I found the legendary detailer named "El Chino"
#31
10-08-2009, 12:13 AM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 9,107
Rep Power: 527 
The pictures I see are fairly grainy and like others pointed out are camera phone like quality. I understand that you may have settings made local to your computer to help you read, but that shouldn't affect the quality of pics at all.
Not sure what kind of point and shoot you have, but if you get yourself a Canon SD870IS with the 3" LCD or their latest IS digicam, you will get better quality pictures without any need to tweak any of the settings.
Not sure what kind of point and shoot you have, but if you get yourself a Canon SD870IS with the 3" LCD or their latest IS digicam, you will get better quality pictures without any need to tweak any of the settings.
#32
10-08-2009, 12:20 AM
. I'm no photo/camera expert myself, but w/ my Canon, the main thing is you can get clear pictures at minimum right out of the box and it really really is easy to use.
#33
10-08-2009, 10:35 AM
I would think almost any camera made in the past 5 years could do a decent shot in the daytime. So something must me set up badly on the camera. The pictures look like cell phone shots - what makes a cell phone pic look bad:
1 - low resolution of sensor (not enough pixels) - setting a camera to store pics in the smallest size could cause something similar from severe JPEG compression
2 - small lens aperture/not enough light - low light causes the sensor to work harder and at a higher ISO contributing to noise. Setting a camera to a high ISO (800 or higher) might cause similar problems especially on smaller cameras
If there is an AUTO mode for the camera, it should do fine in daylight. However, AUTO usually affects picture capture and not always storage - make sure the images are being captured and stored by the camera at the highest possible JPEG quality - some cameras just call it "Large" or "Fine". My guess from looking at these shots is that maximum JPEG compression was used and possibly a very high ISO setting - looks like 1600 or more really, but I'd be surprised if a Coolpix even would let you do that.
However, the metadata in the interior shot, for example, is: NIKON Coolpix S6, F3, 1/30sec, ISO-50, Flash Auto. That all seems fine, so it must be a JPEG compression problem - can't imagine what else.
1 - low resolution of sensor (not enough pixels) - setting a camera to store pics in the smallest size could cause something similar from severe JPEG compression
2 - small lens aperture/not enough light - low light causes the sensor to work harder and at a higher ISO contributing to noise. Setting a camera to a high ISO (800 or higher) might cause similar problems especially on smaller cameras
If there is an AUTO mode for the camera, it should do fine in daylight. However, AUTO usually affects picture capture and not always storage - make sure the images are being captured and stored by the camera at the highest possible JPEG quality - some cameras just call it "Large" or "Fine". My guess from looking at these shots is that maximum JPEG compression was used and possibly a very high ISO setting - looks like 1600 or more really, but I'd be surprised if a Coolpix even would let you do that.
However, the metadata in the interior shot, for example, is: NIKON Coolpix S6, F3, 1/30sec, ISO-50, Flash Auto. That all seems fine, so it must be a JPEG compression problem - can't imagine what else.
Last edited by stevepow; 10-08-2009 at 10:54 AM.
#35
10-08-2009, 12:55 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Natick, MA
Age: 51
Posts: 3,122
Rep Power: 162 
do I understand it right this 'detailing' is essentially just a rubbing clear washed car with a piece of cloth?
#38
10-08-2009, 01:30 PM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 9,107
Rep Power: 527 I would think almost any camera made in the past 5 years could do a decent shot in the daytime. So something must me set up badly on the camera. The pictures look like cell phone shots - what makes a cell phone pic look bad:
1 - low resolution of sensor (not enough pixels) - setting a camera to store pics in the smallest size could cause something similar from severe JPEG compression
2 - small lens aperture/not enough light - low light causes the sensor to work harder and at a higher ISO contributing to noise. Setting a camera to a high ISO (800 or higher) might cause similar problems especially on smaller cameras
If there is an AUTO mode for the camera, it should do fine in daylight. However, AUTO usually affects picture capture and not always storage - make sure the images are being captured and stored by the camera at the highest possible JPEG quality - some cameras just call it "Large" or "Fine". My guess from looking at these shots is that maximum JPEG compression was used and possibly a very high ISO setting - looks like 1600 or more really, but I'd be surprised if a Coolpix even would let you do that.
However, the metadata in the interior shot, for example, is: NIKON Coolpix S6, F3, 1/30sec, ISO-50, Flash Auto. That all seems fine, so it must be a JPEG compression problem - can't imagine what else.
