Featured 19th century painting by known photographer?

I acquired this today. It is signed "R Anson." It is an 18 x 24 inch oil on canvas. I believe it to possibly be by Rufus Anson who was a 19th century photographer- although I can't find a single other painting he did online. When I purchased it the person who sold it included a photo by Rufus Anson (attached below) of a little boy with what he believed to be the dog in the painting.

Any thoughts?

 

The first thing that jumps out at me is the dog in the photo seems to be a curly haired breed like a Chesapeake Bay Retriever and the dog in the painting seems to be portrayed as a breed with a more standard hair type. I really have no idea though. Perhaps the dogs head area wasn't as curly....

 

I found a Curly Coated Retriever that looks even more like it.

 

Beautiful painting.
Yes, the dog in the photograph could be the dog in the painting. I think the little girl is a little boy, little boys often had longer hair in those days. Nice to have painting and photo together.

 

yes typo on my part from posting it up quickly.

 

The dog in the painting is portrayed with a water fowl as a Retriever might be.

 

It's probably my librarian/researcher background speaking, but I think more research would need to be done (and it might not be simple online research) to verify whether or not these are connected. Same surname and first initial and a somewhat similar-looking dog are the only things I see that have been mentioned as evidence. Not strong enough for any sort of real proof. Although, if you are keeping both of them and like the story, fine!

 

Can you post the entire photo, including the card mount? If by Rufus Anson you are referring to Rufus P. Anson the daguerreotypist who worked in New York City, this photo would have to be very early. He is known to have worked only into the 1860s. I would like to see the studio mark on your photo.

 

I don't have the photo. Just seems to be something the seller found online. I can't find any artists with the name R. Anson. It was listed possibly by Rufus Anson; never said it was definitively him.

 

So maybe just a move [edited from "ploy"] by the seller to add some interest?

I'll say that the image appears to be from later than the 1860s. That decade saw the first images on paper, which is what that one appears to be. However, they were usually taken in a studio, or if outdoors were normally of buildings or architecture and/or scenery. It would have been highly unusual for a portrait photo in the 1860s to be taken outdoors, as that one appears to be. And even if taken outdoors they were posed more formally than that. The child's clothing doesn't look quite right to me for the mid-19th century, either. It looks like early 20th to me, although could also be late 19th.

And by the way, I do like your painting!!

 

It might be a "ploy" I guess but considering he was willing to take $300 for it shipped I would think it was more just a guess without intentions like that. I thought it was good quality and was just trying to figure out anything really.

 

Maybe "ploy" was the wrong word that I used. Sorry -- I have edited my other post. What I meant was that sellers often try to add value by finding out or identifying something about what they are selling and including it. In this case, the seller was being hopeful that the theory was correct.