*ooof*: Armitage à la Surprise

It may or may not come as a surprise to you that I sometimes have difficulties finding something suitably *ooof*y to say. Don’t get me wrong – every picture of RA has an inherent *ooof* factor, just by virtue of containing him. That’s the prerogative of the fangirl. And yet, not all images that we get to see of him make me drool, swoon admire in appreciation. That is the critical eye of the photographer. And thus I occasionally find myself schizophrenically sitting on a fence: I am delighted to see new material, and cannot wait to re-blog and share. But when it comes to analysing them in-depth, I reluctantly dawdle. That is certainly the case with the now-surfaced images by Ben Rayner which popped up over the weekend – and the reason for a slightly delayed *ooof* which is not appearing at 10 am GMT on-the-dot on this *ooof*Tuesday. Therefore I jumped at the bone that Perry of Armitage Agonistes threw at me, when she suggested the “Halloween Store” image from the Ben Rayner cache of images. And yet I experienced this *ooof* as a challenge, because even at first sight and without examining the technicalities I didn’t like the *beeeep* and the *beeeep*, and I am not sure of the *beeeep*. [Sorry, this had to be blanked out because I do not want to prejudice you with my subjective opinion before I have even started on the basics of the image.]

A Halloween Surprise with Richard Armitage. Photograph by Ben Rayner, 2012. Source.

What we have here is an image of Richard Armitage, posing in a knitted cardigan/sweater. He is pictured in what appears to be a Halloween stall, holding an object that looks like a tombstone. His body is turned sideways, giving us a three-quarter, half-length view of himself, with his head turned towards the camera but an off-camera gaze. The very busy setting in front of the Halloween stall does little for the aesthetics of the picture except date it to October 2012 (if we assume that a Halloween stall is a seasonal occurrence).

The image is probably taken indoors: If you look at Armitage’s skin, you will notice a reddish hue. It is not unnaturally discoloured, but arguably different from the hue of the sitter’s skin in the other images that were taken in the same series of shots. (Cf. here on RAnet). This, as so often, is due to the interference of different lightsources with each other. To explain this, here are a few basics: Light, as you may know, comes in different intensity or levels of “warmths”. Colour temperature, as it is called, measures the intensity of light and is basically defined by the various different ratios of blue and red light to each other (I am simplifying). Although light appears to be “white”, it contains a whole spectrum of hues. Candlelight, for instance, has a different ratio of red versus blue light than sunlight. The intensity is measured in Kelvin, and the sun is the hottest light there is with approx. 12.000K. A candle has a mere tenth of that intensity. – In analogue photography, different types of films were developed which took light intensity into account. There was film for daylight, and film for tungsten light (tungsten being the conventionally used electric light bulbs). Digital photography does not deal with a chemically coated, light-sensitive surface anymore, and so the intensity of light is determined by the camera in order to process the image for a visual reproduction as close to reality as possible. The photographer can also set the White Balance (WB) manually and inform the camera about the light intensity. That is what the little icons on your camera are for: When you shoot in bright sunshine, you ought to set the dial to the sun icon. When you are shooting inside, you click the little bulb icon. And when you are using flash, you should set the White Balance on the lightning icon. The processor of your camera will then adapt the image accordingly and recreate the image as naturally as possible. (You can safely leave your camera on automatic WB if you are not adventurous, btw. If you are interested in photography, however, you should experiment with WB to understand the impact the wrong settings have: Take your camera and photograph the same view, changing the WB for each shot. You will get a different colour hue on each image.) So far so good. Except that the camera is as stupid as a computer – and easily gets thrown off when more than just one lightsource illuminate an image. The result are unsightly, unrealistic hues – which we most often pick out on the colour of skin in portraits. (A prime example for an image that imo suffers from white balance confusion can be seen in this image, previously *spooof*ed by me – an unnatural orange hue.) If you compare the images of the “sweater” series, you will see that those shots that were taken outside (and thus presumably were illuminated only by the sun) have a “bluer” hue than the Halloween stall image. An indication that the Halloween shot was probably illuminated by both natural light, as well as another light source that interferes with the camera’s pre-set WB – and makes Armitage’s skin look redder, more orangey in this image than in the outdoor shots.

Whoa. That was quite scientific, wasn’t it? With that out of the way we can relax into a more subjective content review. I am not mad about the setting of the image – lots of items of different colours are dotted in the background of the image – we can make out white ghosts, ornate picture frames with eerie images in them, tombstone replicas, a poster featuring a skull. In order to distract from the busy background, the photographer has shot this image at a large aperture, blurring out what is behind Armitage. However, the focus plane also includes everything that is in close proximity to him, i.e. the headstone tablet which features some text. On the other hand, the image very successfully puts the subject in a concrete context. It creates a story around the sitter that is very easy to discern. Here we have a man who is perusing the gimmicks and gadgets in a funny speciality store, an informal occasion in a relaxing environment. Fittingly, Armitage has been clothed informally – the sweater, although an expensive design brand, and the denim trousers are casualwear.

