The reason I asked this question is a debate I had with my two sisters over Easter.
I told them I would have been more interested in art at school if we had been able to study a wider range of art. I recall that in grade 10 (last year I studied art) we mainly studied the Old Masters whereas I found 19th and 20th century art far more to my taste. I also don't remember studying any non-European art at all. I also thought we studied painting at the expense of other art-forms (such as ceramics, photography etc).
My sisters more or less said "How can you say you love art and not want to study the Old Masters?". I mentioned that, while I find Leonardo Da Vinci's drawings interesting his paintings do nothing for me. They then went on to say what a great painting the Mona Lisa was and all seemed shocked when I said I didn't found it aspiring - there are hundreds of paintings I like more.
I would have much preferred it if I could have studied the photography of Ansel Adams rather the paintings of Leonardo da Vinci.
Edited to add - There are some pre-19th century artists I do like such as Hieronymus Bosch and Pieter Bruegel the Elder.