you nor hyperphagia would be considered photorealistic I dont think. Photorealism delves into the realm of 'uncanny valley' (wiki it), example: [link] work that is photorealistic tends to feel plastic and give off a "why didn't you just use a photo" vibe.

In my opinion it is important to pull off a certain amount of realism, but not to the point of being photo-realistic. You both have great galleries, but they arent photorealistic. If they were however, they wouldn't have as much appeal and your pieces would not be identifiable to you. Artists realised this way back in the second renaissance, take Michelangelo for instance, the statue of David holds unrealistic proportions, the hands and feet are too big in comparision to the widened torso. Its exxageratioons like this that make art more interesting to look at.


lol /end rant. You really shouldn't go around saying you do photorealism when you dont, I prefer both your styles to photorealism

--
"A little nonsense now and then is relished by the wisest men"