# [SOLVED] Cell phone cameras....



## awaisagha (Nov 12, 2011)

I want some sincere advice.

Just when i thought of a friend's cell phone HTC and i looked at pictures on his cell phone, and it was looking awesome on cell phone LCD but when taken out in PC they were just ****, big sized pictures with no pixels, i mean quality is just as much as a good VGA camera.
Why then cell phones market it with camera, when their cameras are no good at all, why then making such costly phones?

I am just asking simply that why cell phones cameras are so great in quality on their own LCD but when you take out the pictures in computer, then you come to know that you have taken **** pictures. I ignore hand shakes, camera blurs, lens problems, i am just talking about the quality of pictures.

If for some reasons of portability, i have to choose for a cell phone, that i cannot take a digital camera everywhere, how should i choose?


----------



## Masterchiefxx17 (Feb 27, 2010)

*Re: Cell phone cameras....*

By any chance are you enlarging the pictures after to move them to the PC?


----------



## awaisagha (Nov 12, 2011)

*Re: Cell phone cameras....*



Masterchiefxx17 said:


> By any chance are you enlarging the pictures after to move them to the PC?


No, but let me explain to you the thing i am asking.
The image taken from a Canon 8mega pixel camera and a Samsung Galaxy S3 (8MP) camera, the results are so much different. Looking at a Canon image, it has lots of quality watching at a picture in PC, and it is very comfortable to work in Photoshop, but taking the same picture from S3, it's pixel quality is very low that you cannot work in Photoshop.
By working in Photoshop, i am not asking for very high precision as a professional, i am just trying to do little tweaks, effects to photo as an amateur. The difference of quality of pictures is precisely what i am talking of.

why this is so?


----------



## zuluclayman (Dec 16, 2005)

*Re: Cell phone cameras....*

The difference is in the size of the sensor - the camera phones have tiny sensors meaning the pixels are smaller, collect less light, are able to collect less data and so have smaller dynamic range, are less able to adequately capture (and so when displayed) subtle gradations of colour and shape.


The reason they look OK on your phone's LCD is that the screen is tiny compared to that of your computer monitor/laptop screen. The pixels are small and the image looks dense and sharp. When taken to your laptop/desktop display they look much worse because the smaller pixels are being scaled up - jagged edges (aliasing) can occur, the colour rendition is not as good highlights are often blown out and shadows noisy.

All this is why the number of megapixels really aren't the best guide to how good a camera is :smile:


----------



## sinclair_tm (Mar 11, 2005)

*Re: Cell phone cameras....*

And those on the phone are designed with copying them to computers in mind. Photos taken with phones are expected to stay on the phone and to be used in Facebook and Instagram and the like.


----------



## Babbzzz (Jul 14, 2011)

*Re: Cell phone cameras....*

Hello awaisagha :wavey:

You might be interested in reading *this* (link to Cnet) as well.


----------



## awaisagha (Nov 12, 2011)

*Re: Cell phone cameras....*

Well thanks a lot to everyone for their kind sharing of knowledge. I also pretty much figured out that thing after reading the given articles.


----------



## yustr (Sep 27, 2004)

awaisagha, 

You hit on one of my pet-peeves: the move to more convenient but less quality.Technological advances should come with substantive improvements not just more features.

Cameras vs cell phones is one area.

I am particularly upset by the move away from hi-fidelity to MP3. There's a whole generation that thinks music sounds great through ear buds. 

Watches are another area. When did telling time cease to be a need versus (now) reading email and texting on your wrist? All at the expense of legibility.


----------

