Somewhere, someone saw what you are seeing in that photograph through the lens of their camera, even if it is later altered in developing. The same might be said of a painter s subject matter, but the painter paints an interpretation of what he sees in front of him. The viewer is seeing the scene secondhand, after it has already been processed by the painter. But then, if the purpose of the photograph or the painting is the feelings it transmits to the viewer, then both styles have their merits, in the use of lighting, placement and other aspects. Painters have the ability to use texture to their advantage, even the type of brushstrokes used helps the viewer interpret the scene.
Paint can rise up in globs off of the canvas, making it more three-dimensional.
In a photograph, while depth can be portrayed, the actual photograph is itself flat. I m really understanding what is intended with the question. Both artistic mediums have the intent of conveying certain messages to their viewers. The mechanics of how they actually convey those images might be different, but as to which medium achieves a more perfect view of reality, I can answer while not understanding what is meant by the question.