>>4495292
What do you suggest as an alternative?

nice, looks great

>>4495292
I think you're making the assumption that these photos are seen as good *because* of this one lighting feature. The first one could be any hacky x-pro basedtographer sure, but the second one is pretty good. The way I look at it is that there's two scenes in the photo, the shadow, where both the man and the cross are present, and the solid scene, where only the man is. That alone is pretty interesting. The value of the photo has nothing to do with 'long shadows (y/n)' it's the actual content that matter, the lighting just helps present that message in a beautiful way. It's not like its a new fad to shoot at golden hour for better lighting.

>>4495293
Actually kino.

File: 11077151095_2cbcc74771_b.jpg (109.2 KB)

109.2 KB JPG

>>4495299
There are lots of other styles of street. You do see this a lot in Street photography examples, its true.
You could try getting up in peoples faces like Bruce Gilden.
High contrast black and white like Daido Moriyama.
Restrained contrast documentary style like maybe Diane Arbus.
Martin Parr style shots, colourful images of working class people.

>>4495305
Oh sick. I was thinking of taking pictures of people walking perpendicular to walls instead of parallel, but those all sound pretty solid as well.

>>4495306
>people walking perpendicular to walls
You mean people walking INTO walls?

>>4495308
Yeah or away from them.

>>4495306
Another option would be still parallel, but to ceilings

>>4495308
Call silverwitz, rothstein, shekelberg, and noseman. This could get change photography forever.

It's a bit like the "walking towards the camera while singing" shot in music videos. It's cliché, but it works and looks good.

Nah, that would be prettyGirl[semi]Naked

>>4495421
I'm gonna need some examples.