Dating a painting - County Durham

[282daniel282]

I have a photocopy of an old painting who I think is my 3xgreat grandmother Mary Barrass born 1867, however I just wanted to be sure.

Therefore I'm wondering if anyone could put a rough date on it based on the little girl's clothing.

Help would be much appreciated!

[jim1]

The child looks around 3 so this would have to be 1870/1.
The dress style is from around that time but could just as easily
be from the 1880's.
I'm not convinced it's a portrait, it could be a painted enlargement
of an original photo depending on the size of it.
Also it may not be a girl as young boys were also dressed like this.
I would look at it as a possibility.

[Hollander]

I'm not convinced it's a portrait, it could be a painted enlargement
of an original photo depending on the size of it.
Also it may not be a girl as young boys were also dressed like this.
I would look at it as a possibility.

I agree with the above.
Is the image on glass? It looks like it could be an ambrotype, a photographic process where the positive image was produced on glass. These were often hand coloured. I have a couple of them, and they look similar to this.

[Treetotal]

I agree with Jim, the proportions are too accurate for it to be a painting.
Carol

[arthurk]

I agree with Jim, the proportions are too accurate for it to be a painting.

Yes, but the right arm and shoulder look a bit odd. Could that be due to some kind of brace or restraint for keeping the subject still during a long exposure?

[282daniel282]

Thank you for the comments everyone. Yes I suppose it could well be from an early photo. I was told it was from a painting so took it for gospel. Sadly it's lost to me who has the original so can't find out for certain.

[Gadget]

Arthur, I agree - It does look odd. If it were extended it would be much shorter than her left arm and she doesn't seem to be sitting askew which might show as that type of distortion.

Also, I'm a bit suspicious of the white blobs and longer strokes on the bottom underskirt(?) I've not come across any portrait painter of that period making such obviously painted splodges. They look rather crude.  This could, of course, be the scan/photograph as the image is very blurred.

Although I think it is an overpainting,is it possible to put up a clearer image ? **

Gadget

** or is this blurring in the copy you were sent?

[282daniel282]

Unfortunately that's the only image I've got Gadget. I believe the copy image was taken with a mobile phone and then printed. The photo I have attached is the scan of the printed copy.

[Uhnnohn]

I also think painted enlargement (Crayon Portrait)
I have seen odd hands like that in many
Done by an artist who did faces all the time, but only occasionally had to also paint hands.