Do the Ldraw parts import, but you can't see them? Mecabricks parts are modeled in a non-default scale and will import 1000 times bigger than the default scale. If my suspicion is correct, you can scale the MB down by 1000 or scale the LDraw parts up by 1000. Then the parts may be at the same scale. If you are planning on using the MB materials, I'd recommend scaling up the LDraw parts, but I've no experience with that so your mileage may vary.

It appears the wheel covers for the 18976 series will fit the 72206 wheels. BrickLink says they are similar molds, and in the workshop they appear to fit both styles of wheel. I bet you can substitute those without much of a difference. If you search 18976 in the part bin, it will pull up 8 different variations.

It appears the wheel covers for the 18976 series will fit the 72206 wheels. BrickLink says they are similar molds, and in the workshop they appear to fit both styles of wheel. I bet you can substitute those without much of a difference. If you search 18976 in the part bin, it will pull up 8 different variations.

  You are right, you can replace them. I did, because I couldn't find any other solution 

But it doesn't work that way, they are completely different. There is a fundamental difference in this 1:24 scale, the proportions of the car are completely different with these wheels. That's why I say that the wheel rims are the most important part, because you can't replace them without disturbing the proportions

Do the Ldraw parts import, but you can't see them? Mecabricks parts are modeled in a non-default scale and will import 1000 times bigger than the default scale. If my suspicion is correct, you can scale the MB down by 1000 or scale the LDraw parts up by 1000. Then the parts may be at the same scale. If you are planning on using the MB materials, I'd recommend scaling up the LDraw parts, but I've no experience with that so your mileage may vary.

   That's a great idea! After reading this, I was sure it would help, but alas, no. Nothing happens when I zoom in on the LDraw, I can't see it. So it's a problem and it's not solved

What if you import the LDraw first and then the MB parts?

Ok, I can see the difference in the two hubcap sets... unfortunately, you'll have to wait until Scrubs can model up the wheel inserts. In the mean time, if you're interested, I have a few workarounds.

First, if you would like to use only Mecabricks parts, you can scale the 18976 wheel cover up by 20%. The simplest way to do this is to select the wheel cover and type S1.2 to scale it up. This tells Blender to [S]cale to [1.2] times the original size.

Additionally, you only need to do this to the width and height. If you change the Transformation Orientation from Global to Local, then you can scale this wheel insert by typing S Shift+X 1.2 this time. This option is at the top middle of the 3D viewport. The difference from the previous paragraph is that [Shift]+[X] locks the X axis. For this part, the Local X axis runs down the wheel's axle. You can do this in Global, but your wheel needs to be aligned to the grid and you may need to pick a different axis to lock. You can also use the mouse to do the scale instead of typing in the numbers, but 1.2 should get you close. You can see what it looks like in the picture below.

Second, if you want to use the LDraw part, you absolutely can do it. I imported a test wheel and it came in super tiny. You can't see it if you can see the rest of the model, but it is there. After importing it, scale it up by 1000%. For this operation, you should not lock any axis. Just type S1000 to scale the LDraw wheel cover. Now it should be the same size as the rest of the model.

Here is the result of my test. Starting at the top left, we have the old wheel and tire combo (18976/18977) with the old wheel cover (1897😎. The second wheel uses the old wheel cover but is the new 72206 wheel tire combo. The third wheel is the same as the second, but I scaled the wheel cover by 120%.
On the bottom row, you have the LDraw 72206 wheel/tire and 72210 wheel cover as they import. As you can see, it is tiny, but it is there (reference the gif above). The middle wheel is the same as the first, but they are both scaled up by 1000%. The third wheel on this row uses the Mecabricks 72206 with the scaled up LDraw 72210 wheel cover. Hopefully some of this helps.

Ye-e-es! That helped! I added the LDraw wheel to the MB model by adjusting its scale. Thank you for your help, you are so kind! I'm glad there are people who are actually interested in helping and not just giving advice. Topic is closed

My problem was that I was adding the wheel.ldr to the MB.zmbx model. And it wasn't working, I was especially frustrated seeing what you had accomplished. But then I tried adding wheel.dae, instead of wheel.ldr, and, oh wonder, it worked. The wheel.dae had to be reduced from 0.96 to 0.45 and applied shaders that I copied from the wheel. And in what format did you add the wheel to the MB model?

Here is the result:
The difference is colossal, it was worth it, don't you think?

P.S. I think you have a good understanding of Blender. Would you be so kind as to tell me why there is no change when adjusting the aperture on the camera? Before, when I rendered models.ldr the aperture changes were immediately visible, everything worked. But once I started rendering MB.zmbx there is no difference between 0.1 and 3.8. The only difference is there is to set 0, it becomes nothing to see. I hope it is clear even without a photo, what I mean. If you feel comfortable, answer here or me in private messages. Thank you!

