Paintings or Photographs?

I have a few paintings, no photographs. For my walls decoration I use a mix of stencils, stickers and paintings: the stencils I do myself and the paintings/stickers I buy cheaply online. I guess that pictures are fine as long as you love the landscapes they depict. Personally, I find that pictures are too common, online or offline, so I rather use paintings instead. In the end, you should choose something that you're sure you want to see daily, because you'll look at those pictures or paintings pretty often.

 

I prefer photographs because the picture is much crisper that way and it's never really all that interested in paintings anyway. The only real problem with photographs is that they are limited by what is physically possible in capturing the subject, while a painting can be pretty much anything from realistic to abstract. Ultimately, the main deciding factor would be which type you wouldn't eventually hate looking at everyday, or if you are planning on spending a lot on it, I'd say make sure that the one you are getting could be easily sold if it ever came down to it.

 

Although I like paintings, my walls are adorned with photographs. I am lucky enough to be a mum to four beautiful children so I have their smiling faces on the walls in every room. I also have three nephews and four nieces.

 

I prefer pictures.

When comparing prices [not referring to the pricier paintings that are sold at ridiculous prices] paintings tend to be somewhat more expensive than photographs. But I've heard of some really expensive photos. The advantage these days though is you can find pictures online, print them and hang them on your wall.

For paintings . . . you have to buy them.

If you don't want to spend much money, go with photos.

 

Well, let's say that my style is a bit 'eclectic' (you know, instead of just saying that I don't like to have to pick! lol) but I really do love both too much to pick, and I think if done right, they really can work well together and complement one another. I tend to think paintings are more of an art (though of course photography can be as well), and it's a bit more personal to have art that someone spent time and energy making. But I love pictures too much to ever be without plenty of them hanging up...family, friends, moments that you want to remember. No painting could capture that in quite the same way that a photograph can. But anyway, my vote is for a mix of both .

 

Unless you want to get a little DIY-ing going and make your own!

 

I love paintings, but I wouldn't want any in my room because a photograph of someone or some place I know would be more personal. I've been to some houses of family members and they have paintings, but they're very generic and don't add anything. It's the photos that are meaningful in those instances. Having paintings that aren't personal seems kind of show offish to me.

 

This is such an open ended question, since both paintings and photographs can venture into non-objective / abstract images. In a really general sense though, I think photographs would give you more flexibility if you remodel your rooms down the road, especially if they are black and white photos, since you can just swap out the matting and or frames to match your new color scheme. Once you start choosing artwork with color, then your options become more limited, even if its something totally abstract like a Rothko or a Joan Mitchell.

When you are dealing with photo-realistic paintings or straightforward photos of scenes, landscapes or people, these also limit your design options when decorating a room. If you've got a bunch of tinted retro looking photos of old street signs and buildings, that might not work so well in a modern living room design, or perhaps a Tuscan countryside inspired look.

 

I much prefer photographs. I don't think paintings fit the style of my apartment and prefer the look of photos. Also, all of the photos I use to decorate have people I know, places I've been so it's nice to be surrounded by so many personal memories and I find they're great conversation starters.

 

I like both. I'm not particular if it's a photograph or a painting as long as I like the subject. I like seeing nature or natural surroundings such as mountains, springs, waterfalls, etc.. So I really don't care if it's a painting or a photograph - as long as it depicts nature then it's fine with me.

 

It really depends on what the subject is in a certain painting or photograph. If the subject is a person or a family portrait I think a painting looks better because it gives the decoration a non-generic appeal that a photograph does not.
As far as landscapes go I prefer a photograph because it really captures the amazing view that nature gives us in certain privileged parts of the world. Artists do a great job painting landscapes and they do indeed look great, but I don't think it will ever compare to the beauty of seeing the real thing, even through a photograph.

 

I love both, I find paintings can tell a story to me. I love going into art galleries and looking at paintings and thinking what the artist must of been thinking when he/she painted it. I also love photographs because they are good memories and sometimes can also tell a story.

 

You can really have them both. You don't actually have to give up one for the other. I think it would be better if you have them both so the spectators will have a variation of what art they are looking at. You just have to make them really appealing and organized and not messy and lousy.

 

I really don't have a preference...
But I think it's easier to get cool photographs, than it is to get cool paintings. Probably cheaper too, right?
I love paintings though... Not the holy spirit, or a majestic horse. Not that I'm a big art connoisseur, but I'd like something a little less classic.

Movie posters are cool too!

 

I think for a more classy look, then you should go for paintings, but if you want to keep things simple then I think you should just go for photographs and frame them on the wall. Come to think if it, if you like it and it fits your budget, why not hang a painting version of your photos? That would be cool.

 

I prefer landscape paintings or photos. I guess I don't have a preference whether the picture is painted of photographed, but I like to look a pretty scenery. I don't have pictures of people on my walls because I don't like having my own picture taken, so I just return the favor. I also don't like having people on my walls "looking" at me, that's kind of strange sometimes.

 

I have both, but don't rush into buying anything as you will find paintings and photos that you are drawn to and find the right place for them. I quite like prints too, the main thing is finding frames for them once you find what you like. I like matching frames, so I consider that and the size when I hang them up.

I would start with photos and if you find paintings you like them great, but don't go looking because when you least expect it you will find something else.

 

My livingroom walls are covered in Photographs, but we also have two paintings in the house. I like both of them, depending on what they are of!

 

Both have their own way to bring awe to me, but of most importance, it's all about what and how the painting or photo is expressing or implying to its viewers. In my experience, a simple dot on a painting, can be more mesmerizing than a HD portrait of a whole city skyline. While some photos simply showing a drop of water, can be more intriguing and captivating than a mural depicting the struggles of humans. It all comes down to perspective and perception, which is mainly derive from one's experience, memories, emotions, and knowledge of art.