=====
From staff@clickquicknow.com:
The water is perfect... but I think I have seen those plants/tree before?!?
...Hope they are original. Nice Image.

=====
From jouni@mikrobitti.fi:
Well-composed foreground, but why is the pagoda standing on a plane with
absolutely no features whatsoever in the background? 

=====
From ruy@hipernet.com.br:
Nice modelling of the pagoda. Good job with the water and grass. Radiosity could
have helped to enhance the realistic look.

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

Nice concept... quite a bit of detail here.... a bit more attention to
atmosphere and lighting may have helped make this a more dramatic image.
=====
From daffy-duck@worldnet.att.net:
Nice ripples in the pond. I like your attention to detail in the Pagoda
building. I understand your use of the trees (which look nice) to screen out
the infinite plain the scene is on, but using a height field to simulate hills
and mountains is an easy way to fill in a background that you might want to
try.

=====
From lrwii@joplin.com:
The pagoda is nice. I also like concret under it. More 
brush and trees would help. It needs something to brake 
up the horison line. Maybe trees or distant hills.

=====
From chris_hormann@gmx.de:
Has a nice serene look, just the ground below the building looks somehow
strange.

=====
From jrcsurvey@aol.com:
This picture has an odd appeal.  It has a delicacy that sets off some of the 
gentler details.  Like in early Renaissance work.