SAD has light on the R side of the fact ut it seems to be a slightly different angle of light, a bit more in the front than the other girls in the top row; the top row girls all have light on the tops of their heads and SAD doesn’t. Of course she is shorter than all the other girls. How tall was she at that time, btw??? Wasn’t she five feet six? That’s fairly tall, those other girls must have been very tall. And what grade is this supposed to be? The girls look to be at least 16 years old, and most girls have attained their adult height by then. Another anomaly that strikes me looking at this photo again is that SAD’s face is quite small in comparison to most of the other girls’ faces. The only two that have faces as small as hers are the bottom very R and L faces. In photos with SAD and other people that I recall, her face is rather large. little jeremiah, you've made a cogent, credible argument the image of SAD was sized to cover a shorter person, a matching of outline to minimize the complexity of the task.
Add the too-short, small-faced SAD to the only one without sweater, not looking at camera, not bending elbow, the lighting anomalies mentioned by you and The Cajun and others, and we wonder if we can just go out on ebay and buy these SAD movie lobby promotional cutouts.
"Everyone remarked she looked so much smaller that day. And it was really peculiar, as she was so distracted she forgot her sweater, didn't bend her arm, and DIDN'T ATTEMPT TO SMILE. It was as though she were a hologram from a future where people knew what that word meant."
In today's propaganda report, anomalies are running slightly ahead of explanations. Experts explained explanations are typically a lagging indicator."
