>>3511169>Street photos are for lazy peopleLiterally the opposite. OP's photos are shit street photos. Good street photos require getting closer to your subject which requires you to have people skills. If you're a socially awkward fuck with a 50mm or more tele imo the photo generally looks shit. With that being said a good street shot also requires a good subject mater/scene.
OP's first image is a good example of a somewhat interesting scene done bad. The facial expressions on the elderly couple are great but the retard in the background and that the elderly women is cropped out ruins it. If OP say stepped to the right a meter or two, got a bit closer and used a wider lens then you'd have a much more pleasing scene. The couple in the background would of been hidden behind the elderly couple, the elderly women would of been in the frame and you would of been able to see the face of the guy in red.
>Empty streets and architecture on the other hand require an eye and taste.Yes It's easier to take a good looking architecture photo than a good looking street photo because the building aren't erratic beings.
With all that said I appreciate photography in all it's forms
