Is it worth to buy a book with photographs by Cecil Beaton?

P

Peter_wrote:

Well-known
Local time
8:08 PM
Joined
Mar 4, 2012
Messages
462
i think, it's time to buy a photo book again. i look for something with portraits.

so do u think, i should buy a book with photographs by cecil beaton, or are his pictures just boring, decorative kitsch?
till i was in the bookshop today, i never heard his name before...


EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!! EDIT!!
let me please reformulate the question: do you personally like the photographs by cecil beaton? if yes, why? if no, why not?
 
do i think that using no caps and 'u' for 'you' is a bad idea. Yes. Does this mean you agree with me? No. It doesn't even necessarily mean that I'm right and you're wrong. How is ANYONE going to tell you what you might like, especially if you have already formed the opinion that the work of a well-known photographer of whom you have never heard work might be 'boring kitsch'?

Cheers,

R.
 
Your question is puzzling.

Did they not let you look at the book?

I mean, whether or not you like the work of a particular photographer, or like it enough to buy a book of his/her work is entirely up to you.
 
do i think that using no caps and 'u' for 'you' is a bad idea. Yes.
Click to expand...

The problem with some young people, Roger, is that they lack the experience to know that what other young people tell them is [cool/with it/other meaningless phrase] is just rather boring to those of us who have grown out of it.

The good news is that such youngsters seem to be in a minority. :D
 
... v much a tog of is era, i find him v interesting and deserves props imo ... idc for the abbrevs either, for wiw
 
Roger Hicks said:
do i think that using no caps and 'u' for 'you' is a bad idea. Yes. Does this mean you agree with me? No. It doesn't even necessarily mean that I'm right and you're wrong. How is ANYONE going to tell you what you might like, especially if you have already formed the opinion that the work of a well-known photographer of whom you have never heard work might be 'boring kitsch'?

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...


Pablito said:
Your question is puzzling.

Did they not let you look at the book?

I mean, whether or not you like the work of a particular photographer, or like it enough to buy a book of his/her work is entirely up to you.
Click to expand...


i haven't formed an own opinion at all, that's why i am asking here for your thoughts.
i have to admit, that i don't have a deep knowledge of photography. so i wanted to here, what some more experienced people think of him.

of course i had a quick look, but how to judge an artist by a quick look, or reading the wikipedia article?
i don't want something, which looks nice or which i "like", but something with some quality and which gives me somehow deeper insights. and i do think indeed, that there is something like an objective quality.


for all the guys which have a problem with the "u", i submit herewith the "Yo!" after. ;)
 
I don't think it is boring at all - I really like his work. Then again I'm a sucker for classic portraits. The style could be considered to be a bit dated by some, but I wouldn't call it kitcsh. If it were me and I had the scratch I'd buy the book.

The million dollar question is - Do you like his work?
 
Peter_wrote: said:
i don't want something, which looks nice or which i "like", but something with some quality and which gives me somehow deeper insights. and i do think indeed, that there is something like an objective quality.
Click to expand...

Life is too short to worry about what others consider "good" art. IMHO if you are going to plunk down hard earned dosh on a photography book you better like the images inside (unless you collect books for the sake of collecting). If you want a book to expand your knowledge base and expose you to different styles I would suggest getting some art history books that focus on photography.
 
Peter, if you like his work, then purchase the book and study it. If there really is something superficial about his work, I don't think it will corrupt you.

Why do you find his photos superficial?

Randy
 
zauhar said:
Peter, if you like his work, then purchase the book and study it. If there really is something superficial about his work, I don't think it will corrupt you.

Why do you find his photos superficial?

Randy
Click to expand...

thanks for your answer, randy. problem is, i don't know if i could like his work ;)
i found it somehow interesting at the first sight. but i am searching for something, which is not only aesthetically interesting, but which stimulates to further thoughts. my real pleasure is seriousness.

but i don't know Beaton good enough to judge now by myself if he could give me this pleasure.
 
Answer to reformulated question:

Yes, I do... they are technically well executed and the epitome of portrait photography. Elegant images that portray the sitter in the best possible light.

Even better than buying a book (which I still encourage) would be a trip to London's national Portrait Gallery to see some of the real images in person.
 
Beaton's work has much to teach about lighting, composition, imagination, exposure, printing etc etc. His style is dated now but he dominated and defined an era to a great extent, so that's worth understanding.

Personally, I think some of his work will outlast many 20th century photographers, but that is probably down to the historical importance of the subject rather than photographs themselves.
 
Hi,

If you can't decide why not get something like "Techniques of the World's Great Photographers"; although it will only be available second-hand nowadays but what are Amazon and ebay for?

Regards, David
 
Austerby said:
Beaton's work has much to teach about lighting, composition, imagination, exposure, printing etc etc. His style is dated now but he dominated and defined an era to a great extent, so that's worth understanding.

Personally, I think some of his work will outlast many 20th century photographers, but that is probably down to the historical importance of the subject rather than photographs themselves.
Click to expand...
I don't think I could have put it better. And my apologies to the OP for my testiness.

But a lot depends on what sort of photography you want to learn about. For portraiture, I prefer the Hollywood style and 8x10 inch, or a Thambar on a Leica.

Cheers,

R.
 
i have no idea, but I know that this here "portraits" book is great. http://www.artland.com.tw/ENG/BookDetail.asp?BookID={46F9725F-A825-42BA-A259-93A100594F34}&BookType=4
ISBN: 9784904845141
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom