Quote -
Sorry. 100% wrong.
If you want to create an accurate model of something, either virtual or physical, correct reference is a must.
Because if the shape is wrong, everything else is, too.

You think I don't know that? I would think you'd be able to read that in the intended context and realize I meant the shape-to-surfacing ratio of realism. Surfacing is the more important thing than shape.

Look at a simple object like, say a simple drinking glass. I could model a totally accurate, 100% perfectly shaped drinking glass and then spend hours trying to get the light and the surface data just right to make it look like a photo instead of a CG picture of a glass that looks wrong.

Granted, a drinking glass is a much simpler shape, but it's the same idea.

Quote -
Polygons are cheap these days, textures and other stuff costs ram.

That may very well be, but I think the thousands of highly realistic CG human renders that some of the pros "out there" make using very lo res figures pretty much proves my point that shape is a lesser concern than lighting and surface data.
And they use normal maps and displacement maps to get their "shape", which is partly surface data as well.

I don't want to argue with you about this though, because you are wrong, completely wrong, and this is wasting my time.

You're not wrong that shape is important, but when you start saying that shape is the MORE important thing... well I guess you know better than all the professionals out there.