I can understand that, and take a similar approach often myself.
But "exact results" is not the death of Finesse.
For any Rego spell, for any Creo spell that is not narrowly defined, Finesse determines the exact results - the exact orientation, the cosmetic elements that are variable within the overall end result.
And perhaps a copy of a living being is not a good example - there are "artistic" and biological variables (such as hairstyle, for one, or recent wounds) that would always require Finesse to mimic, as they have nothing to do with Essential Nature or Form of the target.
A mage creates a spell that cuts stone for a wall. Take a large boulder, ZAP, and you have one dressed stone - great. Finesse could create a stone 50 cm square, or 55 cm square, or 55.5 cm square, as needed - so the stones are all (hopefully!) the same size. The more exact, the greater the Finesse roll, each time, every time.
But a spell with an extra magnitude of complexity could be designed to duplicate, exactly, the size of a "model" stone - so they are all identical, no Finesse necessary. There is no "art" involved in this, no judgment need be involved in the process - there is a model, and the magic copies the model, done.
"Finesse" might conceivably add something to the final product - a symbol or carving, or orient how the block is carved from the boulder, but the spell, as designed, achieves one specific result, one of many that otherwise Finesse would have been necessary for. And if the mage wants a stone slightly larger or slightly smaller, Finesse won't help - because that's not how the spell is designed.
Complexity should not cover all the variables of Finesse: no "+4 complexity for extra control over final shape/color/location" - but to achieve precision of a specific final result (that can be Platonically precise), I would think it's appropriate.