• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

Brooklyn Beckam

cliveh

Subscriber
Allowing Ads
Joined
Oct 9, 2010
Messages
7,944
Format
35mm RF
What do you make of this: -

 
Going by the first minute, it's 15 minutes of someone complaining that someone else made a book they didn't find worthwhile and that's supposed to sell (my guess) on the Beckham name alone.

What I make of it? Haters gonna hate, that's all. I couldn't care less either way.

mshchem said:
Not wasting time on video either
Click to expand...
Indeed; not going to watch the remaining 14 mins.
 
Someone mentioned the book in another video, and showed some pictures, really laughable, didn't even succeed in getting an elephant completely in the shot, I mean you could watch a video like that for a laugh (as long as there's not too much moaning about Beckham being a nepo baby, we get it). But yeah, don't expect to glean any important insights from a video like that.
I mean, sure it's a photo:


And no, elephants for sure are not hard to photograph, here's a snapshot that my wife did, simple cheap second hand camera, decidedly not a wannabe photographer:
 
The Guardian article is pretty funny.

Frankly, the publishers sucked up to him to get something that would easily make them money. Even that people complain about the photos is due to his parents' fame. If he was unknown, no one would care that his photos aren't great, even if they were published in a coffee-table book. No one would notice.
 
I see two things driving this from different groups, both negative:

- Jealousy over another person's wealth and easy life

- People who've never had much hardship or struggle thinking that all creative output is "valid" in the meaning of equal

The best response to most things you don't appreciate is to simply ignore them. No one's getting hurt from a book of frivolous photos. Nor are the number of photo books a person does or doesn't sell a real indication of the photographer's quality. Seems with young rich guys like this, the main product that is actually being sold is just an object for teenage girls that have a crush on him to collect. It's okay, we've all had embarrassing phases. No harm done, part of being human.
 
loccdor said:
Seems with young rich guys like this, the main product that is actually being sold is just an object for teenage girls that have a crush on him to collect.
Click to expand...

It's just opportunism, on the part of the publisher and every other person connected to it. Even the people posting the "this is so bad" YouTube videos and the magazines writing about it are opportunistic. But people have to be paid.

It's not really driven by jealousy. Content "creators" just need something to reel in the views. YouTube is largely no better than The National Enquirer.
 

I do not see the the issues you mentioned.
Not sure that his life really is that easy, actually, probably it's difficult in a lot of different ways, if only being on a magnifying glass all the time.
All creative output is OK, and it is OK to suck, and to learn, but that does not mean it needs to be monetized by publishing it, and there should be self-reflection by the photographer to allow him to learn. Does he himself think this is the best he can do?

The video probably is overly negative (didn't watch it, there is indeed a benefit in ignoring). It might be jealousy driving that, or not, maybe it is indeed simply content, but I think the people on this forum are generally amazed, not irritated (at least I'm not).
 
Jarno said:
Not sure that his life really is that easy, actually, probably it's difficult in a lot of different ways, if only being on a magnifying glass all the time.
Click to expand...

Well it might have been a more difficult life had they called him Hell's Kitchen Beckham instead of Brooklyn

pentaxuser
 
Last edited:
Meh, just another video of someone's reaction.
It's funny that she criticizes the book for not having any substance. The same could be said about the video, especially since she presents herself as a professional photographer. She could have taken the opportunity to explain what doesn't work in the book and why. Instead, it's the typical eye rolling/ making fun of something. It's a wasted opportunity...
 

 
I've been musing about @cliveh posting about this in a thread naming the photographer.
That choice is, of course, entirely understandable if made by someone like @cliveh or most of us here on Photrio, who tend to value photographers.
It seems to me that any controversy there might be centres around the realities of publishing, not the fact that this quasi-famous individual shared some mediocre (at best) photography.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register