>>3128317You seem to think everyone here is being mean just for the sake of it, probably because nobody is giving you any real criticism.
>>3127807The composition of this is just bad and the subject is uninteresting. Just because you can be close to a tank doesn't give you any merits. Your image needs to tell a story. Why is the tank there? Is there a conflict in this scene? You need to tell the audience without having to write a paragraph along the image.
>>3127815This one is better but still uninteresting, this time because of your framing and DOF. You decided to use a shallow dof but decided to focus on his helmet/shoulder patch for some reason. The first thing that pops into view when the audience looks at this is the rocket (highlight and yellow contrast), and they can clearly see it's out of focus. So is the guy's face, and so is the guy in the background. The result of all this is a confusing image where the audience has no idea what story you're trying to tell. This photo would have done a lot better with a wider angle/dof and shot closer, IMO.
Given the dramatic nature of war photography it's really important to seamlessly tell a story with your images. Keep that in mind when you shoot. Good luck.
