>>2904002Sure. Here are some random thoughts, covering what's already been said and some other things:
1) You've got dust on your sensor. That's not horrible, but you've got to be aware of it. That's what gives you those fuzzy blobs on your image. Look right above the left-most section of the bridge. See that fuzzy spot? That's dust. Clone it out. Even the most elementary photo editing software should enable you to do that.
2) You've got haloing. Look at the tower at the far left. See all that dark fuzzy area around it? That's haloing. That comes about with shitty, over the top, unrefined editing. You're going overboard and it's making the shot look sloppy. Google it and figure out how not to do it.
3) Composition is shit. You've got this almost-but-not-quite-centered horizon, which weakens the whole shot. Also, your horizon is crooked as fuck.
4) Closely related to composition is balance. Your whole shot is out of balance. The left side of the frame is heavy. There's nothing interesting going on on the right side of the frame, and, consequentially, it makes everything feel like it's leaning to the left. The crooked horizon makes this worse.
5) Speaking of uninteresting shit, there's nothing here to look at it. It's just a sunset shot, but it's a boring one. Everybody does shots like this, so you've got to fucking nail it if you're going to do it. Here, there's absolutely nothing. It's most empty space. It's not minimal enough to be minimalist. There's not enough of a subject to be interesting. It's just boring as fuck.
6) You're relying upon gimmicky tricks rather than focusing on content. So you've figured out how to take a slow shot of a sunset. Great. Who the fuck cares? Everybody can fucking do that. You can see this shot, and *better* versions of this shot, all day every day. You're just doing this because you learned a technique, not because this was an interesting thing to shoot. Focus on content and then make your technique match your content.
