Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: « 1 [2]   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Using VSCO film presets for lightroom 4, and happy about it.  (Read 16510 times)
john beardsworth
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2880



WWW
« Reply #20 on: August 19, 2012, 11:52:40 AM »
ReplyReply

I could get rich by creating a variation on those online mission statement generators and spewing out hundreds of presets with every permutation. Pricing them by the kilo, too!
Logged

Keith Reeder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 253


WWW
« Reply #21 on: August 19, 2012, 12:07:50 PM »
ReplyReply

Maybe a bit harsh in this case.

Not at all harsh - my comment was obviously (I thought) a generalisation than a comment specifically directed at the OP, and remember that I didn't write the article I linked to, nor did I air it on the LuLa forum.

But - for me - the simple fact is this: I have never, ever seen an image - not a single one - that was improved to any worthwhile extent by the application of a filter, effect or other post-processing "flavour of the month".

I'm afraid that content is everything for me, and if that's not there, all the expensive PP filters in the world won't fix things: and if the content is there, it speaks for itself, and effects are therefore redundant.

So I'm somewhat bewildered by their appeal, I'm afraid.
Logged

Keith Reeder
Blyth, NE England
Keith Reeder
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 253


WWW
« Reply #22 on: August 19, 2012, 12:09:53 PM »
ReplyReply

Comparing a hipster's polaroid camera with tool for use in RAW editors, that even offer canon and nikon's specific profiles seems a bit exaggerated, wouldn't you say?

Not to me. In both instances they seem to me to be a case of people trying to substitute quality and content for "out of the box" stylistic gimmickry.

Remember that you did ask "does anyone share my feelings?" I'm sure many do. I do not.

I guess you haven't actually read the linked article. Its key paragraph in the context of my reference to it is this:

Quote
“The problem is so much bigger than we thought” said Phil Anthropy. “Whoever it was who first told a hipster that extreme cross-processing and vignetting instantly elevates a photo of themselves looking bewilderedly off-camera through their asymmetrical fringe into art has a lot to answer for.”

That sums my bafflement about the current appetite for presets and predefined filters very nicely.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2012, 12:18:02 PM by Keith Reeder » Logged

Keith Reeder
Blyth, NE England
Raul_82
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


WWW
« Reply #23 on: August 19, 2012, 12:24:01 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Not to me. In both instances they seem to me to be a case of people trying to substitute quality and content for "out of the box" stylistic gimmickry

What does content have to do here??? Yes, content is everything, but then, you just don't just show your RAW files without processing them do you? I mean, good for you if you do! vsco film presets are merely another tool to help some of us (god help us) processing our files. just that, i never said your photographs will be better if you use them, bad photos will suck anyway if they are bad, no preset is going to solve that.
Logged
Raul_82
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


WWW
« Reply #24 on: August 19, 2012, 12:48:22 PM »
ReplyReply

1st image RAW file unprocessed (I call this the Keith Reeder way)
2nd image RAW file processed using vsco film and other lightroom tools.

People may not like the content, or may not like how I edited this image, but for me it's better than just the plain negative.

Logged
Rhossydd
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 1987


WWW
« Reply #25 on: August 19, 2012, 01:08:33 PM »
ReplyReply

"out of the box" stylistic gimmickry.
Have you actually looked at the product the OP's a fan of ? It's not really 'stylistic gimmickry' of the worst sort.
These are close to being just being a different default behaviour of conversion. Is that so wrong ? or is it 'right' to have to conform to everything the LR engineers decree as defaults ?

Are you as judgemental over a choice of emulsion with film users; Velvia or Ektachrome ? Some of us still make these choices too.
Logged
Henry G
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1


« Reply #26 on: May 24, 2013, 10:40:42 AM »
ReplyReply

Just an experience to share:
VSCO are good but their presets never worked as a straight-from-the-box-solution for me.

