To be 1893 or not to be 1893?

Since receiving a stack of family history from a distant cousin of mine, a little argument has surfaced about the identity of 2 people in a photo. My Mum claims it's my Great-Great Grandmother (Laura Elizabeth Cotter - Nee Clarke) and her husband (James Phillip Cotter). My parents are now convinced it is them, and as you may be noticing, I'm not convinced, in fact I'm so sure it's not them I'll bet my first born (you may have to wait a while, but I'll wager it none the less). James and Laura were married on the 19th of June 1893, so it was probably getting a little cool around that time of year being the beginning of winter for us.

Let me show you the photo and a reference shot for comparison.

We have the wedding photo in question and then a photo taken in 1898 with that we know is James, Laura and Gertie & David their first two children.

I'm convinced that the gentleman in the wedding photo is NOT James Cotter, my reasons are as follows:
- His eyes are too wide, the shape of his eye area is too sharp, James' eyes are soft in comparison.
- The collar of the gentleman in the wedding photo is rounded, not pointed.

I agree that he is from the family, but he isn't James.

Now, the lovely lady is NOT Laura Cotter.
- Her dress is clearly not an 1890's dress (the bodice is too pigeon fronted, the skirts are tiered, the sleeves no where near 'puffy' enough for the 1890's)
- Her hairstyle is typical of the 1900's

My Mum, the proud owner of 0 (zero) dresses, is convinced that a woman can have any wedding dress she likes. Yes, BUT no woman in the 1890's sets out to design and wear a dress some 20 years ahead of it's time. This is Sydney Australia we are talking about, not Paris France. High society and Royals dictate what we wear, Victoria Beckham and Kate Middleton to name the main (and very well dressed) offenders. Women were affected by fashion back then the same way we are now. I was given the example of my sister on her wedding day last year (2011) how most women these days have a strapless dress and my sister had a halter/strap combination and how that doesn't mean that Laura couldn't have had the dress she supposedly had in that photo. My mum is also trying to argue that because Laura was in a convent for a few years she wouldn't want anything 'hugging' to wear, I don't think that's true, she would have worn a corset regardless and not been living free as a bird under any sort of habit. Every woman wants/wanted to be the most gorgeous thing on her wedding day and I don't think fashion was dictated by a middle class leather working family in the heart of Sydney in 1893!

If I am wrong I'll eat my bonnet!