I'm glad it's working for you now! I am not an LDraw expert by any means... in fact, I downloaded it yesterday to figure this out. I saw LeoCAD has multiple export options compared to LDcad, so I exported the wheel to Collada (.dae) using LeoCAD. When I imported the wheel, it came in at 12mm radius. My MB wheels had a 12m radius.

**As far as aperture goes, you need to use a value about 1000 times smaller than you're used to. ** Here's why.

Depth of Field (DOF) describes how much stuff is in focus in your image. DOF is proportional to distance (from camera to the subject) squared times the f-number. If you double your subject size and also double your distance to keep the same framing, your DOF will quadruple. So you will need 1/2 the f-stop from before in order to have the same equivalent DOF. If you scale by 10, your DOF will increase by 100. So if you want your DOF to only increase by 10, then your f-stop must be 1/10th of the original for an equivalent DOF. Note that I am also keeping the focal length of the lens the same for all of this.

With the default Mecabricks import scale, you are now filming from a much farther distance than before. For the top image below, my camera is 100mm from the center wheels, where everything is scaled to life-size (12mm radius tires). When we switch to the Mecabricks import scale in the bottom picture, the camera is now 100m from the middle of the 12m radius tires... 1000 times the distance will increase DOF dramatically by a factor of 1,000,000. We only want it to increase by 1000. In order to get soft edges on the outer tires in the top picture, I used an aperture value of f30. I made my f-stop 1000 times smaller in the bottom picture. Dividing 30 by 1000 results in an f-stop of 0.03. You'll have to manually type it in to the field because it's so small. It will display 0.0, but when you click in the field you can see that the actual f-stop is 0.03.

I set the aperture value I wanted by dividing it by 1000. Everything works fine, it's amazing how simple the solution is. Basically, if you know right away that the MB has a scale of x1000, none of my questions are relevant anymore...

 P.S. Do you see, as I do, the clear edges of the glass in the photo? You can see it clearly in the previous photo. As if the windshield has few polygons, this is reflected in the vertical edges going from top to bottom all over the glass. It is this point that gives away that this is a rendering. Is it possible to fix this? This didn't happen when rendering in LDraw, not MB.

 Also, maybe you know what else you can do to get this result as if it were a real photo? If you want, you don't have to answer. 

 P.P.S. :D    How do you insert pictures into the dialog? I've tried copy and paste like elsewhere, doesn't work

--w35wvi

Features to Format Your Posts

Here is the code:
![https://i.ibb.co/Tr49tLP/1.png](https://i.ibb.co/Tr49tLP/1.png)

The trick is, you can't have a webpage in the img tags... you need to have an image. So far, everything you've posted is an image. If you want, you can edit your previous posts and add the img tags around your images.

And it will look like this:

Also, for your curved surfaces, you can go to Object Data -> Normals -> un-tick Auto-smooth. Then right click and shade smooth. It should even out those lines for you. You could probably do it for the whole model at once, but I don't have the advanced plugin, so I don't know if it will interfere. But it might be worth an experiment... just save it first before you try. If you hold down the [Alt] key when you make a change in the properties, it will propagate to all selected parts. (Use this to un-tick Auto-smooth.) If you need a picture, let me know... but for now it's bed time. Good night!

Ok, did some work this morning...

These pictures should show the difference between the default imported smoothness and my recommendation from the post above.

Everything in this first picture is completely symmetrical except the Sirius XM sticker. I added an array of downlights to hopefully highlight the reflection differences. On the left of the picture, I left everything default, including with Auto Smooth turned On. On the right side of the picture, I turned off Auto Smooth and then shaded smooth all of the parts. To do this, I selected the parts and then held down the [Alt] key while un-checking Auto Smooth. Again, this does it for all selected parts. Then I right clicked on one of my selected parts and clicked on Shade Smooth.

For the next picture, I used an HDRI image for the lighting. The passenger side (car's right) still has the default smoothing from the last image. This shows similar lines of refraction to your photo. You can really tell something is off on the back of the driver's side window.

This final picture is with all of the parts on both sides modified Auto Smooth Off and Shaded Smooth. If you download both pictures, you can easily A-B to see the differences. Besides the windshield and the bowed parts, another thing that stands out to me is the reflections on the studs. It's minor, but it looks better.

Thanks for the answer, what would I do without you, B1Trash?

I'll answer more later because I need to watch a video tutorial on this topic, it's complicated. I don't have time to look for video tutorials yet

If you use the advance add-on, do not tick the option to import with real bevels. It is buggy at the moment with some of the new elements and can result in a flat shading for these elements.

