Marlene Deitrich In Flowers 2, by Nan Goldin, is part of a new exhibit at Aperture Gallery.

Goldin, along with five other photographers, were invited to shoot whatever they saw fit using a Fujifilm X-Series.

Terry Richardson chose to shoot flower arrangements in front of his signature white wall, ending up with a vaguely rococo pair of still life snapshots.

There’s something surprising about Ryan McGinley’s images. They’re crisp, bright, and clear--nothing like the soft, glowing scenes he normally shoots.

An untitled shot from landscape photographer Stephen Shore.

Another Shore shot.

Amazingly, it was the venerable William Eggleston’s first time shooting digital film.

His vibrant images are similar in tone to his ouvre, but somehow quite different in digital format.

Co.Design

New Work From Photography’s Greats, All Shot On The Same Camera

A new show at Aperture Gallery includes new work from six photogs all using Fujifilm’s X-Series.

How do you get six of the biggest names in contemporary photography to make new work for your show? It’s actually easier than it sounds—or it was for Ken Miller, the curator of the frankly titled Photography at Aperture Gallery. The show, which opened today in New York, includes new photographs from William Eggleston, Nan Goldin, Ryan McGinley, Martin Parr, Terry Richardson, and Stephen Shore.

According to Vice, all Miller had to do to snag those six names was to offer each of the photographers a free Fujifilm X-Series. Famous photographers: They’re just like us! But Miller is quick to note that free swag wasn’t the sole motivator—the X-Series is billed as a digital simulacra of an old-school SLR, a kind of holy grail for the photography community. “I think there’s a certain nostalgia for a lot of these photographers who think ‘Oh, this works like a classic point-shoot Nikon,’” Miller told Vice's Christian Storm. “You sort of forget photographers are camera nerds, too, so they wanted to try it out.”

Whatever their motives, they turned up some pretty remarkable shots. Ryan McGinley’s are probably the most surprising. Though he’s stuck with familiar subject matter, there’s something wild about the images he shot with his X-Series. They’re crisp, bright, and clear—nothing like the soft, glowing scenes he normally shoots. Amazingly, it was the 73-year-old William Eggleston’s first time shooting digital film. Though he, like McGinley, stuck to what he knows (dusty rest stops and small-town landscapes), his snaps have an illicit, random quality to them—as though we’re watching a private eye run surveillance on someone. Meanwhile, Terry Richardson put some flower arrangements in front of his signature white wall and came out with a vaguely rococo pair of still-life snapshots—fair enough.

Miller is a genius for concocting such a radically simple but compelling curatorial strategy—give six of the most recognizable eyes in contemporary photography the same camera, then see what happens. Check out more of the images above or head over to the gallery’s website.

Add New Comment

10 Comments

  • John W. O'Brien III

    where can i get this "digital film" you write about?
    will it work in my K1000?
    is it compatible with MF cameras?

    oi.... "digital film"

  • M Sarkar

    The comments asking for NSFW tags for this article make perfect sense. Those who create products (or write articles) for other people's consumption (or reading) need to put themselves in the user's shoes.

  • Keelarr

    Macgoo, shouldn't you be working rather than using your "corporate time" to look at non work related things? I appreciate your point but if you had not been taking a break from the corporate job you want to keep by protecting the corporate image lol you would never have a worry. IJS... I do appreciate the manner in which you slid the buck back to the website fornot protecting your corporate image though.

  • MacGoo

    Yes, I do. Now please check your disdain and condescension at the door and try to understand that cultural differences are something you should respect. 

    While I don't object to the content personally and I understand the artistic nature of the photo, I COMPLETELY object to the careless endangering of my corporate reputation, when a few extra seconds of effort by the author would have saved me the trouble from the start.

  • Vin Weathermon

    I don't mind looking at it, but after I stopped looking at her breasts I wondered if she was a murder victim.

  • MacGoo

    NSFW tag would be nice Kelsey. I have this in my RSS feed at work, and I just had to scramble to shut it down quickly. I get it: it's art. But it's also not something I want to look at at work.

  • Al

    Same. FastCo's blogs' material is relevant to my work, so it's one of the sites I visit on downtime, breaks or mental blocks while at work. But if there could be unexpected bare breasts in the thumbnails in the recommended content section at the bottom of any page I might have to find replacement reading material.

    *I* understand that it's an art shot by a professional photographer. But someone who happens to be walking behind my desk at the exact moment I scroll down and this appears on the screen might get a very wrong idea about the kind of research I'm doing and the way I'm using company equipment...

    Especially if, like Macgoo, they also see me then scrambling to shut it down quickly...