=====
From spanky@wpi.edu:
I can't tell if you actually just accidentally left of the 'e' on Ganymede.

The surface is really incredible, the background/lens flare and monolith are
a little bit weak.  That surface deserves credit though, nice job
=====
From seayt01@mail.mgc.peachnet.edu:
First of all, the name is Ganymede.  Second, this image really didn't work for
me for some reason.  The colors aren't too well chosen, and the whole
black-obelisk thing seems too much like 2001 - which would have been fine if
you had credited it.
=====
From gregj56590@aol.com:
Nice use of color
=====
From Alain.Culos@bigfoot.com:
Topic could have been studied a bit more. Too simple an interpretation of the
theme for me.

=====
From shipbrk@gate.net:
Nice colours, interesting craters.

=====
From ethelm@bigfoot.com:
Very artistic and good concept.

=====
From gshaw@monotix.co.za:
Craters are a little perfect. What is the red object in the sky? Mars? Io?

=====
From mar@physics.usyd.edu.au:
Nice cratered surface, nice colours. Lacking in some more detailed objects to
look at... if the lone monolith is the focal point it might be better closer
up.

=====
From jull43@ij.net:
>From the best I have seen from NASA there is not the least reason to think the
surface of Ganymede is anything like this, nor any reason to think any world
could be like that. 

The angular size of the sun, stars and Jupiter are all wrong. And Ganymede is
real not imaginary. 


=====
From r@209.155.62.50:
Notable for lighting