But the problem is almost certainly substantially due to lighting. Are you using a flash? Is your rig sitting in artificial light? If it's under flourescent lighting, that can be particularly difficult. I find that NOT using flash (if possible) works much better. If you have to use flash, get farther back, but not so far your flash in ineffective. This may prevent the light balance from being too severe--one part overexposed and other parts underexposed. Remember, the brightest part of your subject (front, top, side, background?) will probably dictate which part looks more natural (if you aren't too close or too far away) because it will be the part the light meter adjust to. You can adjust for this though with many cameras.

Put the rig somewhere where it can be illuminated as much as possible by natural light, especially the front panel that you are concerned about. Of course, outside would be best. Then use a tripod and no flash (although outside pictures in natural light can actually make better use of flash to eliminate shadows). Try this even if you can't get it all just like you want it and let me know if that helped any.

If you don't use a digital camera, and if you really enjoy taking a lot of pictures, seriously consider getting a digital camera because you can really experiment with them. You can try something, look at your result, delete images that don't turn out right, etc. Digital cameras are still kind of expensive, but you can find some decent ones for not too much more than you would pay for a 35 mm. But if you are not prepared to pay for one that at least does 1 million pixels plus, wait until the price drops down to your threshold. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that this is the way to go. Just like CD's vs. tapes vs. records.