>>3244937Technically interesting but the colour balance doesn't work at all. I'm also tempted to say your angle should be diagonal for this shot
>>3244962The last one is the only one that should exist and it feels like an establishing shot. The others feel like snapshots you took while doing something you enjoy, which they are.
Straighten your horizons by the by
>>3244976The reflection is the subject of this shot, you don't need everything else. Frame and crop better.
This and 5/5 are the only interesting subjects. All of them are under exposed in the darks, busy and unsure of themselves. Don't be afraid to pick a subject.
All of them would also benefit from a narrower aperture and longer exposures. If you don't have any equipment to bring out those blacks like a tripod/filter then take multiple shots and play around in post
>>3245049Nice focus. Temperature could be a bit warmer but I like the cyan magenta tone
>>3245053I have an over-exposed shot of that exact same street and those buildings. Small world.
>>3245057That's the damrak?
>>3245073There's a neat underground section 30 feet into that door on the left, also good for low light shots
>>3245091and this must be Jordaan?
>>3245128Why does it exist? If your concept is the outsider then you need to expose the outside and give depth at the bottom. Otherwise it's just a snapshot through a window
>>3245246This shot works because of the background telling you who she is but ultimately it's boring. I also don't like that you've left the hair and an edge instead of cropping on the right
>>3245305I'll never understand how you could interpret that as him being upset at you posting someone elses image and not asking the stupidest question I've seen in several weeks
>>3245325Obviously out of focus, and no concept again. Are you trying product photography for the first time or trying to create mood? Either way you haven't gone far enough and it just feels like a shot of a light for no reason.
