http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 Comments posted on this skin. Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:04:13 -0600 Mon, 30 Nov 2009 04:04:13 -0600 http://www.blogskins.com/ http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 oh crap. this is so beautifully designed :D simple and lovely . (5 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:11:24 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (disillusion;) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 as usual, beauut-y-full (: This is just like OMG! i think i never would have created such nice skins :D (5 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 10:16:09 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (tessiuer) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 hello! i'd faved it if not for the orange tree, because the colours are so nice and calm, and the brightness of the orange actually spoils the whole thing. i like how you place the navigs, however as i mentioned above, really spoils everything here. [: (0 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:39:33 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (thatphobia) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 and btw, do you know that the alignment for the white table is off. please fix it [: (0 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 11:40:25 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (thatphobia) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 It's niceee <a href="http://www.blogskins.com/info/162955/">Rate mine?</a> by.<a href="http://hoarsed-voice.blogspot.com">H.voice</a> (5 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 18:52:29 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (H.voice) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 image quality is good and background-image quality is good. that alone deserves a 5stars and SOTD? for every of my skins' image quality and bg-img quality is fab and I do not see myself getting sotd for each of them. being brutally honest, i wouldnt be classifying this skin under 'simple' but rather under 'loose.' in a skin, all elements should be tied and interacting with one another, not one brush here and one brush there. the tree shouldnt have had its stem cut off so abruptly and i super dislike the text hidden amongst the leaves. bring it out to above the navigations. the font for 'i've been missing you' doesnt go. it's too big, too slant, and too much of it is lost inside the white area. as for the background, reconsider your choice of image. this reminds me of sandpaper, not sand. sand in itself has a much softer texture. brushwork: each kind of brush has a different kind of category. grunge, swirls, vectors, sparkles and the likes. and you used ALL of them inside this skin. they dont all go well together! therefore, i suggest you ditch the rainbow and the swirls. use more grunge brushes to blend in the white box. bring the bar of navigations closer to the white box. last but not least, your icon on the disclaimer area in blue does not go with the color scheme of the skin. i suggest you create one from the brushes you used. otherwise, nice header. (0 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 21:53:20 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (intrigue.d) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 I kindda agree with <b>intrigue.d</b>, but for me, this is wonderful enough luh. =X (5 stars) Fri, 19 Oct 2007 23:36:05 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (madeline_tn) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 Hahas . This is sweet i think . And yea , i cant see the words in orange :/ (4.5 stars) Sat, 20 Oct 2007 01:16:02 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com (TWIN-♥) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 why are you fucking hell resubbing. WHEN IT HAS NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL. fuckers like you make bs reject other skins that are better (4.5 stars) Sat, 20 Oct 2007 02:04:07 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com ([DELETED USER]) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 uhm yea i dont think this is good enough to be SOTD, even though it is not bad. The squarish corners of the white box really piss me off, I think they would nicer if they were round. And uhm it looks darn plain, like a few brushes scattered around the page. (0 stars) Sat, 20 Oct 2007 08:38:36 -0500 nobody@blogskins.com ((soldmysmile)) http://www.blogskins.com/info/162949 SO NIICE!!! (5 stars) Fri, 16 Nov 2007 04:45:27 -0600 nobody@blogskins.com (gingersweet)