I want to address a different issue here, which is the language used in those job descriptions. Maybe you as a possible applicant should question the writing a bit more.
Ever noticed that 99% of those job descriptions read the same, request and expect the same? It's because most of the people writing those texts don't know the hell themselves what is common and what it is they really want themselves. So what they do is look at competitors and other well known companies and more or less copy the same requirements.
It's just like terms and conditions you agree on with any software, or law stuff you agree on in daily life. Most people do not really know all the times what all of that word bingo means but with common sense
they usually know what to expect.
And I think when applying for job positions the same applies there - just use your brain and common sense to really read between the lines and guess what they mean actually. In the end anyone can apply and what really matters is your portfolio.
Candidates should have an exceptional understanding of form, shape, structure...
Means that they want to have people who did the stuff they do already for a couple of years. Because the more time you worked so far the more experience you have.
Exceptional could be interpreted as above average but then again every company even crappy ones wants to have the best fruits. No one would write that they are happy with noobs or people shitty skills.
Just apply and have them sort out if you match their description. I'd say most job descriptions are bullshit bingo and proof of how unsure they are themselves when it comes to setting up a proper description of what you should really expect when working there.
Personally I'd like to see more honest and written descriptions with some thoughts and personal words instead of those clich'e ones. Just have someone at the company really think about what they want in a clear and honest way - without trying to confuse anyone. And avoiding words like: best, exceptional, extraordinary, special, best,... because those are not objective at all and in the end really come down to the portfolio anyway - so safe the words.