1 - low resolution of sensor (not enough pixels) - setting a camera to store pics in the smallest size could cause something similar from severe JPEG compression
2 - small lens aperture/not enough light - low light causes the sensor to work harder and at a higher ISO contributing to noise. Setting a camera to a high ISO (800 or higher) might cause similar problems especially on smaller cameras
If there is an AUTO mode for the camera, it should do fine in daylight. However, AUTO usually affects picture capture and not always storage - make sure the images are being captured and stored by the camera at the highest possible JPEG quality - some cameras just call it "Large" or "Fine". My guess from looking at these shots is that maximum JPEG compression was used and possibly a very high ISO setting - looks like 1600 or more really, but I'd be surprised if a Coolpix even would let you do that.
However, the metadata in the interior shot, for example, is: NIKON Coolpix S6, F3, 1/30sec, ISO-50, Flash Auto. That all seems fine, so it must be a JPEG compression problem - can't imagine what else.
#39
10-08-2009, 01:34 PM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 9,107
Rep Power: 527 When the car comes back it looks BETTER than the day you bought it .
Chino is officially on my Porsche payroll . On top of being very professional he's a nice guy too which makes things easy .
I'll be glad to PM you his number .
#40
10-08-2009, 01:50 PM
There is a lot more to detailing than just that. There is a myriad of things to do to preserve the paint. You can check out Moe's posts in the detailing section for more detail. On a black car, there's a lot more overhead in keeping it looking great.
#41
10-08-2009, 02:00 PM
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Natick, MA
Age: 51
Posts: 3,122
Rep Power: 162 I would rather donate several $100s to charity than to waste it on a 'chico' polishing my car that will be dirty again in a week or so anyway, but it`s just me. From other perspective, it is all relative, spending half of grand or more on a case of wine may look as a ridiculous thing to somebody else perhaps...
Last edited by utkinpol; 10-08-2009 at 02:03 PM.
#42
10-08-2009, 02:23 PM
No doubt it`s so.
I would rather donate several $100s to charity than to waste it on a 'chico' polishing my car that will be dirty again in a week or so anyway, but it`s just me. From other perspective, it is all relative, spending half of grand or more on a case of wine may look as a ridiculous thing to somebody else perhaps...
I would rather donate several $100s to charity than to waste it on a 'chico' polishing my car that will be dirty again in a week or so anyway, but it`s just me. From other perspective, it is all relative, spending half of grand or more on a case of wine may look as a ridiculous thing to somebody else perhaps...
The detail normally includes a proper wax job and that layer of protection for your paint is a must!
Not sure if you've ever had a black car, but every flaw is magnified compared to other colors.
I'd love to save a buck too on these things and I've tried my hand at detailing my past black cars with an orbital before w/ not great results. When I get the 997 detailed I'll probably go w/ a pro and observe how they do it to learn.
#43
10-08-2009, 02:46 PM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 9,107
Rep Power: 527 No doubt it`s so.
I would rather donate several $100s to charity than to waste it on a 'chico' polishing my car that will be dirty again in a week or so anyway, but it`s just me. From other perspective, it is all relative, spending half of grand or more on a case of wine may look as a ridiculous thing to somebody else perhaps...
I would rather donate several $100s to charity than to waste it on a 'chico' polishing my car that will be dirty again in a week or so anyway, but it`s just me. From other perspective, it is all relative, spending half of grand or more on a case of wine may look as a ridiculous thing to somebody else perhaps...
i like to keep my things clean and well kept . I am sure i could mow my own lawn , clean my own house, wax my own car , cut my own hair , and cook all my meals .. but these personalized services that some might view as luxury I don't see them as a waste . I view them as necessities so I can spend more time doing meaningful things like posting
#44
10-08-2009, 03:08 PM
Registered User
Join Date: May 2008
Location: deep inside my other half
Posts: 2,295
Rep Power: 0 Maybe this one for a few hundred bucks
#45
10-08-2009, 06:03 PM
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: South Florida
Posts: 9,107
Rep Power: 527
I just got back my M3 . Wow. This car was in very different condition than my Turbo . It's got 20K miles and is driven daily . It is parked outside often and in construction areas , He made it look BETTER tahn when I bought it.
I know you guys don't like my pictures but here goes.
I know you guys don't like my pictures but here goes.