The tessellations of Bruce Bilney are a magnitude of quality above other people in the field. Unfortunately, a major problem in assessing the oeuvre is that the motifs shown on his website are so small, resulting in a most inconvenient viewing. Indeed, a couple defy interpretation altogether because of this, with others of an at best uncertain aspect. Also, on numerous occasions he relaxes the meaning of tessellation. Be that as it may, this does not affect the underlying premise of ability, as both these aspects can be discounted. On eight and a half of the ten determining aspects of ability and understanding of the issues he scores heavily, with criteria as listed in the introduction:

(1) ✓The inherent quality of the motif (silhouette and articulation)
(2) ✓Showing the whole motif (excluding ‘heads’)
(3) X True tessellations - excludes ‘gaps and overlaps’ types
(4) ✓The number of tessellations in the body of his work
(5) ✓Variety of motifs
(6) X✓Challenging motifs - a tendency to the more difficult to achieve motifs (i.e. human figures)
(7) ✓Coloured or shaded tessellations (excluding wireframes)
(8) ✓Contrasting colouring of tessellations
(9) ✓Finished rendering
(10) ✓Borderline

Pleasingly, Bilney’s tessellations posses eight and a half of the ten desired attributes. It can be done; there is (tessellation) life after Escher…!

In more detail:

1. Recognisable in Silhouette
Pleasingly, Bilney’s tessellations are almost all immediately recognisable in silhouette. Indeed, only on rare occasions can lower quality surface embellishment be seen. The articulation is quite superb on occasions, such as with the kangaroo motifs (TwoRoos, OORoos), hunter/prey animals (Big Game), elephants (Tess-elephant), and crayfish (Yabbies Galore), all of which is either more or less indistinguishable from the actual animal, or indeed truly indistinguishable, which should be the aim of the artist.
The aspect of recognisably of the motif as seen in silhouette is fundamental to the premise of a quality tessellation. Lesser artists struggle with this concept (inexplicably so, given its simple premise), and fail to recognise its importance and unfortunately delude themselves as to equating interior life–like interior detail surface detail with a exterior outline that is articulated.

(2) Shows the Complete Motif
Bilney’s tessellations in all instances are of a ‘complete’ motif (like the leading lights, Bailey, Crompton, Escher, Nakamura, Nicolas, and Scalfittura. These artists as a grouping are referred to as Bailey et al in the text below). The easier to accomplish ‘head’ only type is excluded, as this category is lacking in any challenge of worth, being all too easy.
Lesser artists frequently do not understand the difference between the two types, and undertake such ‘head’ only examples (on account of their less challenging aspect), and unfortunately delude themselves as to equating these with the more challenging whole body motif.

(3) True Tessellations - Excludes Gaps and Overlaps Types
One aspect that I am not happy with of his work is the use and indeed frequency of both ‘gaps and overlaps’ type tessellations (and indeed, in one instance in combination), where Bilney allows artistic license to occur as regards outlines. Although as a principle I do not find favour with this, I am prepared to overlook this if it occurs on no more than a handful of occasions. However, this occurs far too many times here, with these being a notable amount in percentage terms. These include:
Gaps - Scorpion Dance, Clones, Numbats, Australia All Over, Cuddly Koalas, Hop In, Ozzie the Magic Kangaroo
Overlaps - Aussie Rules OK, Cuddly Koalas.
Gaps and Overlaps - Cuddly Koalas.
Interestingly, of the leading lights in the field, Bilney is by far the one artist who includes numerous examples of this type in his work (A lesser quality artist, John Osborn utilises this even more substantially). Bailey, Crompton, Escher (with one exception), Nicolas, and Nakamura show none, which thus indicates our (condescending) views on this.
As such, this premise is usually one of an inferior tessellator, in that they lack the necessary wit and imagination to compose a ‘true’ tessellation without the need of such devices. However, here, although such usage (with one exception, Scorpion Dance) is of a minimum amount, in numerical/percentage terms it is relatively high, and so I give such leanings to such examples a weak failure. Ideally, the artist should have at least acknowledged this feature on his site. Therefore, I have decided to mark down his efforts here, on account of both sheer number and usage of both types.
Lesser artists (of which he is not) frequently include ‘non-true tessellations’ types (on account of their less challenging aspect), and unfortunately delude themselves as to equating these with the more challenging ‘true’ type.

