I'm not being critical of the artist here (I know I couldn't paint anything that well) but looking at the Harlequin by Keith Robertson in WD354 (June 2009) I noticed that you don't have to be perfectly neat for a model to still look neat.
If you look at some of the close-ups of the checker pattern (which is, admittedly, quite a small and intricate pattern) some of the edges look a bit rough. Yet on the standard sized image the pattern looks fine and quite crisp.
It just goes to show that you don't always have to be perfectly smooth to look good at a normal viewing distance - scale can be forgiving in hiding some blemishes