Final answer:
Realism differs from academic painting by focusing on everyday scenes and ordinary people, using dynamic brushstrokes and visible textures, and avoiding idealized portrayals, while academic painting adhered to the ideal and historical, with polished and refined representations.
Step-by-step explanation:
Realism differed from academic painting in several crucial ways. While academic art was based on the strict methodologies and idealized subject matter taught in the art academies, Realism focused on depicting everyday life and ordinary people in a true-to-life manner. Realism championed the objective representation of the contemporary world, commonly portraying workers, peasants, and scenes from daily life without embellishment or idealization.
Academic painting, in contrast, often embraced a more ideal, historical, and romantic view, following specific conventions that were widely accepted as the standard for 'high art'. The works were typically smooth, polished, and aligned with the artistic traditions and rules set forth by institutions like the French Academy. Academic paintings aimed to portray subjects in a refined, heroic, or sentimental manner, often with an emphasis on historical or mythological themes.
Gustave Courbet, an important figure in the Realist movement, along with other Realists such as Honore Daumier and Jean-Francois Millet, made a deliberate move away from these classical and highly stylized conventions. Their work often featured strong, dynamic brushstrokes and a visible texture to capture the essence of their subjects. The Realism movement set the stage for subsequent artistic developments, including Impressionism, by shifting focus from the idealized to the 'real', and in doing so, widened the scope of subjects considered worthy of artistic representation.