunning--subtle yet rich.  And the
concept and technique are also very cool.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Well, I'm not sure it's quite glass - I can think of arguements both for and
against - but
it's definately both extremely unique and beautiful.  I *LOVE* the way your
image looks; you get top marks
artisitically from me.  I must try this out myself some time - very cool!

=====
From jay@map.com:
Nice idea for creating the image maps - it does a good job!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Ahhh... At least a good picture !!!
Just, i think that the back mirror disturbs the readability of the objects...
Ok, those are simple objects, but the concept is present and textures are very
nice
they make me think of dried flowers in glass objects... Really nice !
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Wow! Not a whole lot of refraction, but the idea of reflection for a 
kaleidoscope is a great one! Kudos for a great idea!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Incredible textures! A POV kaleidescope sounds like a very interesting idea.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Very nice - the colors are very appealing.  ...very realistic too.  I wish I
had a shelft like that in my home.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Great idea!  A POV-ray Kaleidoscope would make a great animation...
=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
I have on my (long) list of things to do to create a kaliediscope for
another (2D) program.  Your description about equilateral triangles should
make this possible.  Nice work.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cool Idea! Especially the texture choices.


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
I liked the pattern on the glass objects.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Good.   I like many of the objects here.   If I was to complain about
anything, it would be that the image lacks a real focus.   Try to cut down
the amount of viewing necessary at a glance :)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
O.k. Maybe I have some sort of complex or something...but I look at pictures
like this and feel like a loser.
Awesome work, hats off to ya...jmills@stic.net

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
I Don't see much glass around.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is very original! Great job!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice curio cabinet concept (even though the kaleidoskope objects look more
like lacquered wood than bits of colored glass).

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
A lot of interesting textures here.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, lighting, originality, textures


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Wonderful.
Notable for originality, composition, lighting



                                      pig
                                      ---
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
I liked the Toy Story look...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Very nice work on the pig!


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I love the pig!

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very nice blob work!
=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Cool pig! :)


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Cute. Nice tree.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
There should be change in the piggy bank

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Interesting moc toy story.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad, but much of the image looks flat, and I am not sure why the scene
was chosen!

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
A very nice image, about the only way to improve this image is to add some
coins in the belly of the piggy bank.<g>

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Hey, nice tree! 8-)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The "Toy Story" wallpaper is a nice touch.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, originality


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Outstanding pig.
Notable for modelling, originality



                                    pj-chess
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Ah, the old glass chess set trick, eh? <grin>  I really like the way you
signed the box!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I cant see any of the details on the chess pieces. Maybe if you moved your
camera a
litle closer you could show off all of the work you did on them.

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
This is what I like to see in the text file.  Very informative. :-)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice job


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I would prefer a slightly closer view of the chess-board - the glass pieces
look a little opaque from this angle.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
More of a "chess" theme than a "glass" theme, but otherwise it is pretty good.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
After reading that great description, i just have to download the source :)



                                    porthole
                                    --------
=====
From dster@syix.com:
where are the killed birds and the stone? <g>



=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
A neat idea but more detail might be in order; also, more detail back in the 
ship would make the porthole more interesting.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
wrong round... :-)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little wierd.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I realise that this is 50's, but I *would* like more colour/texture, since
this image looks too much like grey plastic to be true!

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Looks rather interesting.  Would like to have seen a bit more reflection and
glass, but otherwise really nice.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Heh heh heh! where are the strings?! Great!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It'd get more "glass" points if the window reflected the rest of the cabin.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for composition



                                     prison
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Spooky concept.

=====
From jay@map.com:
The scene looks a bit bright.  How many lights were used?

=====
From dster@syix.com:
having a slight crack visible in one of the glass bars might have been nice


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The person could use a lot more flushing out, the camera angle could be more 
interesting (less centered).  Also, add more of a feeling to the scene, what's
going on?  How does the person feel, etc...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
My first comment is to scrap the sky and planar horizon background and go for
something a little different. Second, add something "unique" to the scene. A
little mouse (cone + sphere + sphere and a little more) would have added more
story content to the image. Or anything. The trick is not to overload the
scene, but not to underload it either.There is a large grey area. Not bad
though. Enter again.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like the pose on your figure.   Work a bit more with the lighting, and you
would have an excellent picture.

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
I love the idea!  (And I wish I had thought of it first... ;) )
Since you asked for tips, I would recommend making the floor (not the marble
block, but what it sits on) a little darker -- I think it would make your
image look a little "gloomier."  Also maybe use spot light instead (or as
well as) of a huge omni-light.  Great job though!

   "Through me is the way to the sorrowful city;
    Through me is the way to eternal suffering;
    Through me is the way to the lost people;
    Abandon hope, ye who enter here!"  ~~ Dante

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Why not just run through the bars...the granite falls behind you
...oh just kidding :)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Uhh, OK ... a Fisher Price(tm) guy trapped in Hell. I guess this is part of
an unauthorized "Toy Story" sequel. :|  I will give you points for "best use
of glass in a Dungeons and Dragons(tm) style deathtrap".


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Very simple. Very effective.
Notable for composition, originality



                                    purifica
                                    --------
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Very interesting but your description makes no sense.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Huh?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Why submit?
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Interesting. I like the ghostly hand of purifying fire. And the foreground dark
green spheres -do- somehow look less pure than the one on the altar...

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I don't like the halo (reflecting?) on the outside of the lovely jade vase.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Sorry to say it. But only one word described this for me ... boring.



                                    rayslab
                                    -------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Fantastic image.  I think the focal blur works very nicely with the subject. 
Any suspicious things growing in your petri dishes *grin*?
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good use of dof... But your glass texture is a little bit too leaded...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I like the sense of brightness this scene has.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The flask in the foreground hurts the image.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Why's it all blured?

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like the soft-focus - good work!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
You're right - some extra blur_samples would be great.
Good-looking image anyway.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Apart from the speckled focal blur the specular highlights on the glass are to
dim
and too large for real glass.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
You wanted to use Spiral and CTDS - Just check section 7.1.7.3 of the
POV-Ray docs for the #version directive. That *should* let you use any
old style POV-1 code you get from older utilities.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The focus looks fine to me; the only nitpick I have is with the two red flasks;
looks like they should tip over and spill. (Maybe there's an out-of-focus stand
that I'm not seeing? ...)


