I can tell you're trying to do things with shape, light, color, etc. so that beats taking snapshits of your pet cat or whatever. That said the pictures aren't very interesting. It's just the corners of buildings. This sort of abstract, pure shapes, literalist style was already boring 60 years ago.

>>4517952
this OP pic is by far the most interesting. the rest aren't flawed in a technical sense but they just aren't particularly interesting to me. not using your gay rating system though sorry.

also post your pictures in something higher than 720x1080

I like these. 2,3,4 the most.

>>4517962
>>4517965
Harsh but fair, I understand it is not terribly original. Can't tell if "not interesting"/"boring" means it's not good enough or if you dislike the minimalist esthetic as a whole but I'll try to improve to give it a more personnal style.

also the OP image is actually the only pic I consider truly good. I find the textures and the way the building fades in the white sky beautiful, the others don't have anything like this going for them.

>>4517993
thanks

Your shit is kind of like
https://www.mattstuart.com/industrieweg
This
But not as good

>>4518036
Cool. it's definitely more consistent. other examples of stuff that is similar but better are appreciated.

>>4518036
I think where OP differs from that example is the loose perspective. In comparison the collection form the website has this intentional fixed vertical perspective, which makes it more eye catching and uniform in a glance.

I like how you play with colours, but even with those loose perspective, I think the composition can be improved. 9531 feels nice.