Ever other street photograph is of someone looking at their iPhone. Done to death.
Indeed, but then that's the problem with the genre: it is what it has to be. Only when you remove it from straight street and add another dimension such as fashion (Peter Lindbergh R.I.P.), do you get something different that comes to life, shows some excitement. It's the addition of a motive (as distinct from motif) that allows the creation of a tension, a sense of something happening and caught at just the right instant. In real life, by the time you spot something happening it's already too late: you missed it. That relegates street to the happy accident, which is hardly skill, simply determinaton and a high boredom threshold. There appears to be something somewhat perverse about standing half-hidden behind a lamp post, your eyes trained relentlessly for hours upon a doorway or a poster, just waiting for the right person to walk past, especially if, at the end of the wait, there isn't even any pay dirt.
That's why I think Leiter was, and similar guys today are more inclined towards street
art. You don't have to stand and lurk. You can use your eyes whilst walking, which is less challenging than chewing gum and walking. If more folks did the former than the latter, our streets would be safer, except for dog traps on which you can slip and break your leg - or worse - such as bringing them into the car or home. (You could always, of course, if you realise in time that a dog's had you, just abandon your shoes at the car or office door.)
Now there we are: the perfect target for some bright young street fellow: somebody taking that fatal step! Almost as much fun as a banana skin.