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition



                                    rbglass
                                    -------
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
It would have been cool if you could have rendered a picture of it on! Very nice
though.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
A darker scene that showed off the aura that "eye of the storm" is famous for
would have been better.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice models, nice textures, just a little too dull.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I would prefer some small thickness to the sphere, and I am not entirely
sure a dart-board needs to be there at all ;)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Turn out the lights...let's see what it looks like! :)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very photorealistic, and good use of "glass" theme. 



                                     rcgog
                                     -----
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
They look a bit like fetuses.  I wish the signature was more low-key though.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Yep - very nice colouring.
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Perhaps a little bit too simple.
But it looks good!

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is beautiful! P.S. Don't worry about your English, it's fine.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Interesting. Looks like cells dividing or something.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Excellent color.



                                    rcm-glas
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very sweet scene.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Very nice scene.  The moon doesn't quite stand out all that well, though. 
You're right that halos increase render time, though the lense flare does a
good job.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Quite good picture...but your glasses are a lot too thick...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
A little too dark, which is a shame because the objects are great and so is the
composition.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Hey everybody, he's mastered the art of scerene without being boring!!! Thank
you! Many of the artists in this month's competition could learn a lot from
this image.


=====
From mbrown@spry.com:
I love the subtle moon.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Watch your lighting.   Glass likes a nice contrast, and low ambient lighting
is good.   ALso, you would be hard pressed to find a candle which produces
that level of lens-flare.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very nice use of the lenz flare.  I like it!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Swanky! Everything looks great, except the plastic-looking flower, which bears
an
unfortunate resemblance to a cheap bathroom air freshener. There are some much
nicer rosebud models you could borrow from other contest entries, so this isn't
that big of a deal. The moon looks especially good.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
The light/color on the candle is beautiful.  I don't like the plastic rose on
the
window.  The ribbon is a nice rouch.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A good picture.
Notable for textures, modelling, composition, lighting



                                    reading
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Good detail on the glasses.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Liked your image, though I must have looked pretty silly standing by my monitor
craning my head around to try and read the paper.  The mummies lived in the
Sarah Desert and travelled by Camelot?  LOL!  Very nicely modelled glasses and
lamp. 

=====
From jay@map.com:
Try using a bezier patch for the paper - it would give it a bit more life
(wrinkles, folded up on a corner, perhaps).  Looks like the kind of homework
paper that the dog *should* have eaten.  :-)


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Please, think of scene backgrounds...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Great page contents!  ...the page seems too looong though

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Good idea!
The table-top and background could use a little more detail.  
=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
Nice lenses. The image would have been better if the end of the table was shown
with perhaps a simple background. Those infinite planes seem to pop up a little
too often for my liking!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Hell, I'll vote for anything that isn't a glass, a cup, or a winebottle...


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The glasses are great, but slightly marred by the wooden desk.   Some work on
that to produce a nice contrast, and possibly a more well-defined light source
would do wonders.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I like it! Great work!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It's a little plain, but shows everything it needs to. (The text is very
amusing;
I used to see photo-copies of this thing floating around, even before the
Internet.)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
It's a pity that the quality of the reading glasses is marred by the sterility
of other objects. Anders, baie goed.



                                     rev46
                                     -----
=====
From jay@map.com:
It's the curvature of the lens at the edge that's causing the distortion.  

=====
From dster@syix.com:
a picture would have been worth a thousand words


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
liked the back book texture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I think that the magnification effect looks pretty realistic.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
666

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Trust me, your little old lady needs a hand to hold the magnifying glass.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little old lady.. without a hand! What kind of monster are you???


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Probably a better way to model a lens would be the intersection of two spheres.
This avoids the problem of the scaled sphere, for which the tangent will always
approach parallel to the `viewing' direction, causing distortion.   Apart from
that, you might find that some form of highlight on the lens, or more defined
lighing would add to the `depth' of the scene.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
You could try making the pigment for the bible a bit more yellow.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The magnifying glass is very well modelled. The crackle is an interesting
effect
(maybe a bit too much here, unless the old lady threw a fit, physically wadded
up
 the Bible into a ball, and then repented and flattened it out again. :)

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great paper texture.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Most impressive. Leave the blurring around the edges. It's supposed to be
there.
Notable for composition, lighting, textures, originality, modelling



                                      room
                                      ----
=====
From jay@map.com:
I think the scene would benefit from more indirect and less intense lighting.
The highlights on the walls are far to "tight" for lights that appear to be
across the room.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
... Please, take care of lights...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
I've marked this low, to be fair to other images, but will provide some
constructive comments to make up for it.
This image is pretty simple but seems to incorporate a lot of good ideas.
Object
detail pretty much universally could use enhancement. Blocky chairs and tables
are too recognisable as such. Ideas to makes these items more believable
are using rounded corners and edges (possible with CSGs or sweep tools), making
more 'ornate' legs by using a cylindrical sweep or modifying a cylinder, and
careful wood textures can do alot.
Most of your textures in this image are a bit too harsh. Colours are too bright
and the marbly textures are too distinct, they should be a bit more subdued.
This image has a touch of surreality to it, aided by the fact that there are
no apparent shadows on a floor that looks like water.
I think one of the most important things to learn with modelling is attention
to detail. Object detail is important, and the right texture and lighting
can be murder to find, but it makes or breaks an image.
Finally, some words of encouragement.. despite the flaws I have pointed out
and suggestions I have offered, no doubt this scene was a learning experience
and will help build skills and confidence for the next one.. so, don't give up.
You should have seen some of my early traces. :)


=====
From gpig@prometheus.hol.gr:
I think you should try using a ray-tracer for the creation of refractive
objects. I use 3DStudio as well, and as far as I Know, when it comes
to transparency, it is the most unsuitable tool. Why don't you use 
POV-RAY ? It is by far the best.


