As a former resident, I disagree. While they are edited, some of them remind of rainy nights in Ogikubo.
If you're interpreting photography as capturing the most accurate version of our vision system, then you're going to be very disappointed with any photograph.
I really enjoy this photographer's perspective. He captures photos as if you're viewing them from the "mind's eye." A+ work IMO.
First, the artist clearly states he's not a photojournalist. He's editing the photos to suit his aesthetic.
Second, I live in Japan and have spent hundreds of nights (many of them into the middle of the night) in Tokyo and other cities. It's certainly true the edits stand out in many photos but I can tell you the feeling of walking home on a rainy evening after visiting 居酒屋 (izakaya) or 立ち飲み is pretty well captured here.
Not to imply a link between Wong and Monet but no one would look at Monet's impressionist work and say that the poppy field or lily pond is incorrect. I think photographic art deserves the same approach. For me, Wong hits on some of the impressions I have in my mind from all those nights in Tokyo. Some photos are pushed too far and lose that feeling, others are 懐かしい.
I couldn't agree less. Every alley and sidewalk in Tokyo was marvelous. But I'm accustomed to simple backpacks, possibly indistinguishable from the homeless when I travel, finding joy in the most simple things.
Most parts of basically every part of Tokyo are quite grey and plain. Not even 1% as beautiful as pictures would lead you to believe.
Nature and temple photos are the opposite. Even if they’re edited to the absurd degree these are, they don’t capture the beauty of the places in real life.