Keep in mind that in real life, there are two types of energy radiation, reflection and emission.
First, photos are static records of light at a point in time, and don’t naturally emit light as radiation (in significant enough quantities for consideration). As such, they are only reflective, which is dependent on the light that is already in your environment (e.g., the LEDs in your home are missing huge bands of the spectrum), and as such, these wavelengths may not exist to be reflected by the photo.
Secondly, photos are generated by either film, or based on a cmos/ccd sensor, which are calibrated to capture a subset of em radiation in the human visible spectrum. As such, they have filtered the light that may be usable to other organisms.
So based on both of these, depending on similarity to human eyes, no, most animals (non mammals, in particular) would not see photos in the same way as real life.
Keep in mind that in real life, there are two types of energy radiation, reflection and emission.
First, photos are static records of light at a point in time, and don’t naturally emit light as radiation (in significant enough quantities for consideration). As such, they are only reflective, which is dependent on the light that is already in your environment (e.g., the LEDs in your home are missing huge bands of the spectrum), and as such, these wavelengths may not exist to be reflected by the photo.
Secondly, photos are generated by either film, or based on a cmos/ccd sensor, which are calibrated to capture a subset of em radiation in the human visible spectrum. As such, they have filtered the light that may be usable to other organisms.
So based on both of these, depending on similarity to human eyes, no, most animals (non mammals, in particular) would not see photos in the same way as real life.
Thank you, very comprehensive answer.