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Your furniture needs work. The width of the legs seem our of proportion.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The objects are not that bad, but the lighting makes them look `stuck' to
the background.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
I really like this trace as it shows some really unusual textures.  Another
thing that I really like is how he listed exactly what he used. 

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
Very few of us are professionals.  That's what makes the compition fun! <Grin>

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
some sort-of wierd lighting thing goin' on here! I dig the water distortions.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Gimme a break. Another example of stupid non-refracting 3DS-"glass".
I thought 3DS4 and/or Max could do raytracing. Please use it at least
for glass. I would have preferred shadows at least.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It would look much nicer if you added shadows, and maybe got rid of the
"triangle" post to move the window there, at the center. Otherwise, that
corner is too busy, with the table AND window AND vase, etc. The shiny
floor is okay, but it ought to reflect the table and chairs then.



                                      rthh
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very attractive.  Excellent composition, coloring, texturing.  That Lightwave,
sure can turn out the scenes, eh?

=====
From jay@map.com:
Like the image.   The glow on the neon is impressive (haven't figured out how to
do that myself in POV...)  




=====
From dster@syix.com:
nice - some of the proportions are slightly off and more depth into the
window would have been nice - maybe by making the wall thickness greater?


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Nice one... But why all the bottles are so tied-up ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice picture. I hope you will enter more in the future.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I thought happy hours at least had a bartender.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Pretty good - the glasses/bottles suffer mild plasticitis though.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
I can tell a lot of blood sweat and tears went into this one! Bravo!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Looks really good, esp. the door model.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I think the bottles are too plain given the rich texture of the front wall
(bricks, door, neon).  Very rich pic.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Impressive. How were the bricks done?
Notable for textures, modelling, composition



                                    seersgw
                                    -------
=====
From jay@map.com:
I do like the lighting in this scene as opposed to one of the earlier scenes
that also featured a stained glass window.  Adding the pillars helps give the
scene some depth.


=====
From dster@syix.com:

good texture on the panes of stained glass


=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Adding the waves to the glass is a very nice touch!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Nice, but a little dull. There is a lot of detail that could have been added to
this scene.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Hoopy.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The best stained glass I have seen so far - attention to detail is superb,
and the waves technique will be remembered should I ever need to trace SG.
Nice modern feel to the image, with excellent angles, also.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The spiral glass pillars are way cool.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I love the window.  The glass pillars are odd; I think i would have prefered
marble.
The cutout in the top (yellow) pane of the window makes it look rather like a
straight
slot screw.


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
This could be a beautiful rendering.  The window is the prominent part of the
scene, where it should be showcased.  But it is primarily about color.  What
happens when light shines through stained glass?  What effect would it have?  I
think you'll see it come to life if you add that effect!  Nice job!


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Interesting.



                                     serene
                                     ------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
nice picture...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
the blue was black for the most part on my monitor :-(

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Boring


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Not bad... possibly a *bit* too indistinguishable...

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Very pretty

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Lovely!

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
Kinda dark might of been ok. On my screen it came up way dark with just a trace
of picture. Readjusting my monitor didn't help

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
too dark
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Interesting. Dunno what it means, but okay, it looks good and it's glass
anyhow.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
It is an interesting pic.  I saw it separately as either aquatic, erotic, or
biologic
each time i looked.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for originality, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Wonderfully titled. Would make the perfect wallpaper.



                                    sgglass
                                    -------
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Try giving your water a slight bit of transparency. I can imagine that placing a
fog underneath it with the same color would allow a much better depth effect in
general. I haven't tried it, but it sounds reasonable. I just don't like water
with 0 transparency. It looks to much like a solid, even with the ripples.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Snarf.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is a prime example of why the fore and background must fit together - the
glass objects in the fore look like they have some wierd texture, due to the
out of place refraction mapping.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
yawn

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The mountains seem too dark compared with the sky; and the cups are quite
opaque
to be made of glass.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nope. I don't think so.



                                     sgmeus
                                     ------
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice idea but the vase and quilt dont look special enough to belong in a
museum.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The "wood" of the back wall is very odd (a very large tree?)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Your models could use a little work. Try thinking about the size of things with
respect to one another.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
That is one of the saddest, cheeziest things I've seen.
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The idea's good, but it needs artistic refinement. Such as: the velvet ropes
should be thinner; there ought to be a door to keep people from just walking
out with the museum exhibits, etc. The signs are distracting by being so big;
but I'm not sure how you could make them realistic size and still read them
from across the room, so never mind. Anyway, keep practicing.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Nope. I don't think so.



                                    sinebowl
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Good color.  Should have made the spheres bigger so the bowl wouldn't leak!

=====
From jay@map.com:
While the texture on the spheres doesn't look all that glassy, it does look more
like pearl or mother-of-pearl.  Are you using more than one light source here?



=====
From dster@syix.com:
you might have caclulated the circumference of the bowl and used that
to adjust the radius of the individual spheres so that the gaps in the front
would have closed up; or, you mmight have tried blobs instead ...

nice try


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice colours...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Don't sell yourself short - I think it worked out really well!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Looks great. I like the color pattern.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I think I've seen molds that look like this!
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

ahh if you have the source recompile with M486  I think the "canned"
one uses M386 !!!! speeded mine up!(your milage may vary)
=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Interesting.. different.


=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
Though it's not a very interesting scene, the colors are EXCELLENT.
This bowl should be in a display case in an art museum somewhere.
I'm very pleased to see some more "artistic" images that plain scenes this
round.  The scenes are nice, but it's really neat just looking at the colors
and shapes in some of the more abstract images.



=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Dude, you're insane! Why keep your computer tied up for that long?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Interesting formula.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like the colour sceme here.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very unique design and would have scored higher with me if it had some sort of 
image map background.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Beautiful...Wow...

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
That's quite a lot of spheres...

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It's quite impressive as an abstract shape; but if it is an actual bowl, then
the outermost spheres need to be about 150 percent larger so that they touch,
and liquids do not leak out of the bowl. :) A ladle + cups might also look
nice.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
The glass is not that bad.
Notable for originality



                                    skyhook
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Um, glass?

=====
From jay@map.com:
Lovely scene...  The reflections from the glass dome are just the thing.

