this is kind of a vague question but bear with me. i've been looking at my photos versus photos that get a lot of attention on instagram and forums and i cant figure out what the difference is. technically mine are fine, theyre sharp, exposure is decent, but they just feel kind of... empty? like i go out to a beach or a field and i get a nice overhead shot and its like yeah okay thats a beach.

im not sure if this is a composition thing or if im just picking boring subjects or both. ive heard the rule of thirds applies to drone stuff the same as regular photography but when youre straight overhead it feels like that goes out the window. do people who are good at this have like a mental checklist they run through before hitting the shutter or is it more intuitive

leading lines man, thats the big one that took my shots from meh to actually interesting. roads, rivers, shorelines, fences, crop rows ? anything that pulls the eye through the frame. a beach photo from directly overhead is just texture, but if you tilt forward a bit and catch a wave breaking along a curve or a boardwalk cutting through the sand suddenly theres something to look at. straight nadir shots are cool for patterns and symmetry but they need a really strong subject to work, like a roundabout or a geometric building, just a flat beach doesnt have enough going on

also dont underestimate the time of day thing. the same boring field at golden hour with long shadows becomes a completley different photo. the shadows do the compositional work for you almost

scale is something i think about a lot. if you have a tiny person or a car or a boat in the frame it suddenly gives the viewer a sense of how big everything is and makes the photo feel real instead of like a texture sample. empty landscapes from above just dont have anything for the brain to grab onto. even just waiting for someone to walk into frame can save an otherwise boring shot