Just take a look at [this picture](https://www.looksmartmodels.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/lamborghini-huracan-performante-spyder_03.jpg), you can tell immediately that its a model car even though there is nothing in the picture to compare its size to. My guess is that the paint isn’t authentic to our eyes, but are there other reasons as well?
In: 980
Part of it is the level of detail, there are just to many tiny details on a full-sized object that get lost when making a miniature. Things like the wheels/rims would have too many little facets that can’t be replicated at a smaller scale
One major reason is the focus of the image. The diver seat is in focus but the back of the car and even the passenger seat are out of focus. You often get that type of focus when you take pictures of the small object but you will not normally get it with full-scale objects.
There is another simple thing that points to a model car, the angle the photo is taken from. Consider where the photographer needs to be. A smile way to make models look more realistic is to keep the camera low
There are special tilt-shift lenses that you can get the same effect on large scale objects look at [this image that is not of a miniarure but a real habour](https://s.studiobinder.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/What-is-a-Tilt-Shift-Lens-Effect-Featured-StudioBinder.jpg) or even (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=02HTqLJENvI) and they look like models but they are not You can read more about it at [https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/what-is-a-tilt-shift-lens/](https://www.studiobinder.com/blog/what-is-a-tilt-shift-lens/)
The length of the area that is in focus is called the depth of field. For the same lens, the depth of field is shallower the closer the object is to the camera. To get a narrow depth of field with the object at a distance you need a lens with a lot of magnification. So to have sitting similar to what is on the mode you need a telephoto lens so the photographer needs to be quite a distance away quite a bit over the ground to take that image. But a telephoto lens also flattens out the object. Look at [A car with different zoom level cropped to the same size](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-t4pW2l6axX4/Uwe18ZEwKHI/AAAAAAAACDM/PMqlkQ7QOfQ/s1600/zoom-vs-crop-PIN.jpg) or even move obviously [a human face captured the same way](https://i.imgur.com/XBIOEvZ.gifv)
So the image of the model car looks like a car takes close but with something like an 18 m and you can see it being down by someone that knows what they do. I think 00mm lens. So the image does not look like something you see from a normal lens. You likely have not consciously noticed that but you can see that the image does not look like images of large-scale objects usually look.
The depth of field also depends on the size of the aperture in the camera, the large the aperture the shallower depth of field. A larger aperture also lets more light into the camera. So if you take an image of a model in the lower light condition the apertures will be learned and the depth of field shallower. You need lots of light and long exposure time so a camera on a tripod to make it look more like a full-scale car. So if you take an image of a model out in bright sunlight is will the depth of field will be larger in indoor condition with too little light.
You can use [http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html](http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html) and change distance and the aperture size and see the depth of field. The F-stop number is the aperture size, a lower number is a large aperture because it is a fraction so f/2 is larger than f/8. You can also change the magnification, that is the “Focal length (mm)” where a higher value is more magnification.
The result is if you know what you do you can take an image of a model that looks realistic. Models have been used as a special effect in movies for a long time and can look as if they were real. The people that take time images of them know how it should be done
Look at [https://www.demilked.com/small-worlds-macro-photography-felix-hernandez-rodriguez/](https://www.demilked.com/small-worlds-macro-photography-felix-hernandez-rodriguez/) and you can see it being down by someone that knows what they do. I think [you would not know the top image was of a miniature](http://static.demilked.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/5d96fd6eba02f-I-use-Crafts-and-Photography-to-Create-my-own-Worlds-5d95c0ed36f14__880.jpg), this show how realistic a model car can look in the right condition photographed by someone that knows how to do it.
As someone else said, you can tell because of the tilt-shift effect.
But I wanted to add, I know nothing about cars, absolutely nothing, you’d think I’d never seen one in my life, all cars are boxes with wheels to me. But I can still tell this is a model and not a real car.
So its not the paint, or the material or the connection of this part to that part. Even someone like me who has no idea about these things can tell the difference.
It is purely the photographical effect. And nothing else.
A professional photographer can make a model look real as well. This is how we get movies like Lord of the Rings.
When the photographer knows how to use lighting, depth of field and angles, they can make a model look real and make something real, look like a model.
Its nothing else but photography.
I don’t know anything about photography. But apart from those professional explanations I’d add that you don’t always see pics of cars taken from this angle. The photographer would need to raise their camera waaaaay overhead to reach this angle assuming they stand on the same level as the car.
You can’t, you only notice the poor quality models. Miniatures is what we did to make big expensive shots more economical before CGI came around, & just like CGI you only notice it when it’s bad (plastic surgery too)
Check out the LOTR trilogy, it’s the last big movie/s I can remember that was made with extensive use of miniatures. Looks amazing & you wouldn’t even know it’s basically just professional Warhammer
There is a lot of perspective photography that is alarmingly convincing. Video too.
Pre CGI most movie effects were done with miniatures, and a lot of them were really convincing especially for the time.
This one, not so much. Solid white background and no reflections definitely don’t help here.
[removed]
For me it’s the uneven detail around the headlights and rims. That would be exceedingly shitty construction if a real lamborgini had such uneven lines.
I have a friend who has been employed on several occasions to take model cars and add detail so the car can be used in adverts. I have seen his work, and the final adds – you wouldn’t pick it.
It’s not just the size, it’s the details. If the model would be accurate enough, you couldn’t tell the difference.
Latest Answers