The perspective is great.


=====
From beliaev@utu.fi:
It seems that your jpg converter spoiled the image a bit, otherwise it's fine.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good work, but where is the glass topic ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I'm not really sure what I think of this method. It appears that there is a
large cube that envelops your scene. at least that seems to be the reason for
the jumps in the shading. What is that for?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Cool.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
This is a very intellegent image.   The colour selection is very good, and
does not comprimise the modelling.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Interesting design

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
Good image!  You do great buildings!
I think a little detail was lost because JPEG compression was
pushed a little too tight (too small a file, degraded the image too much).

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Too much detail was lost by a too low JPEG quality setting.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Wow! The little building models are wonderful!


From web_user@sa1-023.stic.net:
O.K. this is my picture...and it's my first competition entry...comments
please?!



                                     soda3
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Hee hee!  Made me laugh aloud.  Excellent concept!

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
LOL!  Very cute!  Too bad there's no carbonation bubbles.  And your ice cubes
are a tad too perfect as well.  Overall very nice.
=====
From jay@map.com:
I love it...  quite a fun picture.  (Though it seems the soda has gone flat. 
:-)

=====
From dster@syix.com:
bubbles in the soda would have been nice



=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Very clever :^)
Liked it...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Love the concept! Laughed out loud. Please give more detailed description of
the
technical aspects next time, though! 
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
You should got work for 7-Up's marketing firm!



=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Funny idea!  Good lighting!
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Brilliantly funny! This has to be my fave image. Too many of these scenes have
no sense of a humour. 

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
A very nice, clean image.
Funny, too! It seems there are a number of humourous scenes in this month's
competition.
Perhaps something missing are bubbles in the pop.. it looks like it's been in
that glass for a while, if not for the ice.
...but, I don't blame you, bubbles might be a tough (but satisfying) effect to
achieve. If you were really ambitious you could have tried a 'fizz' effect
above the water level.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
This is a nice image, however without details in the .txt file explaining
how you created the image I can't accurately measure the technical merit.  The
concept was cute, however.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Great idea. Made me chuckle. But shouldn't there be bubbles?


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Funny. That's Spot right?

=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:
Very imaginative. It's a pretty cool pic too.

=====
From mbrown@spry.com:
Great.. hillarious.. thanx for the laugh! 
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Fun ;)   Watch out for over-lighting though.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
What?! No bubbles? 

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very cool indeed!

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
You should have considered a higher JPEG quality setting.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
Cute. Needs carbonation bubbles though...

=====
From tilli@stekt.oulu.fi:
Nice Image. Just wondering whether the white balls are eyes or hands.

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
This is uncluttered (good!) and very realistic. Nice!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
I like it. The spots are very cute; and nice job modelling the 3d tiles. 


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, originality, textures, modelling, lighting


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
I believe I see adoring "Spot's" here!  Extremely creative with nice humor!
Notable for composition, originality, textures


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Some bubbles in the "soda" would have been a nice touch.
Notable for modelling, originality



                                     spcprk
                                     ------
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Have you seen the 'pyramide du Louvres' in Paris ???
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I like the glass pyramid - but the stuff in the back and inside it seem low
quality.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Thank you. Origionality is a big bonus in this competition.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
I've seen enough of those structures.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Space look pretty weird.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
One of the more original scenes this month; no wineglasses to be seen anywhere.
The sky is a bit heavy on galaxies; looks like it's snowing the darned things.
The heightfield creases look bad along the crater edges; may need higher res.
mesh. 

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice detail in the roses.  I don't like the comet thingy (too opaque).



                                     steps
                                     -----
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
original...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
There should be more glassiness to the scene!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nice image.  I don't usually like this sort of thing, but this really works
for me.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Cool effect!
BTW:
The aspect ratio is the ratio of the horizontal to vertical RESOLUTION, 
not size.  
=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
I gave a higher Artistic merit just because of the Moire patterns on the
steps.  A VERY good, abstract image!



=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I'm lost.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
A very powerful image - more colours than you can shake a stick at!

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
I don't know what it is, but I like it. :-)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Doesn't look much like steps; but it's good enough as an abstract anyway.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great colors and lines.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for textures, originality



                                    stillebe
                                    --------
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This could use a little more time.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Snarf.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
There's a lot of distractions in this image - most notably the rippled floor,
which can often be used to good effect, but here just looks like a mistake :(

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Time for some anti-aliasing! :)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The puffy quilted wall texture is very interesting.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I like the quilted wallpaper.



                                    stillife
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
What, no gumdrops? <grin>  I really like the colored transmission shadows from
the foodstuffs.  And the glass bits are nice, too!

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Mmmmm...jello.  Like the glass of aspic cubes; I've seen so many glass dishes
with that "little spheres" edging on them.  The top of the jelly jar is a bit
confusing; I can't figure out if it's an open jar or just a metal lid with some
odd shadows and reflections.

=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Yum!

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good objects...but try to manage your lights better...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Neat! The colors looked kinda washed out, but I'll bet you were going for 
realism. Looks just like late afternoon at my place!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
My grandmother had a bowl just like that...

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very real jello.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
You seem to know a lot about jelly.... ;)
I like this image. The background is a touch on the bright side, but it still
works.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:
Nice job on the jello.  Whoever said jello was easy to make?  :-)  There are
two items to note here. The first is that the colors variations between glass
and background is small, so the details are lost in dithering viewers (like
netscape).  The second is that, for some reason, the green glass appears to be
motion-blurred.  This may also be part of the dithering problem.  

These probably won't show up on >8bpp displays, but anyone using a simple 256 
color display may see them.  Its just something to consider in future images.
Other than that, nice job.  The glass on the left (red jello stand) is quite
good.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little bizzare.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Great glass texture.   The Jell(o)y is a bit sharp-looking, and I am not sure
about the background reflection, but nice attention to texture detail.

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
The shadowing makes the jello look...sinister!

