I'm a gay man, imagining a "most ideal woman" would give me the creeps 8-P I had a long reply addresssing each of your points, but I'll keep it to the essentia

I'm a gay man, imagining a "most ideal woman" would give me the creeps 8-P I had a long reply addresssing each of your points, but I'll keep it to the essentials: - A beautiful woman composed from parts may be anatomically perfect, or can be a Frankenstein monster made of stitches of out-of-proportion body parts, even if every part is individually perfect. Knowing how to put together the parts into a harmonious whole is an art on itself - the art of composition. You can't dismiss this skill with "but it looks good in my mind". The difficult part is taking the nebulous, incomplete visual image in your mind and building a physical object that matches how you feel it should look. You speak as if this "execution phase" is trivial, but it's not; it's what distinguishes an artist from a wannabe. > we have the instinctual knowledge of what looks good and what grabs attention and what improves UX. Thus almost anybody has what it takes to "Design" stuff. - This is a fallacy. Being able to instinctively recognize whether a design is beautiful doesn't mean that you'd be able to build a beautiful one yourself from scratch. The first is easy as your brain is hardwired to do it; but the second is incredibly hard. It's not the same to see that a Greek sculpture is beautiful, than to model a beautiful clay figurine with your hands. You'll know that your current wreck is not correct, but won't know of to change it to make it better. It's exactly the same when you try compositing individual elements into a proportional design. No matter how simple or complex are those elements, the skills required to make a good composition are the same, and they are not easy; it takes years to learn them and apply them properly. It's the reason why a professional designer can make better designs than a developer who learns all the photoshop commands. Seriously, I think you're falling to the Dunning–Kruger effect; it seems that you don't even know what you're missing in terms of the quality of a design, if you think that any amount of basic elements can simply be thrown together without regards of the Gestalt laws of grouping[1] that govern your brain and are the basis of composition, even for very minimalist designs. The hardest part of art is not learning those mechanical techniques for making it photo-realistic, that you seem to value more than it's worth; it's learning these intangible rules and mastering them to make the result graceful.[2] [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_psychology#Pr.C3.A4gnanz https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gestalt_psychology#Pr.C3.A4gna... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_(visual_arts) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Composition_(visual_arts) P.S. Learning to draw a photo-realistic image from life (i.e. looking at the object while you draw it) doesn't take years, it can be done in a few days with a good teacher; (metaphorically) half your brain is literally built for doing just that. You just need to learn how to shut down the symbolic other half of the brain which messes with the results. Betty Edwards Drawing on the Right Side of the Brain method[3] is a good way to do it on your own. [3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Edwards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betty_Edwards