I've seen the "pics or it didn't happen" meme often enough for it to be worth responding to. There are several problems with it.
The first problem is with the word "religion", especially when paired with the claim that science is writing the letter. Religion is a blanket term. It covers a wide range of beliefs, and arguably applies to all beliefs. In other words, the belief in science is, itself, a religion. Some "religion" is false. Some "religion" is true. Science can neither prove nor disprove either. Furthermore, playing religion and science off against each other is a false dichotomy, for the two are not mutually exclusive.
The second problem is with requiring pictures to believe anything. Prior to 1826, cameras didn't exist. At all. Therefore, photos were impossible. Are we to believe, then, that nothing happened before 1826? If so, that's a bit of a problem for Evolutionists, because we still can't get photos of that happening.
So, atheists really should repeal this argument, but that doesn't actually make things much better for them. History is based on observation. Even though we, in the present, have not observed anything before our lifetime, the people who actually lived during the events observed them. Therefore, even if you refuse outright to accept the theological element of the Bible, the historicity of it is stronger than any document of equivalent age.
Ultimately, this argument is far more damaging to atheism than to any faith the meme originally aimed for. I feel far more intellectually fulfilled accepting the Christian faith than opposing it.