I have to agree also that this is a perfect blend of technology, technique and available components. Lots of things could make a
different picture. Color. A new desk. A better looking model. That last is un-arguable.
Ultimately the 24MP Canon could make a picture that looks just as sharp at 16X20. This is how the picture would have been made in 1920. Is there any charm in that? That's what folks will have to decide. What would have been lost in a color HDR picture here. We should set it up again sometime in the future and do exactly that. Perfect color tones over a 3 1/2 stop scale. No light coming through the window, just the window with it's pane visible. No brackish shadows, anywhere. Then hang both side by side and have a look.
In 1920, in a perfect world, the wise photographer would have placed the window at the side out of the frame, and perhaps put a sheet up to diffuse the light, then worked with the model for a very fine portrait. That wasn't possible in these constraints. The desk and the window are where they're at and cannot be moved. There's little room to move anywhere except exactly where Asher was at. That's why if you look at my shot of the same thing, the camera is slightly higher and the elements cropped to a very tight vertical, but the tripod legs were pretty much in the same place. That's all that's available. So like a good 1920 photographer, you solve the problems as best you possibly can with your equipment available and take the picture.
Photography is about light. Something is lost when light is constrained to 3 stops. What's lost is the feeling of LIGHT! I LOVE the flare in the details of the desk cubby holes. It just tells my brain
light.
I think we've forgotten that photo-graphy literally means light-painting.