Awsome 2MP Pics LOOK (56K Come In!!!!)
Ok the title is a bit of a strech, Oh well
Hey guys whats up
I cleaned out my engine bay and decided to take a few pics,
This is only a 2.0 MP digi cam, pretty good for a 2MP
and about 2 years old
this is an 87 Integra ls,
Here they are

It is the middle of the day, I dont know why these came out dark,
But it looks just awsome


I even bought a 3.2 MP digi cam and the pics dont look as good as the ones I take with the 2mp
Thanks, Later
Hey guys whats up
I cleaned out my engine bay and decided to take a few pics,
This is only a 2.0 MP digi cam, pretty good for a 2MP
and about 2 years old
this is an 87 Integra ls,
Here they are

It is the middle of the day, I dont know why these came out dark,
But it looks just awsome


I even bought a 3.2 MP digi cam and the pics dont look as good as the ones I take with the 2mp
Thanks, Later
Yes because the thread wasnt about cleaning my engine bay, its about th pics I took after I cleaned it
I'm about to make the thread about before/after Power Washing my engin bay did
I'm about to make the thread about before/after Power Washing my engin bay did
Trending Topics
yes yes I know,
the pics I took of the valve cover are the ones that look good,
One min and I'll get pics of the Before and after of the Power washign
the pics I took of the valve cover are the ones that look good,
One min and I'll get pics of the Before and after of the Power washign
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by DxHatchback »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">mp only comes into play when it comes time to print </TD></TR></TABLE>
Sry I must disagree, as I have other digi cams and they dont look as good
its the 2Mp, and there 3.2+
Sry I must disagree, as I have other digi cams and they dont look as good
its the 2Mp, and there 3.2+
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 87Integra »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
Sry I must disagree, as I have other digi cams and they dont look as good
its the 2Mp, and there 3.2+</TD></TR></TABLE>
He was saying that higher MP is better for printing pictures.
Sry I must disagree, as I have other digi cams and they dont look as good
its the 2Mp, and there 3.2+</TD></TR></TABLE>
He was saying that higher MP is better for printing pictures.
yes I know that,
But Read again and he says
"mp <U>only</U> comes into play when it comes time to print"
Ok I was too lazy to upload more than like three pics
Before


After
Not too bad for like 20 min work


But Read again and he says
"mp <U>only</U> comes into play when it comes time to print"
Ok I was too lazy to upload more than like three pics
Before


After
Not too bad for like 20 min work


i guess what he's trying to say is megapixels does not have anything to do with image quality. its the size of the sensor, lens, etc. that decides the quality.
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by markwitdada9 »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">
</TD></TR></TABLE>
</TD></TR></TABLE>
<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by 87Integra »</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">yes I know that,
But Read again and he says
"mp <U>only</U> comes into play when it comes time to print"
</TD></TR></TABLE>
DXHatchback is correct. The MP's have absolutely nothing to do with the image quality of web pics.
But Read again and he says
"mp <U>only</U> comes into play when it comes time to print"
</TD></TR></TABLE>
DXHatchback is correct. The MP's have absolutely nothing to do with the image quality of web pics.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post








