Paintings/prints/portraits in church buildings question

[msnobody]

When did the church begin using pictures of Book of Mormon or biblical stories in church buildings and temples? Does this date as far back as Joseph Smith?

[huckelberry]

Msnobody, My observations are based upon limited historical knowledge. Because of that they are an invitation for more information to be provided by others.

Google clarifies that it is the Logan temple, which first had extensive painted illustrations. That is 1884. Manti temple 1888 and SLC temple 1893 are also noted for their paintings. I saw reference to St George, earliest Utah temple did not have murals. I did not see, nor do I remember any reference to paintings in the Navoo or Kirtland temples. Possibly no available artist at the earlier time.

My memory of pictures in chapels is that presence or absence varied from ward to ward and time to time. People have been more comfortable with pictures in parts of the building outside of the chapel.

[Doctor Steuss]

It probably didn't become commonplace until after the church's mission of sending artists overseas to be trained (i.e. Brigham-era). Even then, as far as local buildings/churches go, those were largely up to the congregations for the longest time. Old chapels in rural communities that were built when wards used to have to raise funds for their buildings often have art that you wouldn't necessarily see in newer chapels.

As one example, in a rural Utah chapel I used to attend at least once a year, there's a large portrait of Jesus right behind the pulpit... something you're very unlikely to find in most LDS chapels (I believe it's actually against policy).

ETA:
Confirmed that per the handbook, there isn't supposed to be artwork in the chapel, but there appears to be a potential exception for artwork that has historically been there (such as the instance of the rural chapel, and the large portrait of Jesus). Link (Section 35.5.1)

[msnobody]

Thank you both for your replies.