Brooklyn Beckham photo book backlash hasn’t aged well – was ‘brand Beckham’ to blame or the braying public?

The media frenzy surrounding Brooklyn Beckham has prompted a slew of articles and social media comments picking apart the Beckhams’ firstborn and his various career paths. But you know what? I’ve always thought it was a great shame that Brooklyn didn’t keep up with his photography. Then, again, maybe he has privately, and if that’s the case, all the power to him!

If you can cast your mind back to the very different world that was 2017, Penguin Books released Brooklyn’s photo book debut: What I see, alongside accompanying exhibitions in London and Los Angeles. But what should have been a then-career-highlight evoked the ire of many a social-media loudmouth and critic.

And while I can at least understand the nepotism angle, I hated the very personal ridicule of Brooklyn’s photos. After all, the world was lambasting the work of a teenager. For starters, I know what my photography looked like at 16, and it was utter s***. When I look through the pages of What I See, I’m not expecting it to be Genesis, but it is the formative work of a very young and enthusiastic photographer.

Let’s face it. Very few people take photography seriously nowadays, because everyone’s got a camera phone that’ll do the business with little to no effort. Of course, the layperson ridiculed the now infamous elephant photo, which Brooklyn dubbed “so hard to photograph”, because a smartphone's computational photography makes shooting backlit subjects a cinch. If you’re a photographer using a manual camera, you’ll know that – in actual fact – photographing an elephant backlit against Kenya’s harsh midday sun really would be a bit of a challenge.

A lot of Brooklyn’s photos were shot on film, too. So, to all the digital-only photographers who have forgotten what it’s like to shoot on film (or perhaps never shot film), it’s a different ballgame. Perfectly focused and exposed images are much harder to come by, especially if you’re not a seasoned analog enthusiast or pro.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not suggesting that the images in What I see are all incredible works of art. But I deny anyone who doesn’t see some potential. A small passage from the Daily Mail caught my attention: “Brooklyn told the Daily Telegraph magazine that he struggled to get the collection of photographs past his parents. ‘It was hard to get them approved,’ he said.”

It would be a shame if Brooklyn lost some of his creative autonomy when compiling images for his book. After all, what a subject deems suitable for publication and what a photographer deems suitable are often two very different things. Many subjects would approve an image based on their perceived appearance and not the quality of the overall photograph. How could they not? And while I’m loath to point the finger at anyone specifically, it’s worth noting that Brooklyn’s famous family is no stranger to the celebrity/fashion side of photography. Still, it appears that Brooklyn’s interests err on the side of documentary photography – two very different worlds.

Part of being a good, confident photographer is often about capturing the images that convey what you’re trying to express, not capturing the images that you think your subject(s) want to see. But this comes with experience. In that same article, Brooklyn revealed: “If my mom sees me taking a picture, she kind of poses and stuff, and I don't really like that.” Now, photograph almost anybody in the world, and they’ll pose if they see your camera, but the fact that Brooklyn, a teenager, could identify the merit of a candid photograph certainly shows good instincts.

I also think that in 2026 What I See seems a lot more relevant than it did in 2017. There’s even an argument that Brooklyn’s photo compilation was a little ahead of its time, given the lo-fi photography boom in recent years, with a renewed interest in film and the rise and rise of Fujifilm’s retro cameras and Film Simulations. Indeed, if it were released tomorrow, I think the reception would be a little kinder.

But there’s a more sinister element to What I See that likely wouldn’t escape critique in 2026: the subject of nepotism. There’s little doubt that the family name aided the book’s release, specifically under the banner of Penguin Books and the aforementioned exhibitions in London and LA. And it’s here where I question the rationale of placing so much pressure on the shoulders of such a young and inexperienced photographer. Instead of being allowed to refine his photography skills in relative quiet, Brooklyn found himself stretching his photography wings in front of the entire world. That's a huge amount of pressure.

What I See wasn’t the first time that Brooklyn’s photography was placed under the limelight. The year prior, he was invited to capture a Burberry fashion shoot, which caused arguably even more of an uproar and is admittedly difficult to defend. But again, Brooklyn was only 17; how could he be expected to foresee the backlash?

Let me put this into footballing terms. You don’t shove your 16-year-old wonderkid onto a pitch against Real Madrid, in a Champions League qualifier, when you’re down to ten men. You loan them out to a lower-league team to gain vital first-team experience in a more favorable environment so you don't crush their confidence.

Ultimately, the one person who I don’t think was responsible for What I See's reception was Brooklyn. And if you ask me, I think it’s a shame the industry lost a celebrity who could have really championed photography and directed more youngsters towards this great hobby, industry, and profession. Then again, if you’ve picked up a camera – even once – with the intention of creating art, you can always consider yourself a photographer in my book. I hope we see more of Brooklyn's photos in the future.

You might also like...

I always hated the backlash to Brooklyn Beckham’s photography book anyway, but if you're looking for more photography books, check out this Vivian Maier: Street Photographer review and this Joel Meyerowitz: How I Make Photographs review.