unknown by Rebecca Pryor

It is rather beautiful.

Are me old eyes playing tricks, or is that a very faint signature on the extreme bottom right? If it isn't - I have no idea who painted this, although an awful lot of people could have done; it looks a bit like a religious painting you might have found in many Catholic churches (and on second viewing, that signature looks like the area where the dirty varnish stops, suggesting it's been removed from a frame). Is this the whole painting, or a detail? The reason I suggest it may be a religious painting, apart from the fact that I've seen a few of them, is the lack of any kind of detailing in the costume - 19th century artists when depicting saints did tend to get a bit vague about clothing.

Google image search found San Guiseppe: http://www.angeli.netsons.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=8635 Guido Reni (1572-1642) San Giuseppe Roma, Galleria Villa Borghese. (in Italian)

http://www.angeli.netsons.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=82&t=8635 ~~ hopefully the URL will all be on one line in this coment.

So, Robert is both right - it's a saint - and wrong - it's considerably earlier than C19th.

I'll settle for half right .... well done for finding him, because I looked and failed.

Quite a difference in colouring there, too - rather makes the point I saw somewhere, maybe here, the other day: that a reproduction isn't anything like the same as seeing an original painting. I'm not sure I don't prefer the rather more muted (probably rather more dirty!) version to the highly-coloured affair on the angeli website.

Yes, I agree with reproduction. The shift towards on0line submissions on the face of it seems like a good move. However, if you are not a professional photographer ....