I don't think street photography does require you to provide intimacy. If it requires anything, it is that you treat the subject appropriately, and this is true for all photography.
There are several ways you can convey the feeling that someone is alone in a large space. Consider, for example, the common type of shot which shows someone alone in a big landscape, such as a mountain range. Often the person is standing isolated on a ridge, relatively small in the frame, while the rest of the frame is filled with the landscape, and no other people, which highlights the person's isolation. Their particular pose & body language helps to show whether they are lonely or noble or inspired or whatever. This type of shot is usually done with a long lens. There's no reason why you can't apply the same principles to somebody in a cityscape. Another approach to the same subject is to get very close to them and use a wide-angle lens. In this situation the person is very large relative to the frame, but the lens also sucks in the size of the landscape, showing their isolation. Again, there's no reason why you shouldn't use the same technique, depending on what you want to convey, and how confident you are about getting close to that person. -- Cheers, Bob > Yes. It's a contrast and a dilemma. How do you provide > intimacy that street photography seems to require when you > are trying to portray isolation? ;-) I almost labeled it > isolation to begin with, then ended up with personal space > because it fit better. His personal space (isolation) and me > allowing him his personal space. >