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Like all of your scenes, this shows remarkable artistic talent. Your level
of technical skill gets better every round. This scene is great!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
 Homer-Simpson-voice  "Mmmmm.... Jell-o....".  /Homer 
Seriously, nice job on the modelling.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great colors/textures.  I think the back reflection is too distracting.  I would
have
liked to have seen it open in the back. (perhaps...)
The orange aspic looks delicious.



                                     study2
                                     ------
=====
From jay@map.com:
It's kind of hard to tell that the stained glass window is a window, not another
painting on the wall.  Yes, the light from the window shines on the desktop,
but it's too flush with the wall.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Nice glass texture...
Be carefull with scene croping...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
the objects don't "fit" well together...  they all look good, but the scene
isn't
appealing...  I would have liked to see close-ups of some of the individual
objects (snowman, hourglass, etc...)

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   You did the painting on the wall by hand eh? Not too bad. ;)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A nice image. The arwork in the background (left image) is cheesy, but I always
vote for more detail, even if the detail added is slighly goofy. Kudos. Much
better than a plain backgound. Everything else is very nice, especially the
polished surface, which reflects the goofy image nicely (good use of color)


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Squish.

=====
From mbrown@spry.com:
Just a simple desk? You have a gift of understatement. Its the most
photorealistic image i have seen down with povray. The only detraction
from the effect is the simple painting of the castle. But bravo! none the less.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
As far as `Glass things on a desk' goes, you have managed that fine.   I
would prefer more thought as to what makes an image artistic though.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Looks great!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Normally I might gripe about such heavy use of scanned artwork; but the glass
stuff on the desk interacts really well with the paintings. Very
photorealistic.



                                    surprise
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
I love those shapes--how were they done?  Spline patches?

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Very nice colours...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Hard to rate on technical merit without a description. And less venom in the 
description, please. :(

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Very nice!  This would make a great poster-print in a modern space.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
I like these sorts of images!

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   Simple, yet unique and captivating. The reflective checkerboard is just the
right touch to give that hint of realism to the scene. The blue shapes
are so atypical as to be, well, something. Though the one in back does
look like someone pulling up their pants. True art, no?

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Great richness in color. Very expressive.
By the way, take it easy on the nationalistic content. Being mistaken for a
Russian is not the worst thing that could happen to you. You weren't occupied
by the Soviet Union -- you WERE the Soviet Union. Now that it doesn't exist,
everyone wants to blame 
the Russians. You could bitch if there weren't any Lithuanians participating in
the 
revolution of 1917, but there were. If it weren't for Russians, you would be
speaking 
German right now (that, or be six feet under). So relax.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Hey, it's origional. I don't get it, but I think it's pretty.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Neat, a few copies of the same blob and stuff.

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like this a lot - the colour scheme is near perfect, and enough work has
gone into modelling and texturing to enhance realism.   V. Good.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Super image.  I really like the use of reflection and lighting!

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Very pretty...and beautiful colors.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
Your image is quite nice, a little more background detail might be nice
Your Country comment shows a bit of paranoia and might be just a little
unfair to someone looking at your art

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very surreal. To me, it looks like alien creatures examining an artifact from
Earth.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Outstanding. I can see why people said you should display it to a greater
audience. Only one issue though. The floor seems to be too reflective.
Notable for originality, lighting, composition



                                     swirl
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very pretty!

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great colors

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The signature (near the middle of the image) is too noticable.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
_TOO_ Bizzare


=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Nice Klein bottle, but it looks a little lonely there all by itself.


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
The irridescence here is gorgeous!  
Notable for composition, textures, modelling, lighting, originality



                                    tb-tmpl
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very nice picture!  Excellent modelling, good use of color, great concept.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Lovely image - I'm particularly fond of the dolphins.
=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good idea...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Beautiful image!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Wow, now that's glass



=====
From klynn@minn.net:

Very good image!
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

I judge the pictures not the description .......
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is definitely one of the better images in the competition this round. Good
work. Your temple structure gets a little repetitive, but it looks nice.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Awesome!



=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Many good points to this image.   My only problem is that glass does not scale
up that well, unless you can provide a *lot* of detail from the background to
refract through.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Very nice!

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very cold-looking!

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
Don't worry about your English, it's fine. The picture is VERY nice!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very icy and crystalline; could use some color besides blue (red sunset maybe)


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for originality


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Dobar dan. I like this. Very different. Looking for the snow queen. Hvala.
Notable for originality



                                     tcwray
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
At least there's lots of glass.

=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
the way used you name did not relate to the rest of the piece. nice
reflections.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice image especially with the colors but please make your signature a little
more
subtle. Having your name pasted across the image in large bold letters severely
detracts
from your picture (and also loses some artistic value in my book).

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
What inspired plastering your name in the middle like that?

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
oh. wow.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
A lot of colour, and bright imagary.  Unfortunately, possibly too much.  I
feel `saturated' ;)

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
Very nice glass sculpture.  I shouldn't really whine about it, but it seems
to me that rather than helping each other, the glass and your name together
just make it hard to see either one.  Details of your name, like the letter E
are completely hidden, and the effect on the glass is to completely shatter
the effect.  (I DO like the reflection though!)  Maybe, rerender WITHOUT your
name? (Sorry)

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
I enjoyed your picture, however I think using your name across the middle 
detracted from the overall effect. If the name was needed, it should have been
imprinted
using the same techniques as the rest of the picture instead of being stamped
over the top 

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Your name right over the middle of the image spoils it

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Not sure what it is, but it's very glassy and looks nice.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
I had to deduct 1 artistic point because that sig really slashes across an
elegant model.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Just too much!



                                     temple
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very science-fictiony.  Would make a great book cover.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A bit odd. Pretty, but odd. Thanks for being origional.


=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
I really like the temple, but the clouds look very flat.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very surreal. The green glass blocks look good.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A modern "tomb of the unknown soldier"?
Notable for lighting



                                    tkgalile
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Wish I could have seen it better.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Having seen this kind of thermometer before, I have to admit I wish you'd used a
lower angle;
one of the charms of these old thermometers is how lovely they are (especially
when compared with the nasty
modern mercury ones used now).  Much of your detail is lost by the fact that we
can only see distorted
refractions of the interior "balloons".  What I can make out looks very nicely
detailed.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good idea... It's good that you explain what it is !!!
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
I would have like to have seen this from a different angle.

