Before photography, the only way to depict how a person looked was by drawing or painting. Do you ever wonder about the accuracy in the

PAINTINGS.

Paintings.

I think they probably did a good job.

But when did Jesus dye his hair and go blond? 

sonnetinnes

I think people didn't smile because their faces got tired.  It might have helped if the artists started with their smiles first and went to paint their hands.  Those are the hardest for me.

Depends on the period.
The camera obscura was developed circa 1600-1650.

However, at that time, the person who could commission a portrait usually wanted it to flatter his social position - so despite the access to a technological means of accuracy, the art would almost always distort the reality.
The exceptions to this were some of the Northern Renaissance painters, like Rembrandt and Albrecht Durer, who had an intense love for realism - though even they sometimes took licenses with truth for the sake of expression.

The natural eye can draw with great accuracy once an artist has the right training and sufficient practice. However, for a master, the literal transcription of exactly what the eye sees soon becomes boring and pedantic. Art requires something more, both in the beauty of the craftsmanship and in the expression and meaning of the work. Often what is left out is more telling or more aesthetically interesting than what is included. This post was edited by inky at November 24, 2018 9:29 PM MST