I was about to reply to the skepticism of a poster, who deleted the post in the meantime: This is a clear context in which re-doing something in the style of s

I was about to reply to the skepticism of a poster, who deleted the post in the meantime: This is a clear context in which re-doing something in the style of some Author can be radically inappropriate: the visual style is stunningly good, but an unintelligent operation - it is relatively easy to mock a style, while the real thing was the judgement underneath. The Author knows if and why he would have used a curve made in such way in that place - not the simple mocker. Edit: in case some wanted to advance the idea that they are contented with the visuals, AJ is a foremost example of visuals studied to serve a content. Not to mention his declared contempt against states of poor hallucination.