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Liked the concept; where did you find the design? I couldn't find one I liked
when I was selecting an idea... :)

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
they sell these at the mall....  I'd rather have seen a side view though.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
hmmm hard to tell what it was without the description...maby another angle?

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
It looks to me as if there is a genie peering out from the thermometer.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like it. An interesting image.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Seeing the text-file really helped - before I knew what to look for I just
saw a vaguely phallic object!   Whilst the camera angle gives good refraction,
I would recommend a more understandable one :)   Very nice background texture.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow! I could go blind looking at this! :)

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Oh, I thought it was a condom... ;)

=====
From ptdawson@voicenet.com:
The blue background is fantastic!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Interesting. Good thing you explain what it is in the text file, 'cause it
looks distractingly like a big glass condom.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for lighting



                                      trax
                                      ----
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Nice but what the hell is it.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
I like the use of grays with color highlights...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Why on it's side?


=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very effective. I can almost hear the jazz music from some detective story.
The only bad thing about the picture is that it is sideways, and if I rotate
it back upright, is much too tall to see all at once on a typical monitor. :( 


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Pity I had to lie down to view it properly. Nice composition though. Best
cigarrette I have seen.
Notable for modelling, composition, lighting, textures



                                    triball
                                    -------
=====
From jay@map.com:
Did you use a "merge" CSG for the three spheres?  

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Corel ???
What that bullshit-ware usefull for a 3d contest ???
Stop now !!!
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego




=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I really like the background.

=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
nice spatial grouping, simple AND elegent

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little too plain for my tastes.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Ohhhhhhhhhh... Ahhhhh.... NOT
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Some nice thoughts about light-placement and colouring really show up.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
Very interesting use of colors and textures.  

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Groovy daddy-O!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Gosh! Three spheres -and- an aurora background. It must've taken -minutes- to
render. Okay, it's not that bad, but maybe try something more ambitious next
time.



                                    ttwindow
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Cool lighting.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice image - I like the reflection of the windows in the polished floor.  The
"projection" of the light onto
the floor is distracting, as the angle of the projection from the original
window position changes too dramatically from left to right; I
suspest the light source is too close to your windows, so the rays are diverging
by a *MUCH* greater angle than if the scene was actually being lit by a distant
sun.
Some interior lighting to show interior architecture would also be nice; as it
is, the top half of the scene unfortunately looks more
like a bitmapped image than a raytraced one.

=====
From jay@map.com:
While it's a great scene, I do have trouble with the floor -
it's a bit too dark in my opinion.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

It's surely difficult in pov to do that, but try to be more
original for next time...
=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Very nice ligthing effects.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Neat image - the contract of the sharp focus of the windows vs. the fuzzy 
distorted reflections has a nice effect.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
Great combination of relflection and refraction.  You might consider turning up
the ambient lighting on the stone wall.
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:

could have used more in the background
=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
It'd be nice to see the wall.

=====
From tiger@mgl.ca:
Rather impressive. The dark back wall could have used just a smidgen more
light,
and something I noticed with the light falling on the floor through the
windows...
your light source is probably quite close by on the far side of the glass,
wasn't it? It causes the rays to spread apart at quite a sharp angle, whereas
sunlight would result in parallel projections onto the floor.

It's a very cool effect, though :)

=====
From mickmcm@indigo.ie:
The reflections work really well. Perhaps the colorless glass needs a shine or
something just to show that it's there, but aside from that it's a really nice
picture.


=====
From mjhammel@emass.com:

Very nice image.  Simplistic yet effective.  Well done.
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
A little more ambient light would be nice to see the facing wall. If enough
light is entering to make the reflections, there ought to be enough light to
see the wall.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Who me? Oh yeah.
Um.. Nice.
=====
From schmij3@rpi.edu:

I like the water in the window.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The stained glass looks OK, but the image in general is a bit 2D.   Most of
the image could have been done with a paint-package.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Hmmmmmm, I think I like it! Great reflections.                                  
          
                                               jmills@stic.net

=====
From xeo@sprynet.com:
The refletions on the floor looks good, but the windows and the wall around them
are to flat and uninteresting.
Next time try a slightly off center camera angle, add a little side
lighting(maybe from Z+X+ of the scene pointing at the windows for example)
Good job on the stain glass though!
=====
From efry@zeta.org.au:
I like the design in the windows, I think you need to show the texture on the
wall to make the scene look more natural.


=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
This is a very simple scene, but the lighting effects are powerful. The sea is
a nice touch; almost overlooked it until I read the text entry.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Nice composition.  I really like the "3 views" of the windows concept.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Very pretty



                                     val97
                                     -----
=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
very nice!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Hmm... are we all just a bunch of lonely computer dweebs?

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I place it in the top three. Personally, I find notheing wrong with your image.
I just like the neo Punk Cinderella better. Other than personal biases, I think
your image is perfect. My girlfriend says "That's COOL!" if it's any
consolation (Her caps, not mine). Excellent image. (19,20,20)


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Make sure the (esp. glass) foreground an the background match - the crystals
look a bit flat otherwise.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
This raytrace looks really nice, but sort of dull.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Wow! Beautiful!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very nice, esp. the animation option.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for modelling



                                      vase
                                      ----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Yeah, pretty.  That Alias sure can churn out the pics, eh?

=====
From jay@map.com:
The vase in itself is quite interesting, but the scene could use something else
to 
interract with the vase

=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Beautiful but what did you use?

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Very cool!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Very eloquent. Very classy. Very good.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like your other work, but this one is just another single glass model entries
to me.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
I would vote on this if 
it wasn't the like 20th image mr.naxos has submitted
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Very good - you managed to model/place the vase so that even with the very
sparse background, it retains its definition.

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Nice object...although I think flowers would fall out of it! :)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very interesting shaped vase, but the scene would be better if the vase
weren't all by its lonely self. It needs some other objects, to show off
its glassiness.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, lighting, textures, originality, modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for lighting, modelling



                                     verres
                                     ------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
This one you went too far--bad aliasing, and you even included the wrong text
file!  Next time, fewer images, more work on each one, please.

