realistic
-
1. What the term means
The terms “realistic” and “realistic-looking” are often used by the public to refer to photographs that portray the subject as well as a photograph can.
The word “realistic” was coined specifically to refer to things that depict, portray, represent, describe, recreate, reproduce, or refer to — but are distinctly different from — something else.
“Realistic-looking” photographs are no exception.
-
2. What the term doesn’t mean
It’s about portrayals, not reality
When people use the word “realistic,” they use it to describe portrayals of other things, not to describe “the thing itself.” To use the term “realistic-looking” when describing a photograph is not to say that photographs of things are equal to the actual (“real”) things themselves.
Most people don’t point at an actual car and say, “That’s very realistic looking.” Instead, they point to a detailed toy model of the car and say “That’s very realistic looking.”
Even small children know that no photograph can ever be an exact substitute for the three-dimensional subject that it depicts. A child will usually opt for an ice-cream cone over even the most “realistic” photograph of an ice-cream cone.
The same principle applies to adults, most of whom would choose a 20-dollar/euro/pound piece of currency over even the most “realistic” photograph of the same amount of money (unless the photo had been taken by a famous photographer and thus was worth more than the piece of currency it depicted).
By choosing to use the word “realistic” when describing a photograph, the person using the term is making it clear that he or she is referring to a portrayal of the thing rather than the actual thing itself.
No photograph — no matter how “realistic”— can ever perfectly reproduce every aspect of a three-dimensional scene, thanks to the inherent limitations of the photographic medium.
Questions #314 and following address similar themes.
See also the Key pages on real, reality, and portrayals