 |
| 1. Guys In Uniform - Sailor in the Rigging |
Guys
in Uniform Studio set up in the mid 1970s, producing sexy pictures
with a strong flavour of military
discipline.
It was much inspired by the example set by Royale Studio in the late 1950s, the photo above directly references the 'Sailor in the Rigging' images of Royale Studio and Hussar. The personnel involved reputedly had connections of some sort with
Basil Clavering's, Royale set-up.
 |
| 2. Guys In Uniform - Double Discipline |
Guys In Uniform created many Gym Discipline scenarios which also mirrored Royale storyettes, but without accessories like the gym horses that popped up in the Royale images, providing better context - and a handy platform for punishment.
 |
| 3. Royale Studio - 'Through the Legs' pose from 'Soldier-Sailor' |
Other GIU images copy the striking 'through the legs' poses which were a feature
of Royale's work (notably Soldier-Sailor). I think Royale derived them from cinema, 'film
noir' advertising. See 'Military Intimidation' for an excellent, Guys In Uniform example.
 |
| 4. Guys In Uniform - Caning by Numbers, 'Dunces' |
The creation of Royale-inspired imagery seems to have peaked with a set, which I have called 'Caning By Numbers' (since GIU didn't give them names). Although their imagery is new, it seems to closely copy the Royale Storyette 'Tough Schoolmaster', notably including the use of archaic, dunces caps. My article, 'Caning by Numbers', cross-references the similarities, picture by picture.
~
The
pictures of both studios pushed at the boundaries of acceptability for
their respective times. Royale's beefcake images flirted with homosexual innuendo and sadism, which was strictly taboo in the 1950s Britain, despite the proliferation of corporal punishment in boy's schools. By the mid 70s, when Guys in Uniform was formed, gay lifestyle magazines were commonplace and even frontal nudes were permissible (if flaccid). However, the combination of nudity and discipline scenarios' was still highly controversial and problematic.
 |
| 5. Guys In Uniform - Double Discipline |
This image is similar to Royale discipline scenarios, but they did not show their subjects undressed like this. Rear nudes appear in some Royale, solo sets but are almost non-existent in the storyettes, where the men wear shorts to be spanked. There are no Royale frontal nudes at all, but such images are commonplace in Guys in Uniform's work.  |
| 6. Guys In Uniform - The Investigation |
Both Studios openly used genuine servicemen as models, particularly Royal Guardsmen (sometimes in authentic uniforms). This shocked the establishment and provoked police
raids to seize their material. In Royale's day, anything to do with homosexuality was hushed up by the press, but in the case of Guys in Uniform there was a full-blown public scandal when a tabloid 'exposed' that real Guardsmen were posing for nude photographs in homosexual magazines. The specific images that sparked the row were those of the 'Caning by Numbers' series, image 4, above.
 |
| 7. Guys In Uniform - The Harness |
Guys in Uniform did venture into one area where Royale and Hussar had not dared - Leather and Rubber fetish. The leather harness/apron shown in the picture above was part of a provocative (for its time) exploration of leather and rubber fetish. It was a subject which formed a major part of Guys in Uniform's output. They developed the visual language of domination and submission in a way that goes far beyond what Royale did, a contribution to the emergence of the leather fetish scene that is probably more significant than it is given credit for.
 |
| 8. Royale Studio - Man wearing a Leather Harness |
Recently, a solitary image has come to light suggesting Royale had a similar harness (above), but if they did, images of it were never published at the time.
However, this collection also included pictures from 'Guys in Uniform' (see preceding paragraph in that Numbers article) so the attribution of this image to Basil Clavering by Bonhams was probably a simple mistake.
Interestingly, the saleroom stated in their prospectus that the collection of hundreds of Royale Studio images had been "acquired by the present owner in Notting Hill in
the 1980s, from a fan of Studio Royale (sic) who had tried unsuccessfully to mimic its success". This latter reference sounds very much like the 'Guys in Uniform' producer, Charles Koestler.
Royale did publish a series of fetishistic images with models wearing pouches made from chains, also one or two that feature a wide, leather belt like the one seen in the picture below. However, the Dolphin/Hussar set 'Leather Merchants' (below) seems to be the limit of their ventures into the leather scene.
 |
| 9. Dolphin Photography - Leather Merchants |
Leather Merchants was used for the launch of the Dolphin Photography off-shoot of Royale, later renamed 'Hussar'. The powerful leather and rubber, biker theme marks a significant break with Royale's more cautious approach to biker imagery. They limited themselves to leather jackets and jeans with not a motorcycle in sight - notably in The Stolen Motorcycle, for example.
Documentation exists that named John Parkhurst, Basil Clavering's collaborator, as the proprietor of Hussar, so it seems fair to attribute this change in tone to him. The bold, unmistakeable, fetish ingredient seems to be an uncanny foretaste of what was to come with Guys in Uniform, although we know of no connection between the two organisations other than that just outlined above.
~
The Guys in Uniform Business
The 'Guys in Uniform' Studio has long suffered from being
called 'Men in Uniform' in some quarters. However, it always used the
'Guys in Uniform' label in its short existence, as shown in the image below and image 2, above. There was never a Studio called 'Men In Uniform'
This misconception seems to have originated from the publication of the British Photographer's collection (Source 1), since the originator gave some of his scans titles beginning with MIU. An interesting, 2002 article by Squaddie John about the history and
the connections between the two studios gives an account of how this came about. Formerly published at 'Milism'
(now defunct), I have been given permission by the author to reproduce
it at mitchmen - read the 'Milism' article.
 |
| 10. Ad for Guys In Uniform in 'Him Exclusive' Sept 1975 |
Strictly
speaking, 'Guys in Uniform' was a product of 'Studio 57', run by
Charles Koestler and based in Linden Gardens, Notting Hill. Some of
their advertisements showed this information.
This ad also shows they were
using the same marketing technique as Royale - 'selection' sheets from which clients could choose which prints they wanted to buy. It was a sales
methodology that was becoming outdated by then, and none of these selection
sheets seem to have survived. It's not known if they were able to secure an income stream from them.
N.B. This advertisement was originally published in black and white, I have added the colour using AI.
 |
| 11. Guys in Uniform Feature in 'Q International' v1 No3 (1976) |
Like
Royale and Hussar, Guys in Uniform supplied their images to the Gay
Magazines of their time - including 'Q International', 'Him', 'Playguy' and 'Zipper'. We know that 'Him/Playguy' paid for them and provided free advertising (from a Daily Mirror article 20/10/75).
Many of the illustrations were printed in colour, which was not affordable in the 1960s for Royale, nor it's publishers. Unlike
Royale, GIU don't seem to have reached out to US magazines, a link-up
with 'Drummer' might have transformed the business. They do turn up in European fetish magazines, however.
 |
| 12. Guys In Uniform - Cover of Uniform Magazine, Issue 2 |
Guys in Uniform also
published their own glossy 'Uniform Magazine' starting ca.1978.
Surprisingly, though, it only carried black and white photos, although the ad above (image 10) makes it clear that they were selling colour prints. It was intended to be quarterly but lasted only for 3 issues. The heavy bias towards mature men and fetish may have been too niche.
~
Historical information about Guys in Uniform's origins is scanty, the earliest dated reference is in the mid-1975 issue of Him Exclusive, No 6. They must have been operating for some time before that producing the images. They survived the Guardsman furore in the Autumn of that year and continued at least until the 'Uniform' magazine appeared in 1978. But there's nothing documented after that, except a magazine report in the early 80s that stated that the studio had closed 'some years ago'. It's probably fair to date it as 1974-79.
~
