This reddish (of the three color channels, red green and blue) color cast of your photo has nothing to do with the camera's resolution. It's a function of the camera's metering for this photo. When a camera takes a picture, it first makes judgements about the image it's about to capture. For example, with values, it finds the darkest value in the scene at which it's pointed and records it as absolute black. It finds the lightest and records it as absolute white. All the other values of the image are averaged out between these two extremes.
A similar thing happens with color, only much worse. This is why photographs are seldom of much use to a portrait artist as color references. This problem with photographs of finished paintings can be remedied by varying your photographing technique, and/or possibly by tweaking your photograph with an image editing application such as photoshop (I use MS image composer, which comes with Front Page).
All digital cameras that I've seen, no matter how "automatic" offer some control of the metering, from "EV" settings to actual manual control of "shutter" speed and "aperture" opening. I've put these words in quotes because they actally refer to the operation of film cameras whereas digitals work differently, although this little tidbit is not important here! Any way, try playing around with these settings.
More importantly, try playing around with the lighting. Obviously, the inherent color/temperature of your lighting (e.g. flourescent vs.incandescent vs. full spectrum...) has an effect on the resulting photograph. Less obvious is the effect that the intensity and angle of your lighting has on the photograph. The way the camera meters the image is largely dependant upon the lighting. for example, in relatively dim lighting, there is a greater chance of color distortion. Whereas a film camera would respond to dim lighting by increasing the size of the aperture opening (the hole which allows light onto the film), a digital camera amplifies the signal, which is similar to distortion on speakers when you turn up a radio too loudly. I could go on with such trivia, but the point is PLAY WITH YOUR LIGHTING. I usually take many photos with different lighting and camera settings until I get a satisfactory photo which represents a painting's colors accurately.
To reduce glare when photographing paintings or any 2D piece, the piece should be "cross lit". This means that you should do ANYTHING BUT have your light source coming from the same direction as that from which you're photographing. This is one of the reasons why flash photography in general is so terrible. Lights should be placed pointing at the piece from the sides, so they're not reflecting back into the camera any more than neccessary.
Regarding resolution of digital cameras: Last I've checked, the lowest resolution available on hand-held digital cameras is 640x480. Despite the fact that a major marketing point is made of a camera's resolution, chances R that even this size is larger than any image U'd want to have on a web site (keeping file-size in mind). However, U're printing much, particularly large prints, resolution becomes a factor relevent to your image quality.
Not that I'm a big fan of orange babies, but I like the somewhat impressionistic use of color in your paintings overall.
This is one of the things that differentiates paintings from photographs!
Hope this endless babble helps.