Interview with David Round B.Sc., Ph.D.

Tell me, what is the significance of your logo?

Well, for ten years I worked in the Asia Pacific region, travelling extensively to Hong Kong, Australia, New Zealand, Taiwan, Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, Thailand, China and Japan. For six years, I actually lived in Hong Kong. As a result, I acquired a Chinese name. Chinese names are usually formed from characters that form a sound most like one's English name. In my case, the resulting characters apparently have quite a powerful meaning in Chinese, so I thought I would continue to maintain the connection by using it in my logo. It is simply my name in Chinese characters. I thought it would be somewhat appropriate and unusual.

When did you first become interested in photography?

My interest in photography started at the age of 8 when I was given a Kodak ‘Brownie’ 127 camera by my father. Or maybe he bought the camera for me because of my interest in photography. Either way, I learnt some early lessons in the importance of controlling the light when half of the photographs failed to come out and the other half were not exactly wonderful!

My real interest though probably started when, for my 13th birthday, I was given a 35mm camera, again by my father.   This set me off developing and printing all my own photographs.

Did you study photography or anything similar at university?

Oh no! My favourite subject at school had been chemistry. I suppose there is some connection there! Mind you, that was in the days when you could put your finger into a beaker of Mercury to find out what a liquid 13.6 times denser than water felt like. You could flick any globules which may have been spilled, to-and-fro along the bench; as well as have first-hand experience of experimenting with phosphorus and nitrogen tri-iodide. And all without closing down the school while it was decontaminated!!

My first choice career might have been chemistry or chemical engineering, but the prospect of working in one of the vast chemical complexes at the back-end of Warrington wasn't that appealing. (I'm sure Warrington is a very nice place these days, so I hope no-one feels the need to write to enlighten me!)   Instead I decided on becoming a Civil Engineer. A decision which I never regretted as apart from being interesting it also enabled me to travel extensively around the world, indulging my photographic interest along the way.

So how did you come to swap a technical career for one more artistic?

I am not sure that it is a huge swap. Civil Engineering done properly is very much a combination of art and science. Photography itself is certainly very much a combination of art and the technical understanding if the highest quality of photography is to be achieved. This is especially true in the current phase of changeover from traditional chemical techniques to digital processing. Seeing the photograph in one's mind is the artistic part, converting this into a perfect rendition of the imagined result can be technically quite demanding.

However, maybe one gets to a point in life when it is time for a change. I had been to the top in Civil Engineering in terms of exiting times, achievement and experience. So going further would probably have meant going downhill. Now I have new challenges every day and a keen desire to get to the top again in a new career. Each day I awake again with an enthusiasm to get going. And to all those requests I used to get along the lines of “would you do some photographs of me like that?”, I finally have time to say yes!

So have you found yourself at a disadvantage being pitted against photographers with years as professionals?

No. Not at all. This is particularly so with the increasing use of digital methods.   I bought my first film scanner and copy of Adobe Photoshop 3 in 1994 and with only slight exaggeration have used it, or various upgrade versions since, on an almost daily basis. This was not for producing wacky science fiction orientated montages but for producing quality photography. Ten years on and I am probably as experienced as anyone in modern photographic technology. It is certainly a far more valuable and relevant experience than having spent several years as a laboratory assistant processing the photographs of someone else. Not that I would decry experience in a chemical based darkroom. After all I still use my own darkroom quite frequently. A selenium-toned black-and-white chemical print is still the benchmark to be achieved by digital methods and I will often do a traditional print for special jobs and also to compare results when checking out the latest trade offerings.

However the critical question is not experience in this field or that but do people like my work?

Presumably it can be an advantage having been on the other side of the fence in business.

Definitely, it provides a very valuable insight into how many businesses think in terms of photography and event support services.

Who is your favourite well known photographer or the one who influenced you most?

I am not sure I have a favourite well known photographer. I know what I like when I see it but I would not single out anyone whose work I universally admire above any other. I suppose in terms of influences, I would have to single out Japanese photography in general. It often has a much harder exciting edge than western photography whilst retaining a certain style. I like that.

Do you have a favourite photograph then?

Yes. It's a photograph by O. Winston Link (1914 - 2001). It is a photograph taken in 1956 of a Norfolk and Western Railroad steam locomotive passing a drive-in movie park in West Virginia, USA. The energy, the contrast, the lighting - magic! Interestingly, I discovered recently that he started out as a Civil Engineer too and went on to become a photographer of some note. Well I guess he must have been of some note because here we are in England talking about one of his photographs taken nearly 50 years ago.