4. The Number of Tessellations
Bilney shows 34 examples (discounting the ‘symmetry’ drawings), of which, although perhaps not as high as would be ideal (Nakamura and Escher give 268 and 137 respectively), these are not padded to the same extent as with those artists. As such, there is a reason for this relative paucity, as he is unconcerned with numbers per se, in that he is not interested in multiple variations of commonly found motifs (such as birds and fish) as most other people do. Given such a relatively large number, one might expect that these would not all of the same highest quality. However, by far the overwhelming majority show true worth.
Typically, lesser artists will either show a large number of inferior examples (say 100 or more), or relatively few (say up to 20), with no middle ground. Regarding the former, they consider that such large numbers outweighs inherent quality. Regarding the latter, they adopt a dilettante approach as they lack ability. Sheer number should never be thought to be the ideal. One quality tessellation is still better than a hundred or more of inferior ones

5. Variety of Motifs
A pleasing aspect to these is the sheer variety of motif, with no less than 39 different motifs, albeit this is tempered somewhat by the inclusion of trivial, non-animal motifs, such as hearts and leaves, and so the ‘true’ number is slightly less (Nakamura also has 39, again tempered by some non-animal motifs, Escher has 32).
Pleasingly, Bilney shows creatures not usually shown, and so such distinctness (given commensurate inherent quality) makes a refreshing change from the more common birds and fish. A common theme is of motifs taken from his homeland, Australia, with many exotic creatures, such as kangaroos, numbats, platypus, koalas, and leafy sea dragon. Further to his animal motifs, he includes the odd non-animate tessellation, such as a country, Australia; chess knight piece, grape vines, wall flower, and holly-oak.
Lesser artists frequently shy away from such variety by showing the easier to accomplish birds and fish to the exclusion of others. That said, variety of motif should not be thought to be the ideal at the expense of inherent quality.

6. Challenging Motifs - Human Figures
Less prominent in Bilney’s oeuvre are human figures, with only two examples, Aussie rules OK? and Clones. Furthermore both have concerns as to being a true tessellation, with overlaps and gaps respectively (admittedly the Clones is minimal). Consequently, strictly I fail these Just two human figures, with concerns regarding true tessellations, is simply not of a large enough number to be acceptable. However, aside from human motifs he shows a few others of undoubted challenge, such as Kangaroos, Yabbies (Crayfish), Elephants, and so I award a half mark here.
Lesser artists frequently shy away from such examples (on account of their challenging aspect), preferring the easier to accomplish birds and fish.

(7) Coloured or Shaded Tessellations
All of Bilney’s tessellations are shown coloured (like Bailey et al). No inferior wireframe examples are shown.
Lesser artists frequently show wireframe examples, for no good reason (from which one can only conclude is that they do not understand the issues).

(8) Contrasting/Map Colouring of Tessellations
Bilney’s tessellations as a premise are generally coloured in contrasting colours. However, on a few occasions more than I would like there is the odd exception to this feature. Examples of non-contrast include: Hop Inn, Cuddly Koalas, Rodger the Ram, Numbats, Aussie Rules O.K, Tess-elephant, Heliphant, Clones, Black Dog, Birds Wheeling, Scorpion Dance, Wall Flowers. A total of 12 from an oeuvre of 34 are relatively high in percentage terms. However, this is generally excusable here, as there is a reason behind this in that the desire for true-to-life colouring has overridden the recognition aspect, with different colours for contiguous motifs. Some motifs, as here, simply do not permit differentiated colouring, and so perhaps criticism is unfair. For example Black Dog, where the nature of the composition is entirely of black dogs, and so if coloured in contrasting colours would not make sense. Others of the same principle include Swans, Clones, Tess-elephants (the latter due to a shared feature) where rather than colouring in an artificial way, such as with red, blue, yellow etc, he chooses to have like colouring. However, contrast colouring should be regarded as an important aspect, as it enables the motif to be readily identified, and should be employed wherever applicable. Likely, he has decided to use this for the sake of a more natural presentation, of which such instances are justified.
Lesser artists frequently disregard this aspect, for no good reason (from which one can only conclude is that they do not understand the issues). Perhaps surprisingly, of note is that other leading tessellators, such as Nakamura disregard this aspect on more occasions than I would like.

