Dating and Sitter Identification required old oil painting

[Lilylala]

Hello
My old oil painting is in  poor state, very dirty with several tears in the canvas.
It has a lovely early restorers label on the rear of the frame, I believe 1867 (National Portrait Gallery UK)
The sitter is wearing a deep red velvet or satin dress,  her hair is ringlets in a messy bun.
She is wearing pearls and has a distinctive nose shape, with large eyes and rosy cheeks.
I have searched online for countless hours attempting to locate another portrait with  the same sitters, to no avail.  The painting does not have an artists signature anywhere.  What is the likely social status of the sitter?  It is a large portrait, but plain in execution, apart from the dress and shawl.  Her hair has flecks of light brown in dark brown... it may well reveal much more after a professional clean.
The stretcher has not been removed from the frame for countless years so it may have additional markings not yet seen.
I would appreciate any comments, feedback regarding the age of the painting,  my estimate is c1810 given the fashion of the Regency era was quite brief.  Any ideas re identification of the sitter would be wonderful... or suggestion of artist would also be fantastic.. any help gratefully received. 
thank you
Lily

[jim1]

The date's about right, late 18th. - early 19th.C.
There were 1000's of these painted usually by local artists as this one probably was.
Her face is reasonably well painted but the rest looks naive.
A good artist would have spent more time on her bodice.

[AJ100]

As you say, Regency period. The first though I had was of Lady Hamilton but I don't think it's her at all. The artist is competent though not great and the painting could well have been executed by more than one person, the face by the artist, the rest by his 'apprentices.'
The sitter is a young lady of upper middle class and with a certain degree of breeding, depending on how the artist wanted to portray her. As jim1 says there would have been a lot of these done, all of different people. Before the days of photography it was the thing to record a loved one for posterity on canvas. Thiis needed money, of course, so the sitter and the person who instigated the commission would have had money.
The fact that there is no signature makes me wonder if it hasn't been cut down to  fit the frame.
A delightful portrait of a very attractive young lady. It would look marvellous if it was professionally cleaned.

Regards

AJ

[Viktoria]

 Whoever she is,she is lovely and you must have great pleasure from owning the portrait.
 She rather reminds me of Mrs. Fitzherbert, the Prince Regent`s partner for many years.
 Best of luck with your search. Viktoria.

[Mike in Cumbria]

The face is nicely done, but the artist seemed to lose interest after that - the neck and body are very crudely blocked in. It would be interesting to know whether that was a common practice at that time.

Mike


Sorry Jim and AJ - I now see you said the same before me.

[Lilylala]

The face is nicely done, but the artist seemed to lose interest after that - the neck and body are very crudely blocked in. It would be interesting to know whether that was a common practice at that time.

Mike

Thank you to all for the most interesting and knowledgeable comments.   
I agree with the observation about the quality of the face, hair and neck, with the bodice losing the quality of detail.  I gather from my limited research that it is likely that the main or primary painter would complete the most important details like face, neck etc leaving other detail such as background etc to students or assistants to complete. also due to sheer volumes of painting requests,  another possibility is that painters would have pre prepared 'bodies' painted with each sitter's heads and necks simply added later in the studios after sketching by the artist.
I did for a brief spell consider the possibility that she was Mrs Siddons , but after examining other portraits of the great actress, it does seem to now be a rather remote  possibility.

I do hope to have her professionally cleaned and restored in the future as I do love the red detail of her dress.

I look forward to further comments and suggestions.
Lily

Sorry Jim and AJ - I now see you said the same before me.

[jim1]

As a comparison the picture here is by John Opie painted in 1792.He charged £50 & this is one of 6.
The difference in quality is quite obvious.

[still_looking]

Mike,

Unfortunately I don't recall where I read this but in researching a portrait I found mention of artists working with prepared canvases, the body would already be complete the head would be added later depending on the sitter.

S_L

[Lilylala]

As a comparison the picture here is by John Opie painted in 1792.He charged £50 & this is one of 6.
The difference in quality is quite obvious.

thank you Jim 

The wealthy were able to pay a lot more for a quality artist to improve on their natural looks... The original photo shop 

Little wonder major artists were forced to doctor paintings for the wealthier clientele simply to flatter on the basis of a larger commission.

Thank you to all, most appreciated
Lily