>> But Ive, it looks like in your last comment, you just provided more
>> evidence for the UV hypothesis. You held back on hyper-realism in
>> order to provide *some* benefit, and whatever reason is analogous to
>> the "emotional response" in the Y-axis of the UV.
>
> I don't believe that the UV can be applied to anything else than
> human-like things. The hypothesis only applies to human-like things, and
> every explanation about it only covers human characteristics.
>
> Your aversion for hyper-realism it's something else... it can be
> something similar to my dislike for surrealism or abstraction: I just
> underrate failed attempts because of my own inability to create good
> images on these styles.
>


UV also apply to animals, mainly those that we encounter daily or 
frequently.
For example:
That pouncing cat front paws are just not located correctly enough, they 
seems articulated to low and not forward enough. It body should be 
stretched some more.


Alain

Post a reply to this message