January 13, 2012

VSCO Film for Lightroom & Camera Raw

VSCO Film promises to emulate classic film looks with minimal effort. The product “utilizes camera specific film profiles to alter the way Lightroom and Adobe Camera Raw sees your RAW file.” Check it out:

Photographer Jeremy Cowart writes, “I consider myself to be a Photoshop purist. I hate all things actions/filters/presets, etc. But because I liked these guys so much, I decided to look into it more. Then I was blown away…” His post features numerous sample images produced with these tools.

Posted by John Nack at 9:09 AM on January 13, 2012


  • Sean McCormack — 10:03 AM on January 13, 2012

    Hey John,
    I reviewed these a while ago for Pixiq. They are good. The studio pack is best value, and while relatively pricey, does a great job.


    P.S. Tabbing through the form jumps you to the top of the page for some reason.

  • imajez — 2:45 PM on January 13, 2012

    It’s funny how people argued that film was superior to digital for so many years yet when a photographer recreates ‘film looks’ like here, they appear really poor quality – in a good way I should add.
    Some very nice work on Jeremy’s site.

    Random observation – I rarely come across other Jeremy’s, but if I do, rather bizarrely they are usually photographers too.

  • imajez — 2:47 PM on January 13, 2012

    On subject of the profiles I wonder how they’ll mange with v2012 in ACR 7.

  • Manata — 3:18 PM on January 13, 2012

    what the world needs.. more boring presets to make all images look the same.

  • D to the 3rd — 3:45 PM on January 13, 2012

    Curious – why is it everywhere that RAW is capitalized? I thought this was a format of an image, not an acronym.

    [Adobe’s convention is simply to say “raw,” as the term is a simple adjective and neither a proper name (“Raw”) nor an acronym. Apple & others prefer the (aggro, to my eye) “RAW” convention. –J.]

    Am I missing something?

    (not a photographer, so – I may be way off?)

    Just curious.

    • Dick Brigleb — 5:56 AM on January 16, 2012

      It isn’t even, technically, a file format.

  • K Brown — 6:04 PM on January 13, 2012

    Kinda pricey…

  • Mark Andrew Photographer — 8:49 PM on January 13, 2012

    What makes VSCO special vs other presets are the use of custom camera profiles. On my D3 and D700 they produce something that’s almost believable as Fuji 400H. They really allow me to have a specific look that can be consistently replicated across all my images

  • Steve Laskevitch — 6:26 PM on January 15, 2012

    Do most folks find presets and profiles difficult or hard to discover?

    These may be better than other commercial preset libraries. Yes, it’s cool that they leverage profiles.

    But when I teach Lightroom, very very few students find it challenging to create presets of their own for a custom “look”, film or otherwise. And using something like the ColorChecker Passport, we can get different cameras at the same or a really similar starting points.

    I guess I don’t mind clicking more than once to achieve a look that’s all mine. Then again, I got a kick out of making composite images in a darkroom. (no, I don’t miss it…)

  • Dan_Smith — 3:45 PM on April 04, 2013

    Nice ones.
    But I personally prefer these film presets: http://reallyniceimages.com/index.php/all-film-the-ultimate-package/ (for Lightroom only unfortunately). To me they work a bit better than vsco, as the latter newer work straight-from-the-box and may be used as only the starting point.

  • Andrew — 7:43 AM on April 14, 2013

    Yep, МЫСЩ does good stuff but to me it’s a bit pre-marketed and not always work straight from the box.

    For those who seriously in emulating film I would recommend to check these guys and their film presets for Lightroom: http://reallyniceimages.com/index.php/all-film-the-ultimate-package/

Copyright © 2020 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy and Cookies (Updated)