>>4188410>looking at this next batch i also wonder where the line between "street photography" and just ordinary photography with people is. just semantics i guess..."Street photography" is "mere photography", it has a chance of being good, purely by chance. Ordinary photography is done more intentionally and has a greater chance of being good. The better your photography is, the more it says, the more it leaves "street photography" and is called documentary, portraiture, activism, etc.
>gain a deeper understanding of what it means to be human.In this case your photography asserts what everyone unlucky enough to score 115+ on IQ tests probably already thought of at least once - nihilism is truth, and man is the only animal who knows he's an animal. Your photographs show nothing, with nothing as an input, and exemplify how pedestrian and meaningless each life is. It is the most vapid, dull, and depressing shit because it communicates nothing, no effort no life no magic, it does not pretend, it is just a random shutter opening showing a precise boring 1/60th second in time and all the nothing happening then in all its glory.
You could juxtapose this with totally random snapshits of animals in a zoo and it would say that and more on its own and show there's some actual life behind your beady eyes, I'm sure, but that would take effort, which frightens and confuses any self styled snap-and-run street photographer.
For a good, intentional version of what you shoot, for something that is seemingly random but is in fact an exposition of the human spirit, something that says although these are random people in random moments each one is unique, rather than a blurry mess that emphasizes how each one is worthless, see
http://oh-hi.info/ 
