The article seems to be claiming that artists are different for the attention they give to detail. True enough I guess. The way humans look at the world is perceptual, whilst artists (a sub-class of human) tend to employ a more optical approach.
This is supported by this lovely paper looking at the difference between how artists look at images and how non-artists look at the same image:
Mao D, Kakarala R, Rajan D, Castleman SL. Understanding Photographic Composition through Data-driven Approaches. InVISAPP (2) 2010 (pp. 425-430).
In brief... non-artists dwell on regions of obvious interest (faces, bodies etc), whilst the way artists look is more wide-ranging. They may find a lamppost behind the human subject as interesting at the human.
They're a bit unusual. They must exist in urban areas, but their form doesn't really matter as long as they can provide light.
Sure, highways and parking lots have cookie-cutter mini stadium lights. Sidewalk/street lights can vary a lot based on locality, though. My favorites are the variations on spherical lamps with domed tops. Overdone ironwork is a close second.
This is supported by this lovely paper looking at the difference between how artists look at images and how non-artists look at the same image:
Mao D, Kakarala R, Rajan D, Castleman SL. Understanding Photographic Composition through Data-driven Approaches. InVISAPP (2) 2010 (pp. 425-430).
https://www.scitepress.org/Papers/2010/28421/28421.pdf
(Of course they used an eye tracker)
In brief... non-artists dwell on regions of obvious interest (faces, bodies etc), whilst the way artists look is more wide-ranging. They may find a lamppost behind the human subject as interesting at the human.