>>3317273Might have been better landscape instead of portrait. Lower so the lemon day lilies are in tighter frame, maybe a wider aperture to smooth out the BG a bit more.
>>3317274Find a better subject, but the framing is good.
>>3317275Trashbin, but I see what you tried to do.
>>3317277Rule of 3rds and dirty leaves are the only real problem with this. Empty space is okay if it is framed to juxtapose properly.
>>3317279Same as
>>3317274 in style.
>>3317280Regardless of the exposure, the composition is off with those lines that it falls apart.
>>3317281Harsh light and poor composition.
>>3317282A lower perspective, wider aperture, with faster exposure might help.
>>3317285Not bad at all. There's something off with the lighting/exposure. Probably just too even or not enough highlights?
>>3317286This is good. Something I'd expect to see in a catalog or book.
>>3317288This one is composed properly, just not interesting for me.
>>3317289The reduced width of the image harms this one I think. Also, it feels telephoto which also harms it.
>>3317290Needs a wide aperture and tighter framing. Good timing with the expression on the goat.
>>3317293Probably needed to bee tighter on the Xylocopa Violacea, a bit lower, and go for the selfie in the reflection of the X. Violacea's thorax.
>>3317313The person need more back lighting to make them darkened out. Difficult to do at that time of day and position. You could probably darken in post, but not sure how that'd work out.
>>3317351Not bad. As is, it needs cropped a bit to put the shoes more into the corner. It needs a secondary subject though, like stars, moon, or whatever. I'm sure it was limited on location.
>>3317352Good use of colors.
>>3317354Fun.
>>3317374Unfortunate facial expression for the guy in the back. Was there a bright light down range to cause all that haziness? A lens hood would increased contrast. The way the lead singer is singled out with contrast almost makes up for it.
