>>4461422The pier begins just above the level of the horizon, drawing a step.
The texture of the sea is continuous and fine enough, though the sky's full of unregular details, imo if you're looking to include something that complicated in a picture like this, the rest should be even more plain and simple, otherwise different but similar things (the sea and sky) having very different kinds of textures with very different levels of detail and frequency of details make the whole thing a lot less coherent.
Also, you should use (better/more) lens correction, there's a lot of green and purple fringing around the two people.
>>4461420The crow's not nearly separated enough from the rest of the scene, it doesn't get lost in the vegetation but it also doesn't stand out as it would if it didn't cover part of the leaves and had light blue space all around it.
>>4461418A bit plain, the plants in the foreground prevent it from looking """minimalist""" and the couple of white splashes, especially the one right below the horizon on the coastline, change up the water's general texture without adding anything interest, I'd remove them in post.
>>4461390A bit small, but an improvement in the sense that it makes the sky completely uniform at least.
>>4461371Everything looks oddly green, the leaves are nice but the fence and horse are just odd.
It's odd that what seems to be the subject isn't entirely in the frame.
I think this would be better if it was the picture of a beetle rather than a picture of a farm with a bit of this and also a bit of a beetle from a low perspective.
>>4461367>>4461366These are both worse than the squarer crops, the very bottom part might be removed to make everything in the frame seem in the distance, but cutting those clouds doesn't make anything better, it just removes details.
>>4461356Shame about the girl who's in the middle but not exactly in the middle, and the legs of the structure are way too light compared to the rest.
