Samsung Note II – Photo Processing Comparison


The previous post drew a few compliments for the quality of the photos.

Well, gosh . . . it’s obviously my immense talent, vision, dedication, and overall niceness as a human being that gets them there results.

Although . . . the equipment helps. Yup, I’m about to sing the praises of the Samsung Note II camera.

By the way, the photo above is one of the grass photos from the previous post processed through Snapseed, and then Pixlr Express (one of their Creative Effects options).

But, I’m not here to show you grass . . . I’m here to show you cars. That’s right; four-wheeled monsters of the road, guzzlers of limited resources, and the bane of modern society.

What I plan to do is show you three versions of each photo:

1) the photo as shot by the Samsung Note II camera
2) the photo as processed by Snapseed and then Pixlr Express (in-phone apps)
3) the photo as processed in Lightroom, onOne Suite, and Lightroom finish

Here we go.

As shot

As shot

Processed in phone

Processed in phone


Processed with Lightroom and onOne Suite

Now, if you click on any of the photos, they will open in a new window or tab. They will also be larger (maximum dimension of longest side will be capped at 1280 pixels).

Also, it’s a pain typing the caption on each one, so the sequence will always be the same; original, Snapseed Pixlr Express mods in phone, Lightroom onOne on PC. I assume most of my readers are smart.


I usually crop photos, and the reason is that I shoot larger because a) you can’t see the screen clearly in full sunlight, and b) often I adjust the level of the photos, and that gives me room to frame something like I want to.  Not always (the first shot was not cropped), but usually.

20141004_090935_2_20141014083634023_DIGI 20141004_090935-2_DIGI

Oh, yeah . . . because they are edited on two different machines, the cropping will not likely match.

Note, also, the in-phone processing – I opted for a more dramatic look, so it’s not a perfect color comparison, but it does give you an idea of the amount of work I sometimes do.

Well, actually, the ‘drama’ filter is something I seldom use, but it looked good for these cars.

20141004_091002_DIGI 20141004_091002_1_20141014082717175_DIGI 20141004_091002-2_DIGI

Yes, yes, I know . . . I be a master of composition, of presenting the subject, etc. etc.

. . . please, hold your adulations until the end.

20141004_091019_DIGI 20141004_091019_1_20141014082203920_DIGI 20141004_091019-2_DIGI

One of the reason I opted for the ‘drama’ postprocessing is that the originals were fairly bright.

The post-processing in Lightroom ends up with a brighter shot . . . I used my favorite processing sequence, and it might not have been the best choice for all these shots . . . but it was expedient.

Now, the above shots were taken at the YMCA’s parking lot. That’s right; I work out. I’m on my way to becoming just another big bundle of muscles, but with a brain.

20141014_124028_DIGI 20141014_124028_1_20141014170523990_DIGI 20141014_124031_DIGI

Some people I know pride themselves into not cropping . . . well, I ain’t them.

Also, very difficult to get the shot you want with a fixed wide-angle lens such as found on most phone cameras.

20141014_124047_DIGI 20141014_124047_1_20141014170939668_DIGI 20141014_124047_DIGI

Keep in mind those are three versions of the same photo, and not three different photos.

20141014_124055_DIGI 20141014_124055_1_20141014171703185_DIGI 20141014_124055_DIGI

Once again reflections on the window keeps us from a clear shot at the interior.

20141014_124115_DIGI 20141014_124115_1_20141014172001365_DIGI 20141014_124115_DIGI

You know, it’s difficult for me to pick one version over another. I can see plusses and minuses in each.

OK . . . on to the next car, this one in the parking lot of the local post Office.

20141002_142519_HDR_DIGI 20141002_142519_HDR_1_20141014170133326_DIGI 20141002_142519_HDR-2_DIGI

Now, this was a more overcast day, and the cropping is less extensive since I could see what I was shooting at.

20141002_142527_HDR_DIGI 20141002_142527_HDR_1_20141014165841573_DIGI 20141002_142527_HDR-2_DIGI

Also, you know, the window was rolled down . . .

20141002_142537_HDR_DIGI 20141002_142537_HDR_1_20141014165511199_DIGI 20141002_142537_HDR-2_DIGI

I found the wipers interesting and probably ineffectual.

20141002_142548_HDR_DIGI 20141002_142548_HDR-2

Now, you notice there are only two versions of this photo; the one processed from the phone is missing.

That’s because I did not process this one on the phone. I meant to, but I didn’t.

Instead, I will give you the full-resolution original (all the previous originals are resized to 1280 pixels; this next one is the same size as shot. Click on it, and then zoom in to the various parts to see the resolution and quality of the photo straight from the phone.


This next one is presented as shot . . . no cropping.

20141002_142556_HDR_DIGI 20141002_142556_HDR_1_20141014091211660_DIGI 20141002_142556_HDR-2_DIGI

OK, so maybe you are now one of them who thinks this phone camera is pretty good.

It is, but . . . 

20141014_124347_DIGI 20141014_124347_2_20141014172321377_DIGI untitled-124347_DIGI

The weather has been cold, and the moisture of a few days ago dumped a bunch of snow on Pikes Peak . . . 

