You can stumble into a situation where something is going on in your art that you didn't ever expect. That's fine. Let's not make excuses for why things turned out how they turned out, though. That can be done easily for any sort of error or weakness. My critique for mainly the first picture remains that the elements are too canonical, too repeated and there's no attention paid to negative space and using detail versus plainness to peak interest. I'm pretty certain, and vedsten would probably agree, that he didn't intend any post-bombing rubble in his first picture, but that's just what occured in his head initially when he decided 'rocks, moss and trees'. I am saying he should consider the prototypical images more, ponder on variations and try something else rather than small square rocks x 100
