I keep the school’s photographs in sequence because the gaps between them matter as much as the frames. Two images filed as views of the east wall show a different number of upper-floor windows. Neither image settles what stood there; together, they leave one architectural detail unaccounted for.
The two frames
In the first image, a narrow window appears above the entrance canopy, close to the corner trim. In the second, that section of wall looks continuous, though the roofline and canopy seem to match. The copies have different crops, so perspective or framing could explain part of the mismatch; the photographs do not provide a clean comparison.
What the images cannot tell us
There is no visible date on either print, and neither file includes a photographer’s note. That makes it impossible to establish from the images alone which view came first, or whether they were taken from the same position. The official version leaves this difference unexplained, but an unexplained detail is not automatically evidence of a larger cause.
Keep the originals together
The photo records should stay paired, with their original crops intact, rather than being edited into a single comparison image. A side-by-side copy may help readers inspect the wall, but it should not replace either source. If another view of the east side turns up, its date and framing will matter as much as the window count.