A critique by nature is harsh. If you ask---then be prepared. But critiques will help you improve. You do not have to agree---it is YOUR shot after all. But if the critique is someone thought of this for a reason. Photography is filled with rules. Yes they can be broken---but should be broken for a reason--thus you have to know the rules first. Remember---you took the shot---everything in the shot is your responsibility. There are no excuses. That said...

I recently saw your post asking about critiques. I am a photo judge for competitions in south Florida and also teach photography on a college level. If you find this harsh---just dismiss it as the ramblings of an old man. If you want additional comments on other images you have posted send me a p.m. with the titles of your posts you want comments on.

First, a viewer will like or dislike a photo in about 3 seconds. If they are not wowed withing that time the images fails. This image lack a wow factor. First, it is flat. Nothing pops, it is almost monochrome in its presentation. The dog looks soft---maybe focus, maybe processing, maybe high ISO with too much noise reduction--it could be a variety of things all of which are damaging to the overall photo. When photographing animals the EYE must be sharp. The saying is focus on the eye, that that is believable then the viewer's mind will think most of the rest is sharp. The dogs eye is not sharp. Always focus on the eye closest to the camera of the animal is not facing the camera square. The composition has numerous flaws. The subject is centered. There is something called the rule of thirds. The dog should be moved to the right. In this case your horizon line is the hill the dog is resting on. This line is in the middle of the image. Another violation of the rule of thirds. Personally I would have included more area above the dog when i composed the image because there is contrast between the darks of the dog and the lighter color of the background. The color of the hill and the color of the dog are both dark, the dog blends in. Thus I would crop off more of the area below the dogs front paws---you must leave some, at at least 1/2 to 2/3 of the dirt could be eliminated. I took a screen capture and cropped it as an example. I would note that I think there should be a little bit more room added to the left side---but it was not there and I can't manufacture it.

I'll note one positive: Youshot the dog at his eye level. When shooting animals or children you should position you camera at their eye level. This you appear to have done.

Consider these ideas for the next time.
Good Luck

Larry

Shooter, welcome to the Hog!
I’ll give you my opinion. The average photographer doesn’t have a clue how to give a meaningful critique. There, is that harsh enough?? LoL
I’m a formally trained fotographer so I’ve been given, and have given a lot of critiques.
But I rarely give one. “Nice shot”, is not a critique. When I have given one I make notes so I don’t nice anything. That takes time, and the more you know, the more you see, so the more time it takes.
How many critiques do you have to give where that you gave one is not even acknowledged that one was given? And then there are critiques that are polar opposites! What’s up with that? I hear that it’s a very personal thing. It’s not! Photography has very specific rules. If doesn’t matter if you hate an image, the rules are STILL there. Good critique is based on the rules that are there, the rules that are bent and the rules that are broken, it’s still Photography, whether it’s Mapplethorpe or Adams.
This is of course just my opinion from what I have observed here.
Don’t get me wrong, there are plenty here that could give you a very good critique, should they decide to play.
And yes, there are a few places to go here where a critique may be more reliable and helpful as well. I’m sure many will point those out.
Again, welcome, from one Shooter to another! LoL
SS