*ooof*: Richard Alphatage

UNF
For  a brief moment I thought I would just leave it at those three letters. They perfectly capture my reaction to the image I am *ooof*ing in this special edition of your weekly drool pool.  Well, you probably won’t let me get away with that – even though I suspect you perfectly understand what I mean. But hey – if this gives me a reason, an excuse and an opportunity to peruse one of the most recent Armitage images, then I’ll jump at the chance. So here’s to you, marie8astra, who actually suggested I pick this up *right here, right now*. This *ooof* is dedicated to you!

Richard Alphatage. Eh. Armitage.
Photographed by Robert Ascroft.
Image Sourced via RAnet.com

…
…
…
Oh, are you still there? My eyes had glazed over, my brain had switched off and I was momentarily breathing with my ovaries only. I find I have an almost vicereal reaction to this image. It hit me in the proverbial tumblr feels the moment I spotted it. Is there a reason for that or is this just a lucky combination of Armitage’s publicist’s timing and my own fertility? You know what my answer will be: Good photography *always* has an effect. And this is one of Ascroft’s finest. But made even better by his sitter. Let’s have a look at the technicalities.

Richard Armitage. *squeeee* Sitting on a block of wood. *jazzhands* In front of a white backdrop. *la ola* For Cod’s sake, Guylty, keep your pants on! *yogabreathing*  In Ascroft signature style, we have a full length, seated portrait of the artist as a hot casual man. Again shot under diffused studio light from above front right (cf. the Ethan Hawke image I linked to recently), we have a little shadow under the chin, obscuring part of Richard’s neck and right temple. This is actually quite clever lighting in that Armitage’s signature angle lines on his forehead have been obliterated: The left temple catches the light directly and attracts no shadow; the right temple is in shadow and therefore no angle is visible, either. Also, the soft lighting angled from above drowns out all forehead lines and adds to Armitage’s youthful appearance in this particular image.

The trendy youthfulness is also accentuated by the styling of the sitter: Armitage is casually dressed with jeans, t-shirt and open-laced sneakers. The t-shirt exposes his forearms and biceps *yum*, his long legs appear slim in the narrow-cut jeans. The t-shirt is not the usual tight little number that we have become accustomed to seeing in recent times, but slightly more loose-fitting, visibly bunched up over Armitage’s tummy area. Is this the equivalent to “the little black dress” – the little black tee? Well, I like what I see.

Apart from the delectable little black number that Armitage is sporting *hums,rollseyes,andlickslipsrepeatedly*, for me it is the pose and the facial expression that bursts my reproductive organ. Strangely enough – as this is so definitely artificially posed and could easily look like the proverbial (German) “monkey on a grindstone”. (The dictionary, btw, informs me that the correct BE equivalent is “to sit crouched, looking like a proper charlie” – cheers Richard, I am constantly expanding my vocabulary thanks to you!) He is not quite relaxed. His hands are clenched, and there is an expression of concentration on Richard’s face, particularly around the mouth, while his gaze is actually more of a stare. This could be because his pose cannot be particularly comfortable. Armitage is not only balancing his precioussssss assssssss on a little wooden block, but he has also angled his long legs a bit awkwardly with his right foot wedged against the box and his left foot at a strange angle. Ouch. (Believe me – that hurts! I have copied his pose for the sake of research, and it felt uncomfortable to the point of pain!)  My hunch is that he was directed by the photographer to do this, because the pose is pleasing in terms of the sadistic tendencies on the part of the photographer composition. The angling of the right leg to the side emphasises the slim thigh, while the forward angle of the left leg acts as a guiding line in the image. In fact, if you were to draw a line through the image, starting at the converse star on the sneaker and going up along the side of his leg, it would lead right up to… his face (girls!!! What did *you* think??? *tuttuttut*). Its continuation even follows his cheek line! And the fact that Armitage is holding himself fairly straight – stomach in, shoulders relaxed, chin up! – seems to support that hunch, as in portrait sitting most sitters have a tendency to slack their heads down. Pain or not, the effect is that of a dynamic feel to the image. You can imagine Armitage wriggling his arsitage on the box, or stretching his legs, or turning and twisting, stretching his arms over his head, arching his back – this is just one moment in the shoot (I hope that for his sake…), the pose and the styling suggest that to me.

The image also sports an effect that you might expect in a corny wedding photo, but not in a sporty portrait of a hottie. If you look at the picture you will notice that the corners – particularly the top two corners – appear darker than the centre of the image. This is an effect called “vignetting”. It can occur when there are objects obstructing the reflection of light back into the lens, or when the optic elements of the lens are shading each other (a lens is a series of prisms, essentially, that control how much light is allowed into the camera). In terms of aesthetics, vignetting serves to concentrate the viewers’ gaze onto the brightest part of the image (the centre), shading out the less important part (the edge). It is more or less a “framing device” in that it frames the important part of the image furthermore. It often appears “naturally” but I doubt it is unintended in the case of a highly skilled artist such as Ascroft. In fact, he uses it to add a bit of variation to the otherwise monochrome background, an infinity wall that gives the impression of an endless white background without a visible edge between wall and floor. And yes, the background is most probably white, even though it appears blueish in the image – probably caused by two different types of lighting used for illuminating the subject and the backdrop. But enough of technicalities.

It’s not that I have a penchant for seeing Mr A suffer for a portrait, that I find this image so evocative. It is the combination of all these things, I think, and the fact that this is a deviation from the recently rather suave and formal (studio) photographs, as well as the less streamlined press photography of recent days. (Where is my veil of silence? Oh, it’s already in use, draped over the brown-leather-jacket monstrosity from Tuesday…). This is a well-composed shot with a carefully arranged sitter, and lighting that enhances the handsome features and lithe limbs of Mr A. It also takes into account what Ascroft had photographed so far, and adds a bit of variety to the mix in terms of styling.

And then there is the face. *sighs* The concentrated look in his eyes. Not a smile, or only a hint of amusement (self-ironically, for acting the model?) and the lips in a resolute line. There. (Imagine this word said the way Harry says it when he rings Gerri’s doorbell for the third time after their first date.) There’s the alpha male again, uncompromising, confident, strong, energetic, forceful, benignly-nonplussed.  I love how the details add up to that. The t-shirt’s sleeves stretching over the biceps. The veins standing out on the hands and on the inside of his arms. The hair on the forearms appearing as blondish fuzz against the background. The dynamic pose. This is *ooof* personified. ” ’nuff said!”

All text © Guylty at me + richard armitage, 2013. Please credit when using excerpts and links. Images and video copyrights accrue to their owners.

~ by Guylty on May 2, 2013.