=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
the glasses are fine but they need a setting.

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
I think that you have the wrong image here. I see no mouse, just a couple of
glasses

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
mouse?  hmm... .txt file screw up.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like your other images better. I'm sick of glasses.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Another 1,1,1 for another simple image from naxos.

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Nice colour effects.

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
where's the mouse??? Some{thing|one} screwed up the txt file.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The text file calls this a "billiards mouse" ?! (Perhaps you have submitted
so many entries to us poor judges that you can't even keep track of them
all...)
Again, it is a bit sparse.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for composition, textures, lighting, modelling


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
I love the contrast here between light and darkness around the glasses.  They
shine with the colors of a prism ( like good crystal would!!)  Very nicely
done!  Good refraction of light, and sense of depth.
Notable for composition, lighting, textures, originality, modelling


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A photograph!
Notable for lighting, modelling



                                    verres1
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very pretty.  Shiny!

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nice, but non-evocative.

=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Nice Floor!
=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Beautiful!

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Cool. This has a nice 1930s Art Deco feel. 


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
I love the effect of the light on the glasses, and the surface they stand on.  I
would prefer a different background, as it's a little too busy for the glasses
to suit my taste, but this was VERY well done.  
Notable for modelling, originality, textures, lighting, composition


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
I like it. Very uhmm ... catholic!
Notable for lighting, composition



                                     vidro5
                                     ------
=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
I like the unusual camera angle; makes for a very dramatic picture.  The
multiple shadows cast by your luminary are isually interesting, but perhaps
stand out a little more against the bright yellow wall than is good; they
distract a little from the central focus.
=====
From seppo.halonen@hut.fi:
Nice, but some IOR would be welcome.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
original camera position...dynamic !
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego



=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Nice camera angle and good composition, but the subjects of the image aren't
very interesting or detailed.

=====
From klynn@minn.net:

I like the camera angle and the shadows!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Really bizzare perspective.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Kool.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice concept, but the textures and lighting need lots of work.   Watch out
when using multiple point light sources within a small space, since you
get a lot of overlapping sharp shadows.   Unfortunately the alternative is
area_light :(

=====
From wyvern@u.washington.edu:
You can get a much more realistic flame by using a halo inside a cone.  Other
than that, great image!

=====
From karl@pemail.net:
Interesting viewpoint

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The chandelier is nicely made. Overall, the scene might improve if we were
looking down past it to all the bottles and glasses; there seems like too much
empty ceiling in this version. The lighting is very rich and warm colored.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Notable for originality



                                    vierglas
                                    --------
=====
From tlyons@gnn.com:
keeper

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Looks kind of nice, but unorigional and uncreative.


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
The spheres have a nice amount of inner detail, compared to the background.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
The scene layout is not bad, even if it is yet another set of meaningless glass
spheres; but the background is very badly dithered. You might want to try an
alternate jpg conversion tool.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Not competition quality.



                                    vierneb
                                    -------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
I like this one better.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
wait I've seen this one...

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
This is a cop-out.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
who me?

=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Better colouring than other version ;)



=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
That's better (even though I still think that four glass marbles is nowhere
near
enough effort to win a contest, more like a test scene). The background looks
much
smoother and richly colored.


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Not competition quality.



                                    virtbeer
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Yum!  Very accurate modelling on the actual liquid.  The base of the glass is
almost invisible except for its refraction.

=====
From jay@map.com:
Love the bottle, glass, and beer.  Wish they didn't clash so much with the
background of the scene, which seems a bit to bright to my taste.


=====
From dster@syix.com:

sky coloration distracts from all those bubbles


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Good objects models... But poor scene background...

http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From MMandl@aol.com:

i liked the "flow" of the beer from the bottle to the glass. the sky could have
been better.
=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
The beer and glass look great, but the background is less detailed and takes
away from the beer.  I'd say either darken, or remove the background stuff or
improve their quality (detail).

....and it should have been a Guiness!

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
Mmmm.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
The bakcgound detail level doesn't compare to that of the foreground. I thing
you did a great job with the beer and the glass, but some more attention to the
areas of the windows would be nice. things have a more plastic look to them
than they really ought to. Try adding a texture to the woods (blend different
browns in a wood or marble pattern).


=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Remember that a beer glass is mostly transparent.   There is too much reflect.
here, making the beer hard to see (and I hate not seeing beer ;) 

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Very good-looking beer, but the sky is a bit too blue. 

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Even the empty part of the bottle (except the very neck) refracts as if it were
solid. Remember to make the whole bottle hollow for realistic refractions.
The bottom of the glass seems to have a very low refractive index.

=====
From roth@ens.ascom.ch:
Exellent modelled flow of beer. The foam is incredible!
Good on ya!

=====
From no13@ozemail.com.au:
The bear looks good enough to drink. A little work on the background would help
though.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Its sort of sparse, but the beer glass itself looks good. How come no virtual
stick-man hand or robotic grasping tool pouring the beer? (Without a visual
hand locator, the poor VR user might spill his/her virtual beer :|

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Very, very nice.  Makes me kinda thirsty.  I love the bottle and the liquid.
The boards on the wall are a nice detail.  I think the towel/runner could have
used
a better texture (maybe a wrinkle).


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
A plainer background may have been more effective



                                    we-break
                                    --------
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Very cool concept.  Interesting experiment with the monochrome--looks better
than I would have imagined.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Liked the image - but I think you've gone just a tad TOO far in the opposite
direction from "garish colours".  I'd love to see a version of this scene done
with appropriate colours, garish or otherwise.

=====
From dster@syix.com:


good depth of field in window display area

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Your PC is so old that you don't have colours ;^)
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego




=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Ha!  black and white!  ...we didn't mean you should get rid of all your color!
Still, as soon as I saw it, I knew it was a Paul T. Dawson image, I think it 
was the familiar people.

Once again, nice job, great concept.  

=====
From klynn@minn.net:
good composition!
=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I like it a lot.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
I think they should take over the city killing everyone, HAHAHAHAHA! or maybe
not.  Cool image though.


