Originally Posted by
SPHFerrari
having a 3.2 mp camera is no excuse. i think i took lots of great pics with my 3.2 mp camera, ones a lot better than what i have taken so far with my 6.3 mp camera. and exactly, it was a long exposure without a tripod. you dont do that. this is a PHOTOGRAPHY comp. you dont have to be a pro to know that you dont do long exposures at night without a tripod. if we are supposed to ignore the fact that your mechanical photography skills are no good, then what are we supposed to do. that just proves my point. you cant just take a picture of a good car, if its not a good picture it should not win, no excuses.
i agree that is the THEORY, but apparently not what happens, and thats my problem. if that is the case, you get 1 out of 3 of the requirement for a winning pic for last weeks. you had a good car, not a good background, and not good quality.
i dont agree that had your picture been taken with a thousand dollar 8mp camera. if it came out the way it did here, i would say exactly the same thing, only you couldnt blame it on your camera (which i dont feel is fair anyway cuz 3.2mp is plenty to get a decent picture if your good). with the best camera in the world, your picture would still be blurry because you attempted a long exposure without a tripod, and it would still, IMO, not be a winning quality. if you feel that the only way you ucan take a good picture is with a better camera, then theres nothing i can say to you except these competitions are not won on the basis of the camera's quality, but that of the picture, and not even the physical quality of the picture. when its an 800*600 entry size, 5 extra million pixels will not help you. an 800*600 size picture is only 480,000 pixels, no matter what camera you use. then again, with more megapixels the picture quality may look slightly better once made smaller like that, but, again, it is not the physical quality of the picture, but how good a capture it is.