>>4244505>>4244517I was starting to write a comment by comment reply, but there's no point in doing that
I appreciate the effort in criticizing the photos, there are some things that I can use to better myself, but lots of it I'll simply dismiss, as I said earlier
Some commentaries make me believe you don't really know what you're talking about, like "what is the subject on
>>4242360 ? Is is the guys swimming? It's the guys, right? Why do they occupy so little of the frame?"
If I had two guys covering all of the frame it would simply be an uninteresting photo of two guys swimming
Where are they swimming? What does it tell about them? Why am I shooting them?
The way I shot them you can see there are multiple boats there, you can see the bigger boat which they jumped from; the boat is called "Presente de Deus" [Gift from God]
We can see a part of the guardrail in the bottom, which gives a sense of depth and of separation between the viewer and those guys swimming, their lives, their "gift from God"
Why would I change all of that for a mediocre shot of 2 guys swimming with none of this context whatsoever?
Asking "what is this about?" as if I could crop one element of the photo instead of understanding that all elements come together to form this photo is superficial
Same for many of your comments
The duality between the sole construction worker carrying a pipe in contrast with the huge working site and machinery, and the synthesis of those elements for the transformation of that environment
Even the more technical comments are kind of nonsense, like the one about the birds
>and I'm guessing the darkness is why your aperture is so wideThere's clearly plenty of light, I used a shallow DoF to enphasize the details in the foremost bird
The other birds are pretty much like this one, I don't need to show you every bird (and make the background super busy) for you to understand the shot
>cont. 
