Guys! I get that there is no definitive "this set is the absolutly what X character looks like", they are just there to approximate what they actually look like. Like the Click set versus movie Click. It's just an approximation. I'm just saying some approximations are more accurate than others, and asking which is ever so slightly better (:
Hmmm, so if there is no definitive representation of a character, then we don't know exaclty what any of the characters look like, do we? Just a pretty good idea.
With fiction, what does "exactly what they look like" mean, anyways? There's no reality to be discovered, only basic ideas that are elaborated with specifics and when different people elaborate them they might vary on the details. Even if you try to define it as "whatever the head honchos prefer", even they might not have an ironclad, final-answer or even yet-established full idea of it. And when their organization has put out multiple interpretations, they might be reluctant to tell you that the details they prefer are "canon" per se in case it appeals to a too-small number of people compared to other interpretations.
I don't think it's that simple, but to some extent that's true. There's also story logic which could be used to come up with the most realistic interpretation based on clues given in canon. And these generalities often break down when you look at the details critically so that one looks more likely.
To use something else as an example, nobody would think that ugly potato interpretation of Spherus Magna could possibly be canon in any way. It's even hard to understand why any illustrator ever thought it was a good idea. So we all "know" that one can't be canon.
With Click, when you see the movie form with the body of a realistic beetle, compared to the rather clunky set form, I suspect we all instantly "know" the set form can't be canon. There's usually something or another that makes us think logically that one is a clear winner over another, or one part of one, etc. In this case it's the things everybody's brought up why the canister form has to be the "actual" one; it's shown in the movies, it's more practical, etc. etc.
But then there's some things that seem far more subjective, like:
Uh, about that... In my personal head-canon, the masks don't move at all.
Even there, maybe we tend to suspect what the "canon" is most times, and just "head-canon" differently due to a strong preference. (FTR, pretty sure the masks do emote in "canon"... although it is harder to square that with other facts like that it's just a mask hanging on the face with a magnet lol.)