>>3916052ITT:
>Eggy u suk>Eggy hi res plzLow res is fine. Who the hell pixel peeps an Egg anyway?
>>3915457I'm still convinced that he isn't a super 'creative' photographer. But the dude works hard, puts out content and has a good eye for interesting people. That isn't enough for some people. Check out his older stuff. It was 'better' to my eyes (more interesting compositions and whatnot) but not different to anything you'd see on an /rpt/ thread. Love it or hate it, its a good idea. The dude just has to stand there and day after day, interesting subjects come to him. Look at how many people are talking about him (good or bad). He has generated more engagement than most of us would ever hope to achieve with 'easy to take' pictures.