Which well known figure would you most like to photograph given a free choice?

Oh dear, now that is tricky. It is difficult to single out any one person in particular. Manuela Arcuri, an Italian actress, would definitely be on the shortlist among actresses. From the sporting world, I would most like to photograph Maria Sharapova; despite her athleticism, she still seems to retain an air of femininity which would be interesting to try to capture in a photograph. Tia Carrera, the actress, would be another choice perhaps for an adventure theme. From television it would just have to be Natasha Kaplinski - no question!! I like to think I could make her look truly sensational, though one might say that would not take much doing!!

You have not chosen any models in your list.

Looking good is what models do for a living so photographing them and making them look good is less of a challenge. But if you insist I would really love to photograph Kelly Brook, Reon Kadena, Eiko Koike or Chieko Shiratori.

You mentioned earlier your experience in digital photography. Is your work wholly digital?

Although I have been using digital processing since 1994, until recently I had continued to use film cameras for capturing the image. Whilst digital capture has made significant in-roads in professional photography and is now almost universally used by press photographers, this is predominantly for speed. At the end of an event, the photographer can download the photographs to a laptop in the car or press box and immediately zap them down a line or through a mobile phone to the editor. No more rushing the film to a processor and then rushing the prints to the office. It is all instantaneous. But the quality demanded by newspaper printing or for a small photograph in a magazine is not great.

Wedding and portrait photography is more about quality than time. At the lower cost end of the wedding market, digital cameras have been used for some time because the simplified 'workflow' for the photographer helps keep down costs. At the higher end of the market, which I cater for, film has prevailed and until very recently, I still used a Nikon 35mm film camera for general reportage shots and a medium format Mamiya RZ67 (6cm x 7cm negative size) for the more formal shots likely to be used for large framed portraits.

However, that said, last year, I came to the conclusion that the technology had finally reached a point where it is not just more convenient but superior in quality. I took delivery of a Canon EOS 1Ds, 11.1m pixel full frame digital camera. This camera system is not cheap but the image quality just blew me away, surpassing my medium format camera. As a result I now use this for all my work. In fact I have been so impressed that this year I have added the latest Canon EOS 1Ds MkII 16. 7m pixel camera to my armoury.

All post capture processing is done digitally as this affords much better control over the final prints. Scanning and printing are done using top end professional equipment giving a quality and longevity of prints in excess of traditional consumer chemical printing and far in excess of consumer digital scanners and printers.

The only exceptions are my infra-red photography, for which I use film processed in my own darkroom and for specialist prints such as portrait prints using platinum chemistry, again these are done in my own darkroom

How long does a studio session take?

That depends on several factors. If I am doing a portrait session then I generally assign about four hours. This is not as long as it sounds as generally we would do 4 – 6 different scenes or set-ups each with different outfits for example. Each segment would typically be followed by a five or ten minute break. Sometimes though, if a client just wants a specific photograph and everything falls into place then the session can be over in less than one hour. On the other hand, if I am working on a personal project such as a book or an exhibition, with a model on a 'time for prints' basis, then we can end up shooting all day but with a more relaxed timetable.

You mentioned the United States earlier and you have travelled very extensively around the world. How does the photography scene in Britain compare?

A very good question! There is no doubt that photography is much more highly regarded as an art form in the USA, parts of Asia and in other parts of Europe too, notably France. Prints by contemporary photographers can fetch extraordinarily high prices. In Britain photography is seen as much more functional. But there is a certain amount of the chicken and egg here. Photographers don't produce photographs with high value because there isn't a market. However, people won't buy photograph at high prices unless photographers produce photographs which have a must-have appeal and hence create the market. Also to some extent the self appointed liberal art elite do their best to denigrate photography predominantly one suspects for the sake of self interest. But there are significant signs that the corner has been turned.

So what are you future plans?

Well, as I get time, I am currently taking photographs for a book and also trying to put together prints for a themed exhibition next year. Also I am committed to offering a line of prints through a gallery soon, so I am trying to put together a body of work for that.

You sound very busy

That is certainly true but I am not complaining.

Well thank you for your time and for being so forthcoming.

My pleasure.