I took that into consideration and looked at the average drop for the word and the drop of the baseline of the letter itself. Even if the letter bar struck high it should still have struck somewhat parallel to the horizontal line of the platten, not curving down to follow later line of a bend caused by a book binding. Ergo, the typewriter line of print should be consistently horizontal across the page, as is the offset printed ink on the page. Why then is there ANY discrepancy in parallax at the same vertical vector between the printed and typewritten ink on the page?
I understand why the background safety paper pattern continues in a straight line without curving back... It's merely the laser paper the image is supposedly printed on (although in this instance, it too, is just one of the layers)... but both parallel lines of print should follow the same curved surface plane of the perspective the folio page follows back to the binding. They don't quite. Smoking gun.
The K in Kapiolani is rotated slightly counterclockwise from the curvature of the text. The rotation is the same as the printed form text. Same with M in Male.
I've shown that the leftmost letters are lower than more rightward letters, and that both the M and the K are abnormally skewed downward at the left. None of these effects have any explanation for those who insist that "there's no curve." To deny the evidence I've posted is to deny the facts, as far as I see.