===== From roth@ens.ascom.ch: the best book i've ever seen! ===== From jknepley@nyx.net: A more complex Lego model (that represented one of the illustrations in the book) would have made a huge difference. ===== From djconnel@flash.net: Brilliantly done! The sphere has a bit of an artifact, but otherwise the effect is quite striking Clearly this is an excellent work and a worthy winner. Only one small problem -- the background takes up too much of the image. The grey is destracting from the rest, and robs the good stuff of attention. However, I love the multi-tiered applicability of the image to the subject! The toys are fundamental representations of the engineering paradign -- all classics. The structures generated are extremes of engineering. The book is record of great engineering.... even the pattern is represented as a puzzle, which is also engineering. It definitely passes my "textbook cover" benchmark. Dan ===== From castlewrks@aol.com: This image shows alot ofthought in its conception and execution. ===== From sonya_roberts@geocities.com: Great work. I like the "three impossible objects". The Penrose tiling is also very nicely done. I like how you gave each of the tiles graduated shading rather then a flat colours, it really adds to their dimensional feel and makes them very visually appealing. Excellant work. ===== From kaustin@tgn.net: The tiling is nice. Unfortunatly, short of the images in the book, I fail to understand how this image represents 'Great Engineering Achievement.' The plain background (which bands) gives the image a lopsided feel, I would recomend tilting the camera down a bit to cover that space. The Erector set (sadly, I don't believe they still make this toy, it was rather fun) comes across as flat, as though the pieces are the plastic ones, but without the woven texture which was displayed. The shape of the pages of the book are well done. ===== From daves@wkpowerlink.com: Neat idea, but the color is a bit too... dull. The concept itself might have done better in the childhood competition. ===== From chipr@niestu.com: Very nice image. I especially liked the tiles. The theme was a bit unfocused--I wasn't sure what you were trying to say with the image. ===== From bill@apocalypse.org: This scene grows on you - loved the desciption in the txt file, nice work! ===== From gmccarter@hotmail.com: Clever ideas all over. Artistic points for the composition with the tiled floor and gradient background. ===== From arcana@sinbad.net: I like the image, although most of the hard math is beyond my experience. Some things I would suggest modifying are: 1) The hard lighting. 2) Add some minor reflectiveness to the lego pieces. 3) Work a bit more on the detail of the book cover and the texture of the paper in the book. With the book that close, the paper would have a softer texturing to it. ===== From wozzeck@club-internet.fr: J'aime beaucoup le livre et le dallage, meme si une vue en plongee plus accentuee aurait permis de remplir tout l'espace. Par contre je trouve que c'est assez "limite" par rapport a un sujet qui sert surtout de pretexte. ===== From ethelm@bigfoot.com: Very clever work. ===== From bsieker@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de: The metal impossible object does not look that convincing but tha LEGO one is really neat :) ===== From 101741.541@compuserve.com: Really fine objects, fine technique, many novelties (penrose tiling,...) but seriously lacks of coherence and "feel"; lightning is very weak. ===== From c_et_d@club-internet.fr: Belle image dont au 1er coup d'oeil j'ai appr=E9ci=E9 la qualit=E9 du = dessin est des couleurs . Au del=E0 des explications th=E9oriques, le = support est tr=E8s r=E9ussi. Le coup de la boule qui fait des carr=E9s, = je me suis fait avoir ! Il n'y aque la lumi=E8re qui est peut-=EAtre un = peu "p=E9tard" quoique... ===== From lpurple@netcom.com: This is incredibly cool! I was going to dismiss it as just a table-with-stuff, until I realized that the toy constructs and the paperweight were impossible! The paperweight even casts an appropriate shadow! The Penrose tiles also look great. ===== From r@slip-32-100-72-29.ny.us.ibm.net>: Got a smile. Notable for originality ===== From r@dial-up27.webbernet.net>: Striking image. Very clever design and implementation. Your three impossible objects span a continuum from "mechanical" to "organic". Was that intentional? Were you aware that Roger Penrose (and his father) are also credited with one of your impossible objects? ===== From r@bowerbird.cc.uq.edu.au>: Notable for originality, composition, textures ===== From r@ts6-14.hfx.istar.ca: Very nice, the optical illusions are odd. If these can't exist in real space, how can they be modelled? I'm puzzled Notable for originality