Patre, here is my suggestion.<br><br>First, the coins would not be visible at this angle do to the depth of the pot and the angle of view. Nice thought, but I would remove them. Then, the shadow needs revision. It should be darker under the overhanging lip and lighter in the center bottom where light can reach and I highlighted the rim. Also, for water, I would add a reflection to the surface so let us start with those things first.<br><br><img src="http://xs2.xs.to/pics/04115/Antiquity-parts.jpg"><br><br>Now let us trim to fit and add a reflection of the inside of the pot to the far surface of the water. I also decreased the opaqueness of both and then lightly erased the fore part of the surface reflection shown here:<br><br><img src="http://xs2.xs.to/pics/04115/Antiquityfinishedparts.jpg"><br><br>Now, put all together it looks like this:<br><br><img src="http://xs2.xs.to/pics/04115/Antiquity-done.jpg"><br><br>If I had more time this morning I would do more finessing but this gives you an idea of where to start. I hope it helps.

Nice!

WOW Duckboy... Now I know who to call for advice, eh?

Thanks Al....What a change for the better, but then you are better!!

nice work, ypa!

Thanks folks, I wish I had time to do a better job on it, but the how to was what I wanted to get across. I hope I was clear enough.

Phew! YPA, I was gonna say it looks like sh*t, but I now see that you were just trying to get "how to" point across. <br><br>Just kidding.

Chopper, it is so good to see you back here man. You have definitely been missed.

YPA, thanks man.

what counts most of the time is the illusion and not always real science so your drawing is really a great job <br><br>to make it complete I would like to make 2 small remarks<br><br>first there is a good possibility that the coins would be visible because of the phenomenon called refraction, see for instance http://www.tiscali.co.uk/reference/encyclopaedia/hutchinson/m0006048.html<br> or <br> http://www.kochscience.homestead.com/refraction.jpg<br>or <br>http://perso.club-internet.fr/rene.balderacchi/illustrations/Refraction%2002.JPG<br><br>for some nice examples and explanation <br><br>furthermore you could have let the inside of the pot reflect a bit so there should bee 2 edges in stead of one, try it with a bucket or something, there will be the edge of the bucket and the edge of the water itself, the sky will be above (and in the reflection below) the bucket edge<br>

I would not argue any of your statements. The wonderful thing about this is there are any number of ways to make it look "right" and looking right is what counts.

YPA,<br>That’s what I said, the illusion is what counts most of the time <br>Please don’t get me wrong, it was not meant to start a argument but I only wanted to complete your superb explanation<br>Maybe sometimes my crooked English gives a wrong impression but this was really my intention and nothing more<br>Apologies if it looked different to you<br>

Oh not at all. I was agreeing that there are many ways to do things and that we should all be open to other ideas. God knows I have learned so much since coming here and it was because other people made suggestions, just as you did.<br><br>No apologies needed at all my friend.

And sometimes, in order to make it look "right", you HAVE to make it wrong. In this post for instance:<br><br>http://www.photoshopcontest.com/viewpost?post_id=58741<br><br>the reflection of the orange is wrong. I can tell you that is is. But unless I cheated and put it in, the picture just looked wrong. I know, because I did it both ways.

I have a similar example, the shadow under the car, I shifted it to many positions and this is wrong but looked the nicest to me (and also to the voters;-) )<br><br>forgot the link <br>http://www.photoshopcontest.com/viewpost?post_id=61098