1. The older developments. I believe that modern visual semiotics start with Erwin Panofsky. His contemporary, Aby Warburg, following the standard wisdom of his times (see, for example, Anti Aarne's Motif-index), operates in his Mnemosyne atlas with the idea of motifs, and proceeds with their empirical classification based on a linear and unhistorical conception of history. My criticism of this kind of visual analysis is supported by Vladimir Propp, who opposes his concept of narrative structure (his dramatis personae and their functions) to the concept of theme.Contrary to Warburg, Panofsky demotes the motif to his "pre-iconographical" level, to focus instead on the combination between images (cf. visual syntax), connotatively connected to themes (types). Panofsky goes even further with his "iconology", an awareness of the historical-cultural origins of painting, articulating it with what we would call today "ideology" -- and thus entering the field of sociosemiotics.2. The old developments. Umberto Eco returned to Panofsky to integrate his views within a semiotic context. His "recognition codes" correspond to Panofsky's comprehension, both of everyday objects and events, and of visual arts (the motifs). On this "pictorial" code, his "iconographic" code is grounded. A parallel approach was developed by Group μ.3. The post-Greimasian developments extend visual analysis in the following directions: the dynamisation of the static visual text by emphasising the act of enunciation (that is, sociosemiotics); the focus on the analysis of the pictorial signifiers; and attention to their expression substance.