Blender and units.... that is a real weak point. For some weird reasons, unit scaling only applies to the viewport. Everything else doesn't account for this factor, camera, physics, etc. Blender is designed to work with meters, not millimeters.

Yes, I'm using the "Advanced" add-on. Now I tried importing the model.zmbx and ticked the "Bevels" box. Only 1 part was imported instead of the whole model. Turns out I've always had this option turned off. What is it supposed to do, in normal operation?

Apart from the discomfort in working with light output values, camera range, etc., does it not manifest itself in any other way?

Greetings B1Trash,

It was MUCH easier than I thought it would be, it took me a couple of minutes... The result is great, take a look. The "before" picture above, you can clearly compare. The windscreen, the wings, it's all completely fixed. In a couple of clicks, a miracle! Thank you!

But then another problem came up... (( With the light blue-grey colour. Models in this colour look too unnatural. as if plush. I'm not exactly sure what the problem is, but something is wrong. Either the edges look too round, or the shadows don't render well in this colour. This problem is pronounced specifically with the car models. What can be done about it?

And in general, what else can be done to increase the realism of the render. I want to get closer to the result, when you can't tell the difference between the render and the real photo?

First off... your black car is beautiful, and it looks very photorealistic. As to materials, I hope Scrubs might be able to chime in on this... after all, he knows the materials inside and out. However, he is very busy -- hopefully I can try to help.

Again, I'm not an expert in Blender but I am willing to learn. Along the way I've learned that Scrubs recommends not to scale the model. One of the issues is that the Subsurface Scattering (SSS) gets out of control. Essentially it controls how much light reflects directly off the surface, and how deep it can go through the material. Think about how shining a light directly against your skin gives off a red glow. In this case, I think something is off with the base value of the SSS. There is a value in the beginning of the node tree called scale. If you drop this, it will drop the SSS radius. I tried this with a symmetrical lighting setup. The bricks on the left are not touched. The bricks on the right have all had their Scale reduced to 0.1.

Notice that the bricks on the right look a lot crisper. HOWEVER... because you are using the advanced module, the Scale node will affect far more than just SSS radius... and it is a unique value for each material, so good luck going through 100 materials to change the same thing. But there is some good news. The groups are re-used between materials. If you go into the base material group, you can change make some changes there. One method would be to add a math node between the Group Input node and the the mb_sss_radius group node on the scale noodle. Then you can do your global scale factor there. Another way is to adjust the Subsurface value on the Principled BSDF. This value will fade how much influence SSS has on your parts. If you want to get rid of it completely, change it to 0... or you can mix to an in-between value if you want more SSS influence. Either of these changes will affect all MB parts that share that type of material. (Solid, Transparent, Rubber, Pearlescent, etc). I'm actually excited because this may be the trick to scaling models down with one node change, at least in the free version!

As far as realism goes, the thing that sets CGI apart from real life is the imperfections. When taking a photo, you need to make sure the model is perfectly built and free of fingerprints... the environment is pristine and clean... the camera is in perfect focus... etc. An artist I watched on YouTube said that photographers are constantly trying to get rid of these artifacts, but as a CG artist he uses them as tools to make his renders more photorealistic. You already have the surface imperfections for the parts with the Advanced module. You're using DoF in your shots. But maybe some dust in the environment (possibly in the air), a noise texture to produce variations on your backdrops, lens distortion & aberration can help as well. Again, not an expert... just repeating things I've heard. Good luck!

First off... your black car is beautiful, and it looks very photorealistic...

Thank you, that's good to hear! I too am of that opinion, the shadows and the model look good, want to change the background parameters. I used an angled plane, with a smooth angle, like on photo studios. I think you know what I mean. So I set the roughness and colour parameters by eye. It got better, but not as realistic. Ideally, this plane, on which the car is standing, would have 99% of its parameters close to the real thing. Maybe there is a filter or addons? Any thoughts on this? This is what I am aiming for

....One method would be to add a math node between the Group Input node and the the mb_sss_radius group node on the scale noodle....

I used this method and it worked, better than I had imagined! What do you think?

I'm actually excited because this may be the trick to scaling models down with one node change, at least in the free version!

I'm not quite sure what you mean by that. Do you mean that you seem to have found solutions to fix this?

As far as realism goes, the thing that sets CGI apart from real life is the imperfections. When taking a photo, you need to make sure the model is perfectly built and free of fingerprints... the environment is pristine and clean... the camera is in perfect focus... etc.