But what I found more useful is presets from http://reallyniceimages.com/ some of their stuff is truly amazing (check their Rollei Digibase). Not blaming vsco, just an alternative ;-)

Logged
Raul_82
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 113


WWW
« Reply #27 on: May 24, 2013, 10:56:22 PM »
ReplyReply

It appears that Johnbeardy was right, one could get rich (or at least try) by creating presets using all the available permutations that lightroom offers. Then you just have to sign in on LuLa an send a link to your product site in your first post ever. Ah! What a fool I have been!    Grin

BTW, i'm not saying that the previous comment is exactly that, but it's utterly suspicious.
Logged
FMueller
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 50


« Reply #28 on: September 09, 2013, 07:55:24 AM »
ReplyReply

Well, I was on the fence about paying so much for presets and I finally decided to risk $119. There is NOTHING in those presets that you can't do yourself, no magic sauce... I could have spent my own time creating these presets but I think it would have taken a great deal of my time, time that would be taken away from other things. What is my time worth in this context? So I decided to part with $119 instead of the indeterminate number of hours in front of LR experimenting with preset settings.

Observations and thoughts:

I recently started working on a website of my work, I immediately recognized that my work needs to have a consistency in processing,at least within projects. I could care less whether a VSCO preset faithfully reproduces a particular film, but the presets in film 01 do a pleasing and pleasant job without over processing. I can do without the grain though on low iso shots.

They really speed up my work, there are presets that tweak the initial processing in subtle yet meaningful ways.

I know how to use all the sliders in LR. And I can still go there.

I have Nik color Efex pro. The round trip through there is time consuming and the presets in "film" seem overdone. VSCO is a much faster adjustment.

For monochrome, Silver Efex Pro is clearly superior. IMHO.

I will surely settle on just a couple of "film" styles and the "tweaks"

I'm not a photographer that pays my mortgage with my photographs, but if production speed were crucial, a LR workflow with presets of some sort would seem an obvious part of the workflow for both speed and consistency.

More than a few very successful photographer both now and in the past let all processing and printing to their assistants.  An assistant is a very expensive "preset". VSCO costs a lot less than that.
Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #29 on: September 09, 2013, 11:14:02 AM »
ReplyReply

In general I see nothing wrong with anyone choosing to try and use existing presets. Yes they might be expensive, I personally do not like the price, but I have bought some very cheap sets and I have also downloaded a bunch of freebie ones. They are good for lots of reasons, first they can be educational. Yes you can then learn by looking at the sliders what was done in the preset and learn how things like tone curves, tinting, and other effects work.
They are also tools for people who do not want to spend hours and hours behind in front of the computers learning the nuances of digital processing. Many of us work at full time jobs and sometimes more than full time. Photography is an outlet for me and if it save some time or gives me a starting point that is great and lets me do more, faster and be happy with the hobby.

Another company that sells presets is Rebelsauce, I have not bought their presets I did sign up for their monthly freebie preset, which has had a couple that were interesting. They also sell a trial set with just a few for a reasonable price. Don't really know if they are any better or worse than any others just another choice.

So I find nothing wrong with someone selling or buying presets, it is up to the individual to get what they want and be happy with what they are doing. I mean they may be expensive but at least there is no monthly charge for renting them... doh! It is a marketplace and if you can find "customers"  and they will pay the price maybe more people should do it, drive the price down....

Alan


Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
John Caldwell
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 473



« Reply #30 on: September 09, 2013, 02:26:45 PM »
ReplyReply

I'll say that in visiting the VSCO company's website, I find that I am too luddite to understand what the software packages are. Honestly can't find out what the products are in a reasonable period of time.

John Caldwell
« Last Edit: September 09, 2013, 02:30:58 PM by John Caldwell » Logged
snoleoprd
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 459



WWW
« Reply #31 on: September 09, 2013, 03:08:49 PM »
ReplyReply

Just not a hipster John....  Grin

Alan
Logged

Alan Smallbone
Orange County, CA
digitaldog
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 9213



WWW
« Reply #32 on: September 09, 2013, 03:15:15 PM »
ReplyReply

Not so sure about that.
Recreating the characteristics of a film stock really should be an objective task without much need for imagination.

Yes it should be! But who has proven that their methods DO produce a colorimetric match to the film stock? IOW, if I crank up Vibrance and say it's "Velvia" who's to say it isn't. If I were to capture a scene on Velvia and digital and all the processing and scanning aside (which as we all know makes a huge difference in the results) and I could at least present a visual match, at least I'd have some leg to stand on. Maybe a hop <g>.

IF the image creator 'feels' he's got a Polaroid or Velvia, great. That's hugely subjective and as you point out, not very objective.
Logged

Andrew Rodney
Author “Color Management for Photographers”
http://digitaldog.net/
Pages: « 1 [2]   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad