=====
From rgow@lanset.com:
Good concept. Probably a bit too dark, but maybe just increase the light on the
forground to provide more highlights.

=====
From shay@simcoparts.com:
The pond and the foreground are by far the best part of this image. I would
suggest moving the other elements *way* into the background and perhaps even
obscuring them more with some heavy focal blur. 




=====
From chris@ugan.com:
I wish this image wasn't so dark :(

=====
From maarten_hofman@hotmail.com:
Even with my monitor at its brightest (which causes all the black to disappear)
this picture still seems way too dark.

=====
From rich@brickbots.com:
I like the nightime feel, but I would brighten the image 
and use bluer lights to give the effect.  That would bring 
out the details, but still keep the nighttime appearance.

=====
From batronyx@alliancecable.net:
Well, your described intentions and efforts sound lovely.

=====
From charliemc@prodigy.net:
really nice work, its really am,zing how you could use those simple tools and
take them so far.

=====
From 25ct@lineone.net:

I love the lighting in this.


=====
From chris_hormann@gmx.de:
Very nice work.  Night scenes are always difficult, you managed a convincing
appearance quite well.  The only critique would be the somewhat too purely
horizontal structure of the image.

=====
From clem@dhol.org:
You went too far with the softness and darkness.  More 
visible detail would help greatly.  The lily pond is a good 
idea.  The overall color scheme suggests that the land is 
under some poisonous brown smog.

=====
From p_chan@shaw.ca:
The waterlilies are done very well, although they do 
have a certain air of rigidness about them that's very 
difficult to avoid in ray-tracing.  While I think the 
brightness of the stars is about right, my feeling is that 
the textures in stars.inc tend to have concentrations of 
stars that are too dense (a somewhat unrealistic effect).

=====
From hgregory3a@aol.com:
a bit dark but very nice