In some ways coding is art, sort of, and I can be fussy, and even re-write my code from scratch because I am unhappy with it.
But art is hard - I did a really simple job last week - I drew some playing cards (copied them to be honest), and as above, I did that twice. But at the end of the day, every time I look at what I have done I find myself saying it is not "perfect" and not "finished" yet. They can never be "exact copies" as the originals were mis-aligned and badly printed and badly drawn, so I am guessing at what they "should" have been, and that is where "art" comes in.
I have tinkered with the exact placement and size of the pips on the cards, and then on the court cards. I have tried to make logical "rules" and then found they do not look "right". It is not simple.
I made the mistake of making an interactive card options picker, which showed a load of combinations that did not quite work. So I fixed that in the code. I think all combinations should now "work" even if a bit odd.
I have now got bogged down in the design of a box for the cards, and whether we can make the artwork CMYK so the printers do not have to convert it.
This is very much a "side quest" (as my lawyer described it), but has got me hooked on getting things "right". The problem, I think, is that unlike code, you cannot ever say it is "right". Code can be right in that for all cases it has to handle it works correctly to the design. Art can never actually be "right" as the "design" is not fixed. That is driving me nuts!
I have to put it down, as there is much "real work" to do, but my position in the company does afford me a lot of "side quest" leeway, which is nice. Even so, there have to be limits. The real test is probably the point at which some "side quest" becomes so much "work" it ends up on an R&D tax claim, but I doubt this would qualify, just yet.
Anyway, the existing limited edition packs are proving popular,
P.S. pre-empting comments from mates - OK "piss artist" I could manage!