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
Ya! Monochrome, pixelized, and faceted is the way to go!!

=====
From whytea@topaz.cqu.edu.au:

Very nice image, the human figures are unreal.
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
I like grey.   Grey is good.   I have just criticised one image for greyness,
but it looked wrong there.   It looks right here.   Only comment is that
for b/w images, make sure the contrast is sufficient for depth.

=====
From mwhite@redshift.com:
This to me is a rather bold statement that captured my attension right away!  
The use of grey scale is really nicely used in this image. (Love it!)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
Man, this is like night of the living dead...scary.
Awesome work...

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
A black and white image? You don't just break the glass, you break ray-tracing
conventions! Ray-traced pictures are supposed to be shining and colourful 
=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Cool! I like the all-grey effect in this scene, like this is a security camera
video. (Although garish disco colors might have worked too :).

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great B&W pic.  Lots of nice, well placed models.
You should have mentioned which 'Kraftwerk' album the song is from.
(Autobahn is one of my all time favorite albums :)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Notable for originality



                                    winseat2
                                    --------
=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
Maybe this is an idea that should be gone with the win  "dow" <g>




=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
This scene brings tears to my eyes...

=====
From 93semeno@scar.utoronto.ca:
I wonder how this would fit into the "SCHOOL" topic? :)

=====
From ansellaa@acc.wuacc.edu:
Since this seat is just over the wing, shouldn't there be an emergency exit
somewhere in view?

BTW: if we opened the window, would these two guys get sucked out? ;-)
(as pure abstract art though, I think Bill's _was_ better.)

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Using his concept makes you rather un-origional. And there is still pleanty of
room for detail


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
He used Mr.WindowSeat's bad idea (looking out a plane 
window at nothing in particular) only
with some modifications (the window's square, the wall has
a obviously tiled seamy bump_map on it, there's some pixelized
height_field/image_map on the ground.)
It aparently took 1h 28m on a pro 200.

Get this: 
"They say that truly great ideas never die.  And this
concept worked out so well for my brother admin last round (when the topic
was
"Flight") that, once I realized that it was equally applicable to "Glass",
I
couldn't resist.  If next round's topic is "View From an Airplane" then
perhaps someone else will capitalize on this timeless scene." -Author

Equally applicable to "Glass"?
Worked out so well for my brother?
This idea is timeless? Oh! ,it was timeless! It never had it's time!!!
BAHAHAH!!
Go away Chip!!!!!
Keep up the good work. NOT!!

=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
AGAIN!!!!!!!!

=====
From pjones@powerup.com.au:
I was going to give you a score of 20/20/20 - but I was overcome by a feeling
of
deja vu at the last minute and changed my mind :-)

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
Wrong horizon, badly lit, unoriginal.

=====
From lowellr@globaldialog.com:
 I am assuming this is a joke entry for the following reasons
I think it is a little to close to Bill M entry to be counted as original work.
It is a little (+++) too unfinished to be counted as your "best".
Aside from an invisble window there is no glass/etc in the picture.
If you want suggestions on the picture - email

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
It's a clever enough concept, but to pull it off, this scene needs more
airplane
stuff. Just one or two more windows, and a seat-back would greatly reinforce
it.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Interesting camera angle.  You should have embossed the manufacturer on the
pull
down panel ("Boeing", "POV" :)


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Oooops!



                                     xmass
                                     -----
=====
From dster@syix.com:

Lights?
Topic is Glass.


=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:
Very-very-very nice picture...
BUT, you are NOT in the right topic !!!!!!!
Topic was Glass, not lights...
I use Alias also, come and see some of my work at:
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego


=====
From richmiller@hotmail.com:
Wow. Love the lighting...

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
pretty, but off topic.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
Awesome image!


=====
From Matthew_L_Ziegler@hill-top.com:
Where is the glass?

=====
From amarok@geocities.com:
Great image, but not very "glassy".

=====
From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de:
wrong topic.

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
Very pretty (although it's kind of small, and borderline for the topic).
The modelling is especially nice.

=====
From dick@buckosoft.com:
Great lighting.


From web_user@p5-01.z03.glo.be:
Unfortunatelly, not in the right topic...
Notable for textures, composition, originality, lighting


From web_user@cust90.max4.detroit.mi.ms.uu.net:
This has beautiful light and color, but does not, to me, portray any glass. 
Perhaps adding some shine to the ornament would help.  Nice job overall!
Notable for modelling, lighting


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
Where's the glass?



                                     yoslh
                                     -----
=====
From chipr@niestu.com:
Horrible scary concept, neat pic.

=====
From sroberts@learn.senecac.on.ca:
Nice gastly image.  The dragon outside the window is particularly impressive,
though everthing seems quite well-modelled overall.

=====
From cgallego@nordnet.fr:

Dead can dance...
http://home.nordnet.fr/~cgallego

=====
From tholal@bga.com:
Great picture! The flaming blood chalice looks very realistic.

=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
Blood! ...nice blood, that's hard to do in raytracing.
=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
Sick. Twisted. Demented. Cool.

=====
From ucoakc00@mcl.ucsb.edu:
You are a bit wierd! Actually, this might fit better into the "school" category.
That's where most of my thought of hell stem from.


=====
From usmitc04@mcl.ucsb.edu:
whoa there turbo, that's just a bit freakish


=====
From danclegg@uniserve.com:
How satianic.
=====
From daxrembo@bcl.net:

Sick but cool!
=====
From rea@st-and.ac.uk:
Nice image - not the most glassy I have seen, but the only main quibble I
have is that one would expect the blood-stains on the same side as the finger
`dents' in the hilt ;)

=====
From jmills@stic.net:
ooof! :)

=====
From lpurple@netcom.com:
My hell is staying up night after night, grading hundreds of contest entries,
many of which have nothing to do with topic AND look like they were pulled
from someone's arse five minutes before deadline. Lucky for you, your scene
actually looks like you spent more than five minutes (even though the "glass"
connection is only that it contains glass stuff), so I spare it from the
flames...


From web_user@tonyv.aztec.co.za:
It might have glass in it; but it has very little to do with glass.