The mountain is not that far, and from where this was shot (the parking lot at Costco) it seemed as if you could just reach out and touch it . . . 

. . . not that you can tell from this photo. 

Therein the limitation of a phone camera stand naked and exposed.

“Mine’s got zoom!”

Oh, you foolish dreamer . . . yours has digital zoom. Basically an in-camera crop. You might as well do what I did; take the full picture, and crop close in processing . . . either way, you’ll get this:


If you click on it, you’ll see it’s not very good . . . digital zoom does not gather any more data than the original, so when you crop – unlike full SLR photos with true zoom – you’re basically enlarging, and the more you ‘zoom’ (enlarge), the worse the photo will look.

Mind you, shown that small it’s almost passable, and on a phone screen it will probably still look good.

But, this is what you can get with an SLR . . . click on it, and then zoom into the various parts – it’s 9,031 x 2,260 pixels (125 inches by 39 inches). You can also use the sliders to navigate.


While they may eventually get there, phones have a long way to go.

That’s it. This post has ended . . . except for the stuff below.


Note: if you are not reading this blog post at, know that it has been copied without permission, and likely is being used by someone with nefarious intention, like attracting you to a malware-infested website.  Could be they also torture small mammals.


Please, if you are considering bestowing me recognition beyond commenting below, refrain from doing so.  I will decline blogger-to-blogger awards.   I appreciate the intent behind it, but I prefer a comment thanking me for turning you away from a life of crime, religion, or making you a better person in some other way.  That would mean something to me.

If you wish to know more, please read below.

About awards: Blogger Awards
About “likes”:   Of “Likes”, Subscriptions, and Stuff

Note: to those who may click on “like”, or rate the post; if you do not hear from me, know that I am sincerely appreciative, and I thank you for noticing what I do.

. . .  my FP ward  . . . chieken shit.

About disperser

Odd guy with odd views living an odd life during odd times.
This entry was posted in Cars, Machines, Photography, Photography Stuff and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Samsung Note II – Photo Processing Comparison

  1. oneowner says:

    Sure, phone cameras have a long way to go to match a csmers like the D7000, but these show that a camera like the Samsung has can produce very good quality photos. . And as phone camera quality gets better, more folks will abandon their standard cameras. And that day isn’t too far off, either. I grew up with an SLR so it’s going to take something really special for me to get rid of it but that quality in the end product that I like may not be what other folks are looking for. Or do they want DSLR picture quality in a tiny phone?


    • disperser says:

      The 40MP phone camera was touting amazing quality, but I’ve not heard much about it since it came out.

      Ultimately, I think the physical limitations of glass is what’s going to keep people interested in DSLR (or mirrorless cameras with zoom lenses). I can’t see how they would add a decent optical zoom on a phone, but then again, phones are mainly for social media, and even what I’m doing with mine is probably more than most people do (snap-n-share is what I mostly see).

      I like the option to use the phone for some things (I’ll be the first to agree lugging five pounds of camera and lens around is not something I especially enjoy), but that last photo . . . the Peak looked amazing yesterday afternoon, and no amount of crop is going to show what I could see with my eyes.

      Unfortunately, I had left my Nikon at home. That’s been happening more lately. I should do something about that.


  2. I love that old Ford but I don’t think the steering wheel is an original is it? Pity about the seat belts, I’m not sure but there was a law exempting vintage cars, as the Ford must surely is, from having to install seatbelts and turning light indicators in Australia, This was so that they retained their originality, if modifications such as an up to date steering wheel was substituted for the original then it was no longer covered by the law as a vintage vehicle and had to meet all modern safety standards regarding seatbelts lights etc.perhaps the same type of law is in place in the US of A.

    The Merc’s a beauty too, I’d love to get behind the wheel of that and go for a burn, octogenarian that I am :)


    • disperser says:

      Looking at the original photo, I would say the steering wheel is original. At least based on the wear and tear.

      It also has V8 relief at the center of it that matches the one on the hood.

      I don’t think historical/vintage cars are required to upgrade, at least not for the seat belts, so I’m pretty sure the owner wanted them in there (making him or her very smart individuals).

      As far as I can tell, it’s a 1936 Ford Tudor Deluxe Touring Sedan:


  3. As a person who is not a photographer by any s-t-r-e-t-c-h of the imagination or the definition, I really enjoy your spectacular photos! And I am awed by your creativity in fiddling with them. And I love hearing about where you take them. (Sorry for using such technical language. ;-) )
    I really love old cars…their exteriors and their interiors…so I really enjoyed the ones you featured in this post! :-)
    HUGS!!! :-)


  4. AnnMarie says:

    The above examples indicate that you do “seriously play at it” otherwise they would not be as good as they are. Don’t have to look elsewhere for great stuff, your blog has plenty of it.

    I enjoyed the difference in the processing of the cars, but the Pikes Peak panorama, viewed in zoom with the sliders, is SIMPLY AWESOME!


Voice your opinion

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.