Marvin, Yep, I think you must have hit on it!
All because Tim threatened to bring in the 8x10 color, glossy photos, with the circles and arrows on the back of each one to make his point, and then ran away when he spied the seeing eye Dog.
warning, long post to follow
Tom, I'll put on my asbestos suit here and stick my neck out.
Bill Whitaker once mentioned that everyone has their individual "check points" (often different in some way from another Artist's "check points") when determining if they were on target painting a likeness. I would say that extends to evaluating others Artwork (past and present) as well. We all have our "check points to determine if a work is technically, and or, artistically outstanding. To the degree those differ (rightly or wrongly), we end up differing in opinion.
It seems pretty straightforward when walking the Museums that many Artists indeed worked hard at building on each others advances and methods (learning the check points of several other artists, and combining them into their own work and with their own check points). Of course the "highest possible" are words any Artist ought to be wary of uttering within hearing range of his/her own soul. If you don't feel more is possible, that will likely be true (unless you have a particularly contrary soul).
It sure can be interesting to walk through a Museum chronologically, but watch out at the Met when you pass from the 19th Century into the Modern Art wing. Though I must admit I haven't gone through those doors in a few years. Not to say there aren't things to learn there, there are. However the theme of progression in realistic Art knowledge is strangely represented there (if you could say it was at all. It wasn't when I did go through. Visually, when you walked in it looked like a "Left turn Clyde" (reference from an old Clint Eastwood Movie).
I'd say the sharing of information whether it be on forums like this one, other forums, workshops, classrooms, etc. is important today, if you have any love of realistic style work in you at all. I'd say to much has gotten, and is getting, more splintered, (Illustrators, our keepers of the torch in modern times, are increasingly going to computer and dropping the ball) to many worked in this day and age at rediscovering the wheel alone or in tiny groups, or were bullied when young, by those who "knew", into dropping realism entirely.
Abstraction has its place and importance. As does being able to turn out a big number of pictures for your Gallery to sell. It just seems useful to remember that left unattended things atrophy and degrade.
Slower to complete, quality, Realist work is worthwhile enough to attend to, so this age can build something more on the past, and fewer of us will mumble about the 16th, 17th, 18th, or 19th century and do something worth mumbling about in the 21'st Century.
It's not a good thing that a present day Realistic Artist, needs to play Sherlock Holmes in order to find reliable information on the refinements of his/her profession.
Steven,
I much prefer other liquids when it comes to drinking. I didn't think Tim would spring for that though.
Carl