The reportage wave in street photography differs from the street in its classical sense. Even street photographers themselves are biased against street reporting, as there is a plot, a joke, tricks, and a creative approach.
True street is not from the mind. There is no need to think, but only to react to the space taking into account the acquired skills.
Yes, even the entire academic composition is sometimes ignored, so that the photographer's reflection of reality is more honest, without any bindings.
It turns out that even the use of compositional techniques is already considered binding.
It seems to me that only artistic taste should work in the real street.
Even watching other photos too much will play a negative role in the honesty of the plot.
But I am now showing just a reportage street, which at first glance does not differ much from the classic one.
And if you go deeper and try to find the keys, you will see the difference.
A clearer focus on people, weather conditions, and the plot.
There is even a hint of humor somewhere.
This is all there in the real street. But not as clearly expressed as in the reportage.
In fact, the line between subgenres is very thin and even by feeling it is not always possible to determine this frequency.
By definition, any photo taken on the street can be considered a street.
By the way, classic street is the most non—commercial genre, unlike reportage.
Only a few earn money from street photography.
Everyone needs glamour or a reportage.
To be continued...