"Picture" or "painting"

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rachel Adams

Key Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2018
Member Type
Student or Learner
Native Language
Russian
Home Country
Georgia
Current Location
Georgia
Hello.

Is it wrong to use the word "picture" to refer to a painting? For example, "Mona Lisa is a favourite picture".
 
No, it's fine. But "Mona Lisa" is the subject of that painting. You can add a word to make the statement natural.
 
No, it's fine. But "Mona Lisa" is the subject of that painting. You can add a word to make the statement natural.

What word? Oh, I wrote "favourite" instead of "famous".
 
The distinction gets even blurrier when you're looking a photograph of the actual painting.
 
The distinction gets even blurrier when you're looking a photograph of the actual painting.

Photo/photograph is also a picture but not a painting. A painting is also a picture. Right?
 
''Mona Liza is the famous picture''.
Sorry, no. I was looking for "The Mona Lisa is a famous picture." Your version answers the question "Here are some pictures. Which one is the famous one?" — but it still needs to begin with the definite article.
 
To many people, a picture is a film/movie, so avoid it to refer to a work of art.

You must see 'Titanic'—it's a great picture.


Spoiler alert: It sinks.
 
Last edited:
I would use only "painting" there.
 
I'm not going to pretend for one second that I don't actually say "The Mona Lisa ..." but I felt it was only fair to point out that the OP's original use (no article) was, in fact, correct.
 
Hello.

Is it wrong to use the word "picture" to refer to a painting? For example, "Mona Lisa is a favourite picture".

I wouldn't consider using "picture" to refer to any artwork and I'm sure most artists would be offended to hear/read their paintings referred to as pictures.
 
I think a painting is a picture and so is a photograph or a poster. It is like calling an apple a fruit.
 
I wouldn't consider using "picture" to refer to any artwork and I'm sure most artists would be offended to hear/read their paintings referred to as pictures.


I imagine Ralph Goings , Leng Jun, Robert Bechtle and other photorealists, hyperrealists, as well as anyone who practices trompe l'oeil might disagree. It's the very essence of what they're trying to do - render a photograph via another medium.

Having sat through quite a few art critiques as a student, it's not uncommon to hear someone refer to various elements in the 'picture', or to use 'picture' as a synonym for 'painting' or 'scene'.

Regarding Goings, here's a quote from him about his own work I found on Wikipedia: (bold emphasis mine)

"In 1963 I wanted to start painting again but I decided I wasn't going to do abstract pictures". It occurred to me that I should go as far to the opposite as I could. ... It occurred to me that projecting and tracing the photograph instead of copying it freehand would be even more shocking. To copy a photograph literally was considered a bad thing to do. It went against all of my art school training... some people were upset by what I was doing and said 'it's not art, it can't possibly be art'. That gave me encouragement in a perverse way, because I was delighted to be doing something that was really upsetting people... I was having a hell of a lot of fun..." (edited quote from Realists at Work)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top