VSCO Film 05 Brings Film Stocks from the Golden Age of Analog to Your RAW Photos


Continuing to uphold the “gold standard” of film emulation, Visual Supply Co. has released its fifth series of film emulation presets. Called VSCO Film 05: The Archetype Films Collection, this emulation palette is based on some of the film stocks that defined the consumer analogue photography market of the past two decades.

Deemed “[their] finest digital emulations to date” VSCO truly impresses with this new collection that features over 185 presets emulating Kodak, Agfa and Fuji film stocks like Kodak Ektar, Agfa Vista and Fuji Neopan.

To make things even more tempting, the collection offers both “night” and “tungsten” versions of these films for the very first time, allowing for an even more accurate profile. And, as is to be expected, VSCO also offers custom camera profiles for Canon, Nikon, Sony, Fuji, Olympus and Leica so that the emulations are as accurate and authentic as possible.


Available for Lightroom 4 & 5 and Adobe Camera Raw for Photoshop CS6 & CC as a digital download, you can head on over to their shop now to pick yourself up a copy. Normally the software would retail for $120, but if you buy it in the next two weeks you get it for 25% off, and if you own another version of VSCO Film or VSCO Keys (or if you buy one now) you can get a full 50% off.

For more examples of the software in action, or if you’d like to look through a full list of the presets, head on over to VSCO’s blog post on the release or check out the official press release.

Image credits: Agfa Vista 800 Contrast + / Image by Jessica Silversaga courtesy of Visual Supply Co.

  • Tyson Williams

    And nothing for Apple’s Aperture… oh well!

  • Stewart

    I’m sick of VSCO releasing these presets. It’s costing me too much money! ;-) Love ‘em ….

  • Will Mederski

    I really don’t understand these.

    Why would a professional ever use some out-of-the-box filter that makes your photos look like low quality, antiquated film.

    (and i’m not speaking against film, but the fact that these emulation packs are full of 1600+ exaggerated grain / texture / etc presets…)

  • Graham Marley

    I hear you. I was dead set against presets until I gave one VSCO pack a whirl, out of boredom and as-installed, to use them straight up is a pretty terrible idea. One example, whoever at the VSCO labs got ahold of the grain effect in LR is a dangerous pervert. I mean it’s insane.

    That said, however, it does a nice job of doing some of the heavy lifting as far as color mixing/profiling goes under different lighting conditions. All I really care about for getting something done well quickly is good skin tone, and that is one area where some film stocks set a fantastic standard, and in a lot of cases, VSCO nails it. So, I take presets that I like, tweak them by varying degrees and then build presets out of them according to taste.

    And sure, it’s a gimmick. Totally. But, sometimes that’s what clients want. Jose Villa made over-exposed 400H a wedding industry craze, and as much as I love good clean color and contrast, I also gotta eat and put gas in my car. I mean, if I get a chance to take time with a photo at a wedding, and get some fabulous color, I’m going to take the time to move everything exactly how I want. But with a couple hundred reception photos? I’ll use some effects if it works and gets the job done faster.

  • Fernando Callo

    You can edit those settings. You don’t have to click on the preset and then export, you can manipulate as much as you want. And there’s some people who still love the GRAIN that films gives but they just don’t wanna shoot film.

  • Will Mederski

    agreed. good points.

    i have played around with the VSCO presets.
    and i’ll admit i’ve learned (taking) a few things from their calibration settings, but i almost always find their settings on the extreme side.

    my workflow typically is a little more specific to the shoot.
    i’ll take a couple of the key shots, process them, then apply those settings to the other similar shots in the set.
    rarely does a preset from one shoot usefully apply to another shoot.

    i shot film for 15 years. i’m nostalgic for it.
    but i don’t shoot digital just to make it look like generic stock film.

  • Graham Marley

    Dude, I had a client run an ENTIRE WEDDING SHOOT through instagram because he said he wanted it to look “vintage.” VINTAGE WHAT? VINTAGE IS AN ADJECTIVE!

    I wanted to quit forever.

  • Don Tusk

    I am a pro wedding photog and i use vsco all the time. Clients love the” film look”. PS Vsco saves me a lot of time with processing photos

  • imajez

    I’m curious if VSCO is paying the companies whose trade names they are using for their presets.

  • Katsudon

    What about those VSCO vs the X Equals Xel Pack? I’ve purchased the Xel, it integrates as develop presets in LR, it contains lot more films types, they look fabulous and I paid $50… The VSCO results look pretty nice but I was surprised to see there is so few film types for the bucks it costs.
    A comparison anyone?

  • fonsii

    agreed. and since the grain is so horrible, i modified my preset not to have grain at all. simple. the wedding clients love it. i save time. everyone’s happy.

    meanwhile on personal projects and commercial shoots? yeah, not gonna touch vsco.

  • Craig Marshall

    Sometimes we progress forward with tunnel vision, using the same effect again and again. I downloaded free presets from various sites that I felt looked like crap. What I learnt from this is that a template that I don’t like can be adjusted to taste. Once adjusted I have created something unique with settings I would have never thought to make adjustments to. I was still able to apply my own input but without the narrow-mindedness.

