Whoops, wasn't paying attention with the rests. The notion that a whole-measure rest is always a whole rest has always felt a little bit weird to me (at least in comparison with a whole note), but I understand why it's there. Occasionally I catch myself using note-value rests without realizing it; missed those. I'll go back and change them.
As to the dynamics, do you mean the overall choice of dynamics, or the difference between the instrument groups?
To the former, I felt the character and the nature of the piece needed a lighter touch, dynamically. (I tried to keep the orchestration lighter, too, but it still feels like it edges a little heavy in places.)
If you mean the latter, this is an issue I've always been torn on that I took a little too far, looking back at this. I know players don't see each others' dynamics, but the conductor does. In the case of the woodwinds, I wanted the flute sound to be added to the oboe sound, rather than the other way around. A (possibly overly) subtle thing, yes, but in my mind's ear, the color fit better.
The strings' dynamics were marked below that of the winds (with mutes) because I wanted to use them more for the sustain pedal effect. The viola's octave double I notated piano largely for the same reasons that the flute's unison double.
Looking back, I think I would've been better off notating the strings all simply piano (as the mute on those sustaining would likely have covered the difference there, anyway, and makes the pianissimo feel a little superfluous), and I would've left out the mezzo forte in the oboe (bar 5) because I think mezzo piano would be fully sufficient within the orchestration there.
-asp
(As an unrelated sidenote, I remember plugging this into Finale somewhat in a hurry in between school, but man does some of my notation feel sloppy. Point of future improvement, I suppose.)
