Incredible Scenic Pictures of the BMW M6

Subscribe
Mar 19, 2006 | 11:00 PM
  #1  
My best find yet? That place is stunning!

http://www.m5board.com/articles/m6/w...6boardcom.html











Reply 0
Mar 19, 2006 | 11:06 PM
  #2  
Man, that M3 looks very dated compared to the M6.......
Reply 0
Mar 19, 2006 | 11:09 PM
  #3  
photographically speaking...they all suck.
Reply 0
Mar 19, 2006 | 11:38 PM
  #4  
Quote: photographically speaking...they all suck.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 01:20 AM
  #5  
I love the 6-series, but am I the only one that hates those M6 wheels? They look like they should be spinning to start an Evinrude motor on a 14-foot boat instead of on a $100k car. BMW has done a nice job with certain wheels (ex: competition package on the M3) but I hate them.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 03:11 AM
  #6  
Yeah awesome area. That BMW M6 looks just like my friends mom's 2005 BMW 645. Pretty sweet car.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 03:18 AM
  #7  
i dunno...the M6 doesn't impress me whatsoever

It doesn't look much diff. from the standard 6ser., and the wheels aren't my favorite. The aggressive look just ain't there...something is missing....

Edit: oh and, the photos aren't all that great
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 03:29 AM
  #8  
shit im too late to edit; I mean to say that the EXTERIOR of the M6 doesn't impress me whatsoever over a standard 6ser.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 04:51 AM
  #9  
Pure sex.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 06:42 AM
  #10  
i looooooooooove europe!!! and I loooooooooooove BMW M5 MessageBoard!!!! They have awesome pics and stories.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 07:28 AM
  #11  
with Minch. This is the first time I have ever thought that the E46 M3 looks old/dated.

Cool pics though...
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 07:49 AM
  #12  
I love the wheels on the M6. As for the photography - I think the photographer was limited by the equipment, in which case they did a decent job.

Edit, as an aside, look how much sexier this Maserati is than the M6! Eat your heart out, Bangle.

http://www.m5board.com/articles/m6/DSC04380.jpg
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 08:48 AM
  #13  
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 09:10 AM
  #14  
Quote: As for the photography - I think the photographer was limited by the equipment, in which case they did a decent job.


In which case, you don't know what you're talking about.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 09:41 AM
  #15  
Quote:

In which case, you don't know what you're talking about.

And just what the hell do you know about photography!?
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 11:13 AM
  #16  
The third picture looks okay but the rest look
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 11:35 AM
  #17  
Quote:

In which case, you don't know what you're talking about.
Well I'm not sure what camera/lens he was using.

I'd like to think I know one or two things about photography... I've definitely seen worse pictures than these from amateurs.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 09:21 PM
  #18  
Content of the pictures look amazing to me , pictures are nice and clear too, so I'm good.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 09:48 PM
  #19  
Quote: Well I'm not sure what camera/lens he was using.

I'd like to think I know one or two things about photography... I've definitely seen worse pictures than these from amateurs.

Well, you first sentence combined with the rest of your statement already show you don't know much.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 09:57 PM
  #20  
thats hot yo
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 10:19 PM
  #21  
Quote: Well, you first sentence combined with the rest of your statement already show you don't know much.
What the fuck is your problem?

I just glanced at the pictures posted here. I didn't originally read the article until afterwards when I editted to add the thing about the Maserati. I still don't know what body/lens he was using or if he was just using a point and shoot - I didn't see it in the article. Either way like I said, I've seen a lot worse from amateurs and it's a car review, not a photoshoot.

As for not knowing much, I wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement. If you're going to troll car boards and pontificate about photo quality that's one thing, but calling people out on the internet probably isn't the best idea since you don't know a thing about them.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 10:33 PM
  #22  
aight...after going to the website, I retract my statement above. Secstac, the pictures you chose to post don't really show off the beauty of this car that well. There are MUCH better pictures on that site.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 10:33 PM
  #23  
Quote: What the fuck is your problem?

I just glanced at the pictures posted here. I didn't originally read the article until afterwards when I editted to add the thing about the Maserati. I still don't know what body/lens he was using or if he was just using a point and shoot - I didn't see it in the article. Either way like I said, I've seen a lot worse from amateurs and it's a car review, not a photoshoot.

As for not knowing much, I wouldn't be so quick to pass judgement. If you're going to troll car boards and pontificate about photo quality that's one thing, but calling people out on the internet probably isn't the best idea since you don't know a thing about them.
I'm not talking about any articles. I never read anything. I am talking about your comments saying the pictures were good. And they are not.

As for what camera/lens were used to take the photos. That is completely irrelevant unless, of course, we are talking about a $2 disposable.

It is bad photography. Especially, from a composition POV.

Quick to pass judgement? You bet and I stand by my statement. About not knowing people on the internet...it works both ways
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 10:44 PM
  #24  
I didn't say they were good, I said they were decent based on my assumption that he was using a relatively cheap point and shoot - and I stand by that. Regardless of the fact that the contrast is blown out, he didn't know what ISO to shoot at, etc... I disagree with you and think he did a half decent job at composing the pictures (most of them), which is a lot more than I can say about 99% of the photos you see online. That's all I was originally saying.

If this guy is a pro running around with a D1 and a 70-200 or something then ya, he blows - but I doubt that's the case. And no, I don't think these belong in a magazine, but they are certainly not terrible. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and you can just assume I'm some yutz who doesn't know a thing about photography.
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 10:49 PM
  #25  
Quote: I didn't say they were good, I said they were decent based on my assumption that he was using a relatively cheap point and shoot - and I stand by that. Regardless of the fact that the contrast is blown out, he didn't know what ISO to shoot at, etc... I disagree with you and think he did a half decent job at composing the pictures (most of them), which is a lot more than I can say about 99% of the photos you see online. That's all I was originally saying.

If this guy is a pro running around with a D1 and a 70-200 or something then ya, he blows - but I doubt that's the case. And no, I don't think these belong in a magazine, but they are certainly not terrible. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree and you can just assume I'm some yutz who doesn't know a thing about photography.
I'll just assume you are a yutz who can toss out jargon that really has nothing to do with the context of the criticism.

The composition are terrible, and I could take better looking pictures with my SD400...try and talk about limited by equipment...
Reply 0
Mar 20, 2006 | 11:25 PM
  #26  
Cool pictures. Cool enough that it doesn't get me in trouble with JackieO, But not cool enough that it gets me in trouble with sarlacc.
Reply 0
Mar 21, 2006 | 06:02 AM
  #27  
Quote: Man, that M3 looks very dated compared to the M6.......
I'll admit the curvy stuff makes the M6 look newer, but the eyelid turn signals makes it look like its eyes are half open, and plus that goofy grin ... it reminds me of my stoner roomies
Reply 0
Mar 21, 2006 | 04:23 PM
  #28  
Quote:

In which case, you don't know what you're talking about.
Who gives a shit - JackieO thought the pics looked great. So did I. U (Sarlacc) didn't. End of story.
Reply 0
Mar 21, 2006 | 04:33 PM
  #29  
I think half those pictures look like they were taken with a disposable camera.

And I still think the trunk line on the current generation bimmers (this M6 included) looks like shit.
Reply 0
Mar 21, 2006 | 04:51 PM
  #30  
Quote: Who gives a shit - JackieO thought the pics looked great. So did I. U (Sarlacc) didn't. End of story.
That's because you're even more a knobgoblin then JackieO.
Reply 0
Subscribe