=====
From rgow@lanset.com:
Radiosity looks pretty good to me! The patio does need some more elements
though.

=====
From tek@evilsuperbrain.com:
Could be improved by some materials, but the simplicity of the scene is quite
nice. Good lighting.



=====
From xilo_m@hotpop.com:
Nice image, but unfortunately it seems much like the render of a blue-print and
there is no action, nothing is happening in your scene, it is empty of life and
therefore feels extremely artificial.
=====
From marlo.steed@uleth.ca:
This was a very nice image with only one minor flaw.  The structure had a lot of
subtle detail and looked quite relistic - the lighting matched up with the
light sources.  The color scheme worked for me.  The problem my eye keeps
picking up on is the separation on the steps, there seems to be space between
the steps - this causes dissonance because everything else is so seamless. 
Still a good looking image.
=====
From hildurka@simnet.is:
I like this one, the light and the shadows work very vell together. This is the
kind of rooms that don_t really need furniture, I like it the way it is. The
materials on the walls and ceilings look O.K. but the floor needs some work. In
the middle where the light is brightest the floor gets overexposed, but in the
shadowy part it looks almost black which is unnatural. The overall style of the
building looks convincing, nice details. Good work!

=====
From chris_hormann@gmx.de:
Nice image, well modelled and pleasant colors.  
The shadows of the roof stripes on the steps in the foreground
are quite irritating,  mainly because they are not visible on the upper 
side because this is too bright.  This makes them look somewhat like 
artefacts.


=====
From r@ip68-11-81-210.no.no.cox.net:
Nice use of light and shadow.  Sparsness of interior highlights architectural
elements.  Fairly generic design.
Notable for composition, lighting


=====
From r@215-241.opf.slu.cz:
Very good lighting. Not enough modelling and some not very "exact" proportions.
Notable for lighting