Whether you like the styling or not (I, for one, am not really that enamoured with this bulky cardigan-and-half-a-sheep-on-the-collar), the image has the potential to “swoonate” you. Hand-fetishists sit up: Thanks to the shallow depth of field, Armitage’s hand is rather prominent. Not a bad thing when one possesses a nice hand-wrist combo like Armitage. What draws me, personally, to the image is the curve of Armitage’s luscious bottom body shape. I am particularly attracted by/to the area where the edge of the cardigan meets with the trousers and that scrunched up t-shirt peeks from below. I may be sensing the lean, tight set of hips underneath the fabric, or I see the peeking shirt as another example of the adorable lack of attention to detail/awareness of fashion in the sitter (which is rubbish, as there must have been a stylist present). My knowledge of masculine bodies the world tells me what it feels like to touch the hipbone at that spot (ooolálá), and in my imagination I stroke my thumb over the jutting hipbone, one of my favourite spots on the male physique (yeah, I know, I am a freak), feeling hardness under soft skin. Coupled with the slightly surprised expression on the sitter’s face – the raised eyebrows, the crumpled forehead, the caught-in-the-movement turn of the head, my imagined carress takes on the air of a delicious, forbidden surprise.

31st of October, half past four in the afternoon. My boss had let us all go early because it was Halloween, and most of us were heading to a monstrous party that evening. On my way home, I decided to stop at a Halloween store that had popped up around the corner from my office, in the hope of picking up a little seasonal, gimmicky gift for the hosts of the party I was going to later that night. “Lots of junk, I thought to myself”, as I entered the shop. “Will I find anything in here? Why did I leave it this late to get a pressie? Plus, I am not the only one, getting some kind of small present or last minute decoration.” Too many last-minute shoppers squeezed by each other in the tight space of the overfull shop. I perused the knic-knacks and decorations on offer. “Ghosts, posters, plastic spiders, a giant severed hand seeping blood *yum*, lots of webbing, a pair of denim peaches… Wait, wot?” My gaze got stuck on a handsome bottom, a hand’s reach away from me. “Snugly packaged”, I appreciatively pondered. “Broad shoulders, mhhh. Tight haircut. Nicely tall!!!” My assessment was going overdrive. “I love tight jeans on slim, athletic hips.” I found myself edging surreptitiously closer, covered by the throng of the shop. “I’d love to feel *that* spot. Where the hipbone meets the loins. Bone beside soft flesh.” I came closer, just centimetres away from the broad, beknitted shoulders. I was so close that I could smell a faint whiff of cologne from the handsomely be-bottomed stranger. If I wanted to get past him in the overcrowded shop, I would have to brush along him, anyway. With the unaffected non-chalance of a polite fellow-customer, I whispered a quick “Pardon” and simultaneously placed my right hand on the stranger’s hipbone, signalling my intent to pass and indicating a request to make room. I skimmed the hollow between his hipbone and his loins with my thumb for the merest, briefest second, and brushed past, as his head shot up. I could feel his eyes on my back, lit up by surprise and confusion as I innocently made my way out of the shop…

*ooof* That was unexpected. I didn’t really set out to go this way with my *ooof*. And let me hasten to add that I do not customarily sexually harrass unsuspecting strangers, handsome or not, and have no intention of doing so in the future, Armitage or not. *Especially* not Armitage! The recent news about the wonderful letter he wrote to a fan who had met him on the set of The Hobbit reinforces my suspicion interpretation that he is a caring, decent human being. As such he deserves better than me accosting him. At least not in such a scenario, which has been purely invented for the pleasure of imagining. Happy to share, though.

Edit: Would you like to know what the story looked like from the other POV? Well, Judiang wrote it up. Check out “The Man” on her blog! Beautifully written and deliciously imagined. I regret nothing 😉 !

On the subject of sharing and respecting privacy, and on the delight of receiving letters – the lovely Samm, who was the recipient of Armitage’s letter, had kindly shared her delight with the fandom but was a bit overwhelmed by the response and curiosity it provoked. She has subsequently withdrawn her initial post for privacy reasons – after it had already received 5k+ notes and a huge amount of re-blogs on tumblr. After The Arkenstone pointed it out, I’d like to share her request for privacy here and ask anyone who re-blogged her post to kindly delete it. Some things only belong to the receiver and/or creator of a moment. Let’s respect that.

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 August 27, 2013.