=====
From MMandl@aol.com:
It is beautiful object. However, it needs to be set as a scene.
So I gave low artistic merit and higher tech merit.




=====
From lg@pixar.com:
Not very original -- I've already seen three almost exactly like this

=====
From agage@mines.edu:
Four images of nearly the same thing gets a bit dull.

=====
From jjanger@mail.cspp.edu:
   3 Submissions too many.

=====
From kahler@informatik.tu-muenchen.de:
One shell image would have been enough..

=====
From jaime@ctav.es:
Too many shells!


=====
From bill.marrs@pureatria.com:
This is my least favorite of the 4.

=====
From appel@informatik.tu-muenchen.de:
shell01 ... 01a ... 02 ... 02a ... ?!?
Do you believe in Overkill?




=====
From ingo@ibm.net:
Hello!

Please think about entering only _one_ picture next time.
I've seen your four entries, they're quite similar, but really not bad - so it's
your choice to select the best not the jury's one.

Bye,
  Ingo

=====
From cfusner@enter.net:
Re: Shell*.jpg
All 4 of these images are interesting, but it would have been nice
to see just one (the one the artist considers his best), and then
perhaps a note about visiting his website to see the rest. While I
consider them all quite visually interesting, I had to give 
progressively lower marks for originality in each case.

=====
From alex@astro.queensu.ca:
4 virtually identical renderings gets tiresome


=====

From web_user@sf-pm1-28-28.dialup.slip.net:
Notable for lighting