[pksebben]

it's less about knowing what the details are, and more about gestalt perspective. great artists notice not just which details are present, but how they affect the consciousness of the viewer.

Take the highlights of the beads - it's that contrast between light and dark in that precise context that draws the eye to the glass shapes draped against the wall. The dog contains a different kind of detail - the gentle strokes of fur give it a sense of being organic, and the glint in the eye gives it a sense of being alive.

The skill and care lies in both being able to see these details, and understand what the affect of them is. Of course, then there's the discipline required to pay the right sort of attention to these details while engaged in the cognitively heavy task of rendering. Painting takes an enormous amount of focus on material - especially in a time when one had to mix their own colors from a pretty paltry set of naturally available pigments (relatively speaking).

If I were to take this approach to UI design, I would be focused on the experience of the user as they interacted with a UI (perhaps this is why the term UX is everywhere) - what is the first thing the eye is drawn to? What extra steps are introduced by such-and-such widget? Is there a feeling of intuitiveness and does the interface flow naturally with the purpose of the tool?

When it comes to engineers implementing designs "off" - that's most likely a communication issue. They may not understand why X detail is important.