Thanks for the detailed review. I know how hard it can be to do that for such a large number of photos, I really appreciate your time. I had reversed the order of the photos in the album to newest first. You are quite right about focus issues in earlier shots, they tended to come mostly when I used my manual focus macro lens. The depth of field is razor thin and the lens is very heavy. As I got more practise I tended to have fewer focus issues and became less tolerant of them also.
As far as exposure goes, past the earliest third, any apparent under or over exposure were aesthetic choices, usually to create a mood. I shoot RAW, so I have a fair bit of leeway to adjust exposure. Quite a few of my photos are over exposed 1 stop or more in processing. A lot of my monochromes are heavily pushed with the blacks set high for a very high contrast look.
I have a really bad weakness for bold, minimalist composition with highly saturated, warm colors (I call it the 'National Geographic aesthetic'). Because of this, I naturally gravitated to 5, 14, 15, 37, 66, 78, 101, 108, 165, 170, 233, 259, 260, 264, 270, 272, 280, 281, 294, 300, 324, 325, 351. There were a few other good ones that I liked (like 322), but they were plagued with exposure and/or focus issues. Many of the these photos could really be improved with some tweaking in Photoshop; it's not cheating if you simply make the photo how it appeared in your mind's eye.