My best guess is they differed because the paintings themselves were conveying different ideas, or at least, the artists involved felt differently about their chosen subject.

For example, if I was painting something when I wanted to convey the literal reality of what I saw, I'd try my hardest to portray something in a "photo realistic" manner.  My technique, however, would differ from another artist working in the same way, so the end results would immediately be different.

OTOH, if I wanted to convey some emotional content within the subject, I'd play around until I found something to put the idea across to the best of my abilities.

Your question is interesting in itself because it addresses the question of how we see things, which is something nobody yet understands, except in very broad terms.  It seems we can happily accept wildly different interpretations of the same subject as being a fair portrayal.  That suggests an awful lot of processing going on at both the painter's end and the viewer's.

Coppula eam se non posit acceptera jocularum.

My Store

My Gallery