The point is that you're both right. You use the same tool but look at it differently.
Tesselator, you see flaws and try to explain them, whereas Godfrey picks up the same tool and uses it without being concerned with the flaws. As long as good art is being done by both, this discussion is moot.
A typical conversation on the photo equipment forums:
Painter 1: "Oh my, the new Flimox brushes are really cool!"
Painter 2: "Yeah, well, they were until I found the bristles weren't really sable, they're mink."
Painter 1: "They lay paint pretty nicely!"
Painter 2: "Sable lays paint about 14.2% more efficiently."
Painter 1: "But what does that matter? The paint gets onto the paper the way I want it!"
Painter 2: "More efficiency is important. Consider if your money made 14.2% more interest in the bank. That's a lot more efficient way to have your money grow!"
Painter 1: "I don't know anyone returning 14.2% interest! Where do you find that?"
Painter 2: "Well, it doesn't exist, but it should. Why should we be satisfied with only the current 6.7% interest?"
Painter 1: "How is this related to the fact that Flimox brushes are really cool?"
Painter 2: "Hey, 7.5% difference is IMPORTANT! They better shape up or Flummox brushes will take away all their market!"
Painter 1: "I don't buy Flummox brushes. The last three I bought fell apart in a week."
Painter 2: "But they use REAL sable bristles! They have to be better!"
and so on...