(9) Finished Rendering
Bilney’s style, as regards finish, is of an ideal nature, consistent throughout his oeuvre, favouring a degree of detail level as generally espoused by Escher. As such, he strikes the ideal balance between too simple (although this has its strengths if of inherent quality) and too detailed. These are hand drawn, to a generally pleasing, high quality standard. His style, as regards finish, tends towards the simplistic, with single coloured motifs, albeit with the occasional extra detail/colouring.
Lesser artists sometimes render the motifs in too much detail, believing this to be superior to a more simplistic rendering. As a rule, generally a simplistic finish is to be preferred as too much detail hinders a clear interpretation of the motif.

(10) Borderline
Bilney is generally ambivalent about a decided borderline. Generally, where strong colours are used that don’t strictly require a borderline, the borderline is omitted. Occasionally, some of his tessellations, such as Sea Creatures suffer as a result of this, as the motifs are not readily identifiable. However, this cannot be said to be a fault as such.
Lesser artists invariably omit this feature, not understanding the reasons for its general desirability, namely that of aid in discerning the motifs. However, the inclusion/omission of a borderline cannot be said to be a fault as such, in that the inclusion or exclusion is down to personal choice, depending on the circumstances of the tessellation. Undoubtedly, this is secondary to the tessellation itself, and so of less importance to other, more fundamental issues (e.g. recognisable in silhouette).

General Comments:

Positives

Bilney (in contrast to most other tessellators), has many tessellations of good or excellent quality that are deserving of the utmost praise (e.g. kangaroos, elephants). The all-important aspect of being recognisable in silhouette extends to mostly his entire work. Indeed, very few fail this test. Not only are these recognisable is silhouette, but their articulation is invariably very good indeed. In particular, his kangaroos are very good. Although nearly all are of a high standard, some are worth singling out in particular, as superlatives, of which I detail below:
A highlight, described as a superlative, with considerable innovation in many different ways, is Big Game, of a series of consistent themes:

• Consists of no less that 8 different motifs, simply stated as predators and prey, with four of each type, of leopards, cheetahs, tigers, lions; and gazelle, impala, deer and suchlike respectively
• The motifs are perfectly balanced, in that each of the rows has the motifs ‘pursuing/fleeing’ in alternate directions.
• The motifs are all of an ‘extended leg’ position.
• All are of a commensurate size.
• All are recognisable in silhouette.

This is most innovative and impressive. Indeed, this particular pose appears to be one of Bilney’s specialities, in that few tessellation artists have realised the possibility of such a device. Of note is that Escher had no examples of both these motifs and innovation of this type
A superlative is his kangaroos, namely TwoRoos (albeit somewhat of a misnomer, as it consists of one kangaroo; likely titled ‘Two Roos’ from the motif appearing as a glide reflection, i.e. of two directions) and OORoos. The articulation is most impressive. The verisimilitude here is quite superb, and is worthy of the highest praise.

A particularly pleasing innovation concerns Tess-Elephants, where part of the tessellation serves as a dual function, for a better overall aesthetic appearance. Specifically, this refers to the front and rear legs, where the elephant is both upright and upside down. This very nicely overcomes a design problem, in which the legs would not otherwise be as good as they are. (Note that this is very much in the concept of Escher’s Bulldogs, albeit of a different nature, where the teeth here also served as nails.)

Tess-elephants

Aside from his tessellations, in contrast to other people, Bilney severely and purposefully restricts himself in his tessellations in many ways. Indeed, in some, but not all aspects he is almost alone and ascetic in this desire:

• He is solely concerned with tessellations done to the highest possible standard, with the motif immediately recognised in silhouette.
• He purposefully sets out to not repeat an accomplished motif, unless there is some innovation involved. For example, upon having satisfied himself that that, say, a bird design is of inherent quality, he then does not do any more of this particular motif. This explains the relative paucity of many kinds of the same motif, with only a handful of motifs of the same kind.
• Although a design may be regarded as ‘good’, at least by other people’s standards, if it does not quite meet his own exacting standard then it is deemed not worthy of publication.
• He rules out the ‘easier’ types of tessellations, considering these as unworthy of the art. These include the ‘amputation’ types (heads), grotesequeries (fantasy creatures, such as winged dragons), human figures of a contrived nature, such as ‘big hair’ or flared/diaphanous skirts (the being inconsequential to the human figure), and geometric types.
• He is not content with merely ‘repeating’ a tessellation to Escher’s standards, but challenges himself to better Escher himself.

