Fuji VSCO Film 01 adds Fuji X profiles

[Pelao]

Cool news for fans of VSCO

VSCO Film 01 x Fujifilm | blog | vsco.co

For an idea how this is used, and whether you might like it, watch these videos:

VSCO | VIDEO: What's the best way to use V...

 

[jloden]

Cool - there's also a 15% off discount on VSCO film, today only. I have been wanting to try it a while so what the heck, might as well finally get a copy

 

[jloden]

For anyone considering these, I just played around with it a bit and had some fun, here's a couple examples on Fuji X-E1 files (35mm lens). These are with one of the presets then some additional bouncing around and tweaking with the VSCO tool presets and some manual adjustment also. So this isn't representative of "straight out of camera + preset" but rather the difference in end result of my typical workflow with VSCO Film 01 incorporated as an extra step.

Pretty fun, I like some of the effects and will have to try this on more files in the future. I could also see picking up some of the other Film packs to add more options.


First, here's the original file as I had processed it in LightRoom 4.3 WITHOUT the presets, so represents what I got on my own.

View attachment 11185
Morristown 2013-03-24 by jloden, on Flickr


With one of the VSCO Film 01 presets - LR doesn't track which profile in the history, but I think the Portra 800 was the starting point, with a few additional VSCO toolsets applied such as vignetting, black point, squash highlights and further tweaking.

View attachment 11187
Morristown 2013-03-24 by jloden, on Flickr

Another with I believe the Kodak Portra 400 preset but Fuji toning #2 applied and some other toolset items and tweaking.
View attachment 11189
Morristown 2013-03-24 by jloden, on Flickr

 

[Pelao]

Jloden,
Nice. I've had 01 for a while but only really started getting in to it recently.

 

[drewbot]

Is there a difference between a Fuji and standard preset?

I have both kinds for 03 but cannot distinguish.

 

[jloden]

Is there a difference between a Fuji and standard preset?

I have both kinds for 03 but cannot distinguish.

The video talks about it some, I think it's much the same with some additional corrections calibrated to the camera. Basically the same effects but potentially more accurate since it's taking the camera's specific output into account.

 

[drewbot]

Oh ok. Thanks for the tip.

I typically use VSCO as a starting point anyway - much easier to deal with than Alien Skin Exposure.

 

[Amin]

Oh ok. Thanks for the tip.

I typically use VSCO as a starting point anyway - much easier to deal with than Alien Skin Exposure.

I bought VSCO 01 and 02 a long time ago and have never really liked them. If they had a trial, I would have used that and never purchased. You're right that Alien Skin Exposure is much harder to deal with, but I think the results are worth it. My brother loves VSCO and won't even try the Alien Skin and Nik products.

Disclosure: I paid with my own money for VSCO as well as an older version of Exposure, but Alien Skin gave me the new version of Exposure for eval purposes.

 

[flysurfer]

Alien Skin ignores Apple Aperture (and also isn't available as a stand-alone), so it's no-go for me. Otherwise, I'd already have tried it, like everything else. I've got full/complete/premium packs of VSCO, Topaz, Nik, onOne, DxO Film Pack, and yep, I also paid full price for everything.

 

[MitchGtz]

Alien Skin ignores Apple Aperture (and also isn't available as a stand-alone), so it's no-go for me. Otherwise, I'd already have tried it, like everything else. I've got full/complete/premium packs of VSCO, Topaz, Nik, onOne, DxO Film Pack, and yep, I also paid full price for everything.

I also prefer Aperture (but have Lightroom as well). How have you been dealing with Fuji Raw images? I think Aperture ignores them (last I looked).

Also out of all the plug-ins you list, which do you feel are the most valuable?

 

[flysurfer]

I have Lightroom, Photoshop (Creative Cloud subscription), DxO Optics Pro / ViewPoint, Silkypix 5, CaptureOne Pro, AccuRaw and pretty much every RAW converter that exists on Macs (ad have paid for all of them full price, as well), but my images are finalized and stored in Aperture. Also, I refuse to pay twice to get VSCO running on LR, too. No way that's ever going to happen. I usually settle with Aperture and use one of my VSCO presets as starting points to get the look I want. So it's actually pretty straightforward. There was a phase when I used a lot of Topaz Adjust and Topaz B&W Effects from iPhoto, but after I switched to Aperture, that basically stopped. I like Lightroom, but there are things that I can better do in Aperture (and vice versa). So the combo is quite good.

 

[McGregory]

I would also recommend checking www.reallyniceimages.com. Similar preset packages but in addition they have absolutely great vintage Kodachrome and Rollei Digibase which works absolutely stunning with my X-E1 raw/jpeg.

View attachment 1846

P.S> Recently got vsсо and really love them.

 

[jloden]

An update after a while of using VSCO 01 and now 02 packages:

I've been having good luck with VSCO profiles after some tweaking. None of them quite suited me "as is" but with tweaks to contrast, black point, etc. and removing the added grain I've been pretty pleased. Now I have been processing most of my recent images with modified VSCO presets, especially for B&W images. At first it was such a departure from my usual processing method & look that I wasn't sure about it but giving myself a little time I'm coming around. It's also nice to use a consistent preset as a base, so at least sets of related images keep a consistent feel.