    We repeatedly call ourselves artists but without the discipline of artists. I went to art school and was forced to things I don’t like, and was introduced to many things I would have never thought of. When designing I was forced to re-design over and over even though I liked and may have even gone with my original idea. The point of this was to do something that appeals to a potential client. I am not narrow-minded due to my experiences.

    The good thing about VSCO is they have created something that is the modern fashion and because of this have set new standards. I will use whatever puts me on top and so I will continue to use something new. When VSCO isn’t hot anymore I will more on, but for now I will buy VSCO presets so that I learn not to progress forward with a narrow mind. I will still adjust effects though to make the images my own.

  • yamaha83

    huh… never thought about that but makes me wonder too…

  • Thomas Lawn

    I just wish lightroom had the ability to tone down the effects of the presets all at once, like just changing the opacity on the VSCO layer. You can do that in the iphone app, why can’t I do it on my fancy computer?!

  • Dean Gray

    5% of their user base, not surprising.

  • Graham Marley

    You could make a virtual copy of the photo, run the preset on one, select both and edit as layers in photoshop. I know it’s not as tidy as just staying in LR, but it would do exactly what you’re talking about, and I believe you don’t need to create a tiff file that way.

  • David Vaughn

    Agree. I was skeptical until I bought one. 60% of the presets are kind of…useless and heavy-handed, but there are a few that I like to use as a way to give photos some sort of indescribable “organic” texture that I just can figure out in my own editing sensibilities.

    On the other hand, I know several photographers though who use VSCO religiously and just leave it at that. That is a bit…annoying. I mean, Nutella is really good, but it’s not so good that I put it on everything. That’s kind of how I see VSCO.

    I think VSCO should complement my style but not become my style.

  • Graham Marley

    I think you could say the same thing every time Apple makes a new product announcement. What’s it been, like 3 or 4 years since the last major version?

  • Stefano Druetta

    if they made the others available, that percentage could increase, don’t you think? of course no one is buying aperture versions IF THERE’S ONLY TWO.

  • Dean Gray

    It’s way more work than it’s worth in sales for them. They tested that with the first couple and determined that it isn’t worth their time.

    Nothing against aperture, it’s just more difficult for them to do what they want with it.

  • Fernando Callo

    Lightroom and Camera Raw are available in MAC and Windows so what’s the problem?

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    Using a trademark in connection to accurately describe an aspect of your product falls well within fair use. As it should.

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    In other words, you were deliberately pedantic about him dropping the noun from a sentence for the purpose of being an obtuse tool… like a true professional.

    Otherwise, you must really struggle with everyday life. On the very slim chance your story isn’t entirely fabricated for +internet, that is.

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    I can’t believe that VSCO is so big now that they can afford to lose the business of both Aperture users.

  • Graham Marley

    Definitely. You nailed it. Thanks for showing up dude. You changed everything.

    Or it’s just frustrating dealing, in terms of livelihood, with a certain perception of a trend that the people who participate in it don’t understand, but demand it to an unreasonable degree.

    It must suck to live near you.

  • Broseph of Arimathea

    ‘I want my photos to conform to the vintage aesthetic trend which is rampantly popular at the moment’ is unreasonable?

    Or is it the fact that he wanted them to look ‘vintage’, instead of ‘vintage style’ that made you want to quit forever because its sooooo frustrating?

    Let’s be honest, you were just throwing out the standard cheap ‘lol, instagram… plebs!’ that is popular around these parts.

  • Graham Marley

    Again, flawless narrative! I can’t believe I have to spell this out for you.

    The trend of “vintage fill-in-the-blank” presents unique challenges from a client relations standpoint. Sometimes clients say they want it, and then don’t like it when they get it, suddenly preferring clean, crisp color, and then sometimes someone takes hours of labor that’s earnestly trying to aspire towards established theory of quality and run it through a mindless automated process and then present the results as examples of YOUR work to the rest of the world. Why wouldn’t you think that’s frustrating? Do you have clients that ruin your work and misrepresent you?

    It comes with the job, I get that and there’s nothing about that for you to illuminate to me. But people can vent professional frustration dude, it’s real and it’s helpful to blow off steam with like minded people. You and I aren’t likeminded though, because it kind of seems like you might be a miserable ass.

  • imajez

    Really, so how long do you think Cocoa Cola and Pepsi flavoured drinks would last on a supermarket shelf if they used the ‘fair use’ argument then?

  • Jack McKechnie

    The thing that troubles me is how they can market it as to how a certain camera can preform. A film camera moves the film and operates the shutter…the lenses can achieve certain differences but each lens ..even with the same manufacturer..was different also. There is no sensor here..just shutter speed and aperture and the uniqueness of the film.The only real camera you can duplicate would be a light leaking, plastic lens toy camera..for obvious reasons. Don’t get me wrong…I love film simulation…it turns awful looking square pixels into a beautiful round grain look and enhances sharpness,simulates the actual color and is just way cool. I wouldn’t fool with this…I use Alien Skin Exposure and I don’t think you can do better than that!

  • Zack

    I feel like if there was money to be made in a lawsuit, then Kodak would already be suing. Since they kinda need the money.

  • imajez

    Maybe they can’t afford to!

  • Brett

    Hipsters will gobble anything up.