I understood it intuitively. Yes, it's a funny paradox

An artist I watched on YouTube said that photographers are constantly trying to get rid of these artifacts, but as a CG artist he uses them as tools to make his renders more photorealistic.

I wonder if it's possible to make a CGI photo mimic the one I was trying to get rid of the artefacts. That is, first add the artefacts to the model and then pretend I was trying to get rid of them. Or what can be done about it?
I use the lowest possible MB advanced parameters (Dents 3%, Finger 20%, Color 25%, Deform 15%, Random Parts 10%) and that seems like a lot, looks good but not very realistic. And the detail shift at all, as I learned today, has to be manually corrected after application. Today's Porsche render above shows a flaw - the front fender has too big a gap between the body and the fender

But maybe some dust in the environment (possibly in the air), a noise texture to produce variations on your backdrops, lens distortion & aberration can help as well.

I started using dust in the air with the Porshce renderer. In the photo above I set the dust parameter higher. Noticeable? Does it look realistic or not? About noise texture and lens distortion & aberration I'll watch the video tutorials and try to do something. I'll share the results here as soon as I've done it.

As to the backgrounds... your Land Rover background has a lot of variation to the black material... especially in value. I think this should be able to be replicated with the correct combination of noise textures. But I'm not sure how. I'm willing to bet one of the many YouTube blender professors has come up with a solution.

I think the Land Rover is a fantastic example of little imperfections that you don't notice until they're not there... The tires are not uniform in texture... the one on the hood has wear marks and there is an impression at the 12-o'clock position on the front left tire. TLG does an excellent job keeping their colors consistent, but there still is variation from part to part, especially when you consider the effects of UV radiation on the plastics. This variation is apparent especially on the front hood in the sand blue parts. I'm not sure if it's a matter of the color mix or slight angle changes, but it's there... especially in the 1x1 parts, which are stupidly difficult to keep aligned when building IRL. I spend a lot of time and effort to try and get everything aligned perfectly, but there always seems to be some twist with these parts... or a 1x2 bow that only attaches on one stud.

I think like you said, the computer generated randomness looks good, but not realistic because it's not replicating how pieces actually get misaligned in real life. Two stacked 2x4 bricks don't misalign... the error is that they don't get squished together enough. Does the MB random take this into account? I'm not sure. But really, how does the fender get so far off in alignment? Maybe you can tweak the parameters for the randomness to be smaller -or- manually rotate parts that commonly get out of alignment. Again, I only use the free version, so I don't know how the advanced module works.

As far as the dust goes, I didn't notice any. But when examining the picture, I did notice a variation in the white floor tiles that I think helps add realism. I think the "fuzziness" is definitely gone now! The fingerprint on the headlight sticks out... It seems too strong. If you're already on the lowest setting, I'd dive into the material nodes and try and find a way to tone it down. This guy has very in-depth discussion on CG legos in 3 parts on his blog:

http://stefanmuller.com/category/tutorials/

Anyhow, I think your stuff looks great. The more you learn, the more you will realize how much more you can put into the renders. It's incredible but you're definitely getting there.

I can of course find the solution on YouTube, the problem is that I don't understand a word of English, which is a problem for me. I'll try to look something up...

I was looking at a photo of the Land Rover on a 27′ 4k monitor and never saw a print on the front left tyre)) Wear marks, yes, I can see that. Ultraviolet is unlikely to reproduce in manual mode, unless I create my own filter or something like that. What I can and will start doing is manually correcting the detail bias. Especially so that there are no problems like with the fenders on the Porsche

The automatic offset I used was 10%. This shifts all the parts randomly. And a part like a flat plate 2x4 is unlikely to shift anywhere. From now on, I'll try to set the offset to 5% only and correct each part manually. I've played with a real model of this Porsche and not only that, and have identified patterns of detail shifting. It is quite possible to recreate them manually. This is especially true for 1x1 parts, you're right

By dust I meant in the Porsche photo above what is in the corner. Below the light source is the highlighted area. This is clearly visible in the photo below, there is a halo below each light source where it shines. Here's how I created the dust - I created a cube without planes, with one outline. I placed the model inside the cube. To the cube I applied a Scattering volume filter (Density 0.025. Antisotropy 0, not sure what it affects) Not sure what you said about this dust, but the video tutorial recommends doing it this way
In this photo you can see that the luminescence detail parameter for the Porsche is set to 0.25, but for the grey construction on the ceiling it remains at 1

" I think the "fuzziness" is definitely gone now! " What did you mean by that? I added background blur to the photo, can't you see?

Good point about the prints! I'll increase everything to 50% of the current value, render and manually reduce the value for each part where it looks garish and unnatural

Thanks for the link, will definitely have a look