Some recent samples:

Modified Ilford HP5++ preset

LG @ the Coffee Shop by jloden, on Flickr

Modified Tri-X 400++ preset

The Happy Couple by jloden, on Flickr

Bouquet Toss by jloden, on Flickr


Modified Fuji Superia 400+ preset

Shroommates by jloden, on Flickr

Childlike Wonder is my Superpower by jloden, on Flickr


Modified Kodak Portra 800 HC preset

Gaz by jloden, on Flickr

 

[pniev]

Thanks Jay. Photos look very natural. Especially the ilford and superia. I'll schedule some trial-and-error time myself!
Peter

 

[ean10775]

I have all the VSCO packs, but haven't yet warmed to using them. Prior to acquiring them I simply used curves adjustments and the toning controls to get the look I wanted. I see some stuff I really like coming out of people using VSCO Film, but I've yet to be able to replicate it using the presets and tweaks made to them. With everything I try its either too contrasty or colors are too off for my liking. I know I should play with them more, but it seems like if I'm going to be doing that much tweaking, there is very little advantage to not just starting from scratch and creating my own preset to apply to a series of images. The Superia 400+ image above is more the look that I'd like to replicate as a baseline and then do toning to the shadows and highlights from there.

 

[jloden]

I have all the VSCO packs, but haven't yet warmed to using them. Prior to acquiring them I simply used curves adjustments and the toning controls to get the look I wanted. I see some stuff I really like coming out of people using VSCO Film, but I've yet to be able to replicate it using the presets and tweaks made to them. With everything I try its either too contrasty or colors are too off for my liking. I know I should play with them more, but it seems like if I'm going to be doing that much tweaking, there is very little advantage to not just starting from scratch and creating my own preset to apply to a series of images. The Superia 400+ image above is more the look that I'd like to replicate as a baseline and then do toning to the shadows and highlights from there.

I know what you mean. I'm less adventurous or aggressive than you are with your processing so I tend to avoid strong tone curve adjustments. I quite like the look you get with your photos, but I always seem to chicken out with the stronger highlight/shadow fading in my own editing.

For what you're talking about, the VSCO "toolkit" presets might be more up your alley. I use those a lot, especially the sharpening, vignetting (it's not round like the LR post-crop vignette), and some of the color tone presets. If you're already doing it yourself with a tone curve adjustment it might not buy you much, but you might check out the fade highlights/fade shadows presets in the toolkit and see if they are useful shortcuts since you have the VSCO packs already.

 

[ean10775]

I know what you mean. I'm less adventurous or aggressive than you are with your processing so I tend to avoid strong tone curve adjustments. I quite like the look you get with your photos, but I always seem to chicken out with the stronger highlight/shadow fading in my own editing.

Honestly I've probably been more aggressive in the past than I'd like to be. I definitely like faded shadows, but sometimes I find that with the files from the X100S you can end up with a faux HDR look pretty quickly (especially with architecture/city shots), which I'm not a fan of. These were all done with just curves adjustments and perphaps a few tweaks to the luminance sliders.

I like these:

View attachment 13600
DSCF0112 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF1902 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF2115 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF2575 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF2086 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF1444 by ericarthur, on Flickr

These for example I'm not as crazy about how they turned out:

DSCF0754 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF0307 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF0969 by ericarthur, on Flickr

DSCF0750 by ericarthur, on Flickr

I'd like to consistently be able to get the faded shadows while still maintaining some more natural tonality, contrast and sharpness in the lighter tones - especially when it comes to people. Sardonic seems to have a real handle on this.

 

[jloden]

Some good examples there Eric. That cat shot in particular is an example of one that looks great, but I know I would have processed it far more contrasty and probably wouldn't have been able to convince myself to fade the shadows like that.

What I've been doing lately is making virtual copies of my files and doing much more aggressive edits on some. Helps me see side by side a few options. Sometimes I'll also share them and see what other people's response is as well. That's part of what finally broke me out of a rut with my B&W processing recently. I did everything in Silver Efex with a slightly tweaked Fine Art preset for a long while, because I love texture and detail generally. It was a pretty big jump to go to the Ilford and Tri-X presets with the much softer, clipped look. But, I love that it's all non-destructive edits in LR, I can do a whole batch of photos consistently & easily, and the end result grew on me. I recently did an entire wedding series in B&W with the Tri-X 400 preset and they were very well received

 

[ean10775]

The main issue I've found with using VSCO presets is that since so many tweaks to parameters are automatically applied for a given emulation, if you like the look, apart from say one or two things, it can be quite difficult to remedy those one or two things, unless you know exactly what it is that is contributing to what you don't like. I suppose that's where the toolkit comes into play and admittedly I've yet to mess around with that too much.

 

[flysurfer]

Upping the black point (often to different levels for each color channel) is mostly a gimmick, an effect. It's not how analog film looked like or was/is supposed to look when it was/is correctly processed. That said, it can be a useful and pleasant effect/feature for some subjects/applications/shots, so I sometimes use it, but mostly I am not. As with all effects, things tend to get tired when you use them too frequently. VSCO is perfectly capable of producing results that do NOT look like a gimmick or an effect. Instead, the results will simply look nice, and nobody would even recognize that I used VSCO or a similar preset if I didn't tell them.

As for reallyniceimages.com, I gave their Iconic Films a try and already regret that purchase. I should have known better (it's obvious that the recommendation didn't come from a normal buyer but from someone representing the company), but hey, I'm always open to new stuff. However, it's quite disappointing. For once, the promised "essential toolkit" isn't there (only the film presets), so you are stuck with presets that already include grain and sometimes even frames. The presets will also disable stuff like CA control, fiddle with your exposure or noise reduction settings and reset all tonality sliders. Whoa!