Montréal region couple, c. 1860s, please help verify

[planckera]

Greetings! I know of a photo that's long thought to be of my 3x great grandparents. The back of the photo says Blooming Prairie, MN, which is where they lived and died true. However, I think the actual photo is from the 1860s before they even ended up in Blooming Prairie! I'm wondering if this might be a reprint from the 1880s. Another clue is they would have only been in their 20s in the 1860s, and clearly this couple is at least in their 40s or 50s. I also have a confirmed photo of my 3x great grandparents when they were in their 50s, and they don't resemble the couple enough to convince me that they're the same people. This leads me to wonder if they may actually be the parents of my 3x great-grandfather. The mother of my 3x great-grandmother had already died by 1844, so I don't think it would be her parents.

Names and info for the people in question:

3x great-grandparents:

Peter Gosha
Born: Pierre Gaucher III, 3 July 1837, St Damase, St Hyacinthe, Quebec, Lower Canada
Died: 23 February 1904, Blooming Prairie, Steele, Minnesota

Mary Anne Reynolds
Born: 22 May 1838, Neenah, Tipperary, Ireland
Died: 20 February 1904, Blooming Prairie, Steele, Minnesota

4x great-grandparents:

Pierre Gaucher II
Born: 23 December 1810, St-Jean-Baptiste-de-Rouville, Lower Canada
Died: 21 February 1867, Mont-St-Grégoire, Le Haut-Richelieu, Quebec

Séraphine Matilde Sansousy
Born: 1813, St-Jean-Baptiste, Lower Canada
Died: 1882, Quebec

What I'm hoping to find out is if this could have been taken in the Montréal region prior to 1867, and if the photo was reprinted in the 1880s or so. Also, any opinions on family resemblance would be greatly appreciated! If it's of any help, Pierre Gaucher II was the caretaker (bedeau) of the church in Mont-St-Grégoire from, I think 1842 until his death. Just wondering if his clothes might reflect that occupation.

Photo "A" is the image in question. Photo "B" is confirmed 3x gg taken in Rockford, IL [the first place they settled after they left Canada] c.1866. Photo "C" is confirmed 3x gg taken c.1890 based on the age of their daughter in the photo.

Thanks to anyone who is able to help in any way!

[jim1]

Pic. 1 1850's-60's.
Pic. 2 1860's
Pic. 3 1870's.
Pic 1 may be a reprint as her bodice appears fastened on the wrong side
which would make this a copy of an ambrotype (1850's).
Added:
2 & 3 look like the same couple 10-15 years apart.

[planckera]

Pic. 1 1850's-60's.
Pic. 2 1860's
Pic. 3 1870's.
Pic 1 may be a reprint as her bodice appears fastened on the wrong side
which would make this a copy of an ambrotype (1850's).
Added:
2 & 3 look like the same couple 10-15 years apart.

Thank you, Jim, for taking a look! I intended to mention the bodice on photo "A," but I guess my original post was already long winded enough that I forgot! I'm happy to see how you brought that up unprompted. I will be sure to flip this image going forward in my records with a note.

Glad to see agreement on photos A and B. I can add some more context if it's of any use:

Photo A: I think I've covered everything here. It would be nice if there were some way to pin this down to the Montreal region, or to match the man's garments to my 4x great grandfather's known occupation.

Photo B: I've been able to determine the exact studio this was taken: J. S. Anderson of Rockford, IL. 304 State Street, East Side. Mr. Anderson appears in the 1869 Rockford city directory. He may appear in other years, but only 1869 is available online. It is known that the couple in the photo settled just south of Rockford sometime between March 1865 and April 1868.

Photo C: The couple eventually settled in Blooming Prairie, MN no sooner than about 1878. Their youngest daughter (standing between them) was born 1877 in Orchard, IA. She doesn't appear to be older than about 15 here, so that's where my c. 1890 estimate comes from. Also, the studio (Leavitt & Keene) seemed to be operational around the 1880s-1900s as far as I can tell.

Thanks again for your help on these. I appreciate it!

[jim1]

She doesn't appear to be older than about 15 here, so that's where my c. 1890 estimate comes from

Photo C isn't 1890's it's 1870's.