Negatives
However, although I am overwhelmingly positive on Bilney’s tessellations, this is not to say that his don’t have some shortcomings, or more precisely, as to the way they are presented. As such, although the quality of his tessellations are high, the all too frequent use of non-true tessellations i.e. breathing room and (to a lesser extent, overlaps) types militates against his work. Admittedly, most of these are of an inconsequential or minimum nature, but the reliance of these, and furthermore without due acknowledgement, is a decided shortcoming.
Some examples that are classified as tessellations are not even tessellations, such as Okey the Australia-Shaped Kangaroo, Spinneroos, Hands around Australia, All You’s, and Australian Floral Emblems are best described as symmetry drawings. Ideally, these would be better placed in their own category.
Furthermore, I consider his choice of ‘permissible’ types far too ascetic. For me, far too many possible examples, of undoubted worth are ruled out, for example a clothed human figure. This to me is ridiculous, as clothing, although not strictly a natural feature is a common, everyday occurrence of the motif. By such insistence, many perfectly acceptable, everyday humans are excluded from his oeuvre. Although I have less objection to his omission of ‘heads’ and ‘fantasies’, when of a good standard, these should likewise be considered as worthwhile of inclusion.
No concession is made to more ‘interesting’ tessellations since the time of Escher, such as with Penrose, or Dimorphic tilings for example. As such, these are well with the remit of the tessellation artist (in contrast to, say, hyperbolic examples), and ideally some of these would have been included.
Aside from the relative shortcomings above though, essentially concerning background issues, I can find very little to fault here as regards his tessellations when the concerns of types are stripped away. Indeed, one could be accused of caviling to a certain extent with the above comments.

Escher Comparison
Is he better than Escher? Due to various aspects, comparing like for like here is difficult, and likely unfair. That said, if pressed, I’d put him on a rough par. The examinations below should show this:

Less tessellations than Escher, broadly of generally comparable quality, 34 against 137. (Escher’s 137 being padded to some extent, whilst Bilney’s 34 are not)
More variety of motifs than Escher, 39 against 32
Less challenging motifs (i.e. human figures) than Escher, 2 (and furthermore with concerns) against 4
More pass the silhouette test than Escher (I have no figures available)

Admittedly, Escher was, to all intents and purposes, the first tessellator (negating Koloman Moser’s examples), and so all the kudos of inventing/discovering a new type of art from is worthy of the utmost praise. Indeed, without Escher, how many people, including Bilney, would have the wit and invention to do this? Probably none. Therefore, Escher stands alone here. However, that said, why should the person who makes the breakthrough in a certain field be regarded as having the field to themselves, with other people’s contributions neglected or ignored? As Escher himself stated, he himself opened the garden gate of tessellation, and wandered around. Other people of a like mind have now followed him through, some, but not many, with their own tessellations and innovations to contribute. Escher did not do everything.

Summary
Bilney is a very good, if not superb tessellator, and certainly one of the finest, with his tessellations occasionally being of a superlative nature, for example the two kangaroos TwoRoos, OORoos, and quadruped-themed Big Game. Even when not, then these are still generally of a higher quality than with other people. As detailed above, he understands the various issues underpinning the composing of inherent quality of tessellations. Furthermore, he introduces some innovations of his own, such as with Tess-elephant, which has a dual purpose leg. Additionally, he chooses to undertake challenging motifs (albeit for the most part disappointingly excludes human figures), rather than repeating the easier to achieve bird and fish ad nauseam. Also, he shows motifs of a high quality that are difficult to achieve (Kangaroos, Crayfish (Yabby), as well as rarely seen inanimate ones (knight chess piece).
In short, only the most challenging and highest quality examples are shown. Although I take issue with some of the self imposed restrictions, the premise of worthy over unworthy examples is a fine and laudable desire. If only other people would at least aspire to do the same, and not show seemingly endless, formless, unidentifiable motifs.

Revised: 11 March, 5 July 2010. Illustrated: 15 October 2010