*ooof*: Guylty appr*ooof*s

Hello and apologies for a delay in my posting. I am sure you will forgive me if I tell you why: I was in London last week. Yes, you know why. I had high hopes for capturing Armitage (figuratively speaking, of course) with my lens from a pole position in the press pit at the red carpet. Well. It was not to be. The forces of Mordor (or something like that) were against me. And so I have to fall back on other photographers’ work to bring you another *ooof*. Let’s hop right in.
First of all: I am a total sucker for black on black! Dark backdrops are just so dramatic, gritty, a bit dangerous, a bit mysterious – much like me. Just kidding. Anyway, dark types in front of a black background are usually a big no-no in photography. Well, not for the pro, but amateurs very often get this set-up wrong when the dark hair and dark clothes of the subject seamlessly blend with the black background and the viewer is left with a pale floating face. Now, that can have its aesthetic merits, of course. (Anyone remember the iconic Queen cover???) But that kind of effect is probably unwanted for straight-forward promo shots. Instead, a promo shot has to get the subject across – in an appealing, flattering way. That leaves the photographer some artistic choice – and some photographer manage to choose better than others…

This is what you get when a woman photographer does a shoot with Richard.
Guylty approves, Ms Will! Oh, Guylty approves soooo heartily!!!
Images by Victoria Will sourced through Richard Armitage Facebook Page.

As the caption of the image says, the photos were taken recently by Victoria Will, a portrait and fashion photographer based in New York. Will has actually had quite a few big names in front of her lens – Clint Eastwood, Brad Pitt, Bill Clinton… It pleases me to see that Armitage is now getting exposure to high-flying photographers who are really good at what they do. And that does translate into the images we are now getting to see of him. A nice development considering barrel-distorted balloon shots and cheesy discoloured anti-oooofs from way back when Armitage was not yet a name big enough to commandeer top photographers…

So what does Victoria Will do here, in order to separate Richard from the background (haha, sounds as if he is embroiled in fisticuffs with an aggressive piece of cloth…)? Oh nicee nicee niiiiice… She lights the background separately so it takes on a slightly lighter hue of black, indeed it looks almost blue. You can see how the light diffuses towards the sides and then blends into blackness where it doesn’t reach. It fulfills its purpose, however, setting off Armitage’s dark hair and his black outfit from the background. Bravo, well done – that is how we do black on black. But there’s another approach visible in this shoot that I really like – because it very much mirrors what I do when I do portrait sessions. Study the collage above for a minute. Particularly images 3, 4, 5 and 6 show Armitage with a range of expressions on his face; especially his mouth gives his change of expression away. It is clear to me that the photographer engaged very closely with her subject: She chatted and entertained him, asking questions, prompting him to talk, to move, possibly gave some directions, but in any case had her sitter loosen up by keeping him occupied with talk. The result is a relaxed looking Armitage, happily talking as if unobserved, able to forget the big black eye of the camera that is trained on him. He does still connect with the photographer – he acknowledges her presence (and her questions) by looking at her through the lens, but he is not posing stiffly in those shots. He appears more life-like and “real” than in the remaining images of the collage where he is obviously holding a pose and thus giving a carefully chosen look and “likeness” of himself, self-censored images that have passed the scrutiny of his own consciousness.

While my favourite shot of the whole shoot is the one top right, I cannot help but concede that the pictures I have mentioned above are (literally) more moving: they show a slice of (Armitage’s real-life) self, less consciously made for an audience of fans and movie-goers, but simply recorded moments in time. For me, they are much more “him” than the posed images. And much of the representation of real self actually depends on the photographer. By that I do not even mean the filter of interpretation that may obscure the subject, but I mean the actual representation of the subject as him/herself at the photo session. You see, the success of a (portrait) photographer in general is very much dependent on the photographer’s ability to connect with his subject. The most technically brilliant photographer will never be able to shoot an evocative and true portrait or a sitter if he/she is unable to capture the essence or at least a facet of the subject’s personality. In order to do so, photographers must be sensitive observers and easy communicators. Nothing will get a sitter at ease as quickly and as easily as well-tempered, sensitive and subject-centered talk. A photographer who mutely shoots will merely picture clotheshorses or lifeless mannequins but not the body and soul of a fellow human, celebrity or not!

And thus picture 2 is my favourite. Armitage is at ease, with a friendly smile that looks unposed and genuine. He is mid-movement, pulling his leather jacket down with his right hand. This movement has given him a purpose at the exact moment that Will has released the shutter and therefore avoids the stiffness that we occasionally encounter when Armitage has to pose consciously and specifically for a photo. (Red carpet pictures, even the most recent ones from the London Hobbit premiere, are cases in point for me. I have heard observers describe his pose as reminiscent of his past as a dancer, i.e. “poised” and full of (controlled) tension. Personally, I disagree. I find him looking awkward and uncomfortable in those shots, standing that little bit too erect to be comfortable, too consciously posed with pushed-out chest, drawn-back shoulders and arms stretched down his sides. To me that does not look relaxed, but forced. You can almost imagine a comic book thought-bubble above his head, giving a stream of consciousness  insight into “Armitage the Poser”:  “I must stand straight… Don’t forget to smile, Richard… No blinking… Does my nose look big in this? Better look dead-pan at lens… Look at cameras…  Arrrgh, when is this over?… Dang, where shall I place my hands?… Go on, take your bloody shots and let me go!!…”) In this shot, however, the act of moving and of reacting to the photographer has taken his thoughts away from his situation as a sitter. He may even have been surprised that Will has taken a photo at that moment, (as most sitters do not expect to be snapped mid-movement or mid-talk) but luckily his surprise only becomes visible the split-second after the flash has signified the taking of the picture – and thus does not register on the sensor.

I know it is dodgy, if not down-right sexist, to ascribe the success of this shoot to the photographer’s gender. Besides, it is my very own, subjective opinion that this shoot represents Armitage particularly well and others will disagree.  But I do think that by and large more women than men have a talent to connect (easily) with other people, to make them feel comfortable and to evoke a sense of security which allows their sitters to show their real self. In an industry still dominated by men, women photographers ought to capitalize more on these, their specific talents because they can produce outstanding results, as this shoot clearly tells.

I’ll be interested to hear what you say, dear readers. Is this a shoot you consider good, representative and droolworthy nice to look at? Personal Styling of Armitage and even my much-applauded black backdrop aside – what is your take on the captured moments? Armitage or not, that is the question…

All text © Guylty at me + richard armitage, 2012. Please credit when using excerpts and links. Images and video copyrights accrue to their owners.

~ by Guylty on December 18, 2012.