I haven't refused any reality here, friend. Nor am I substituting my own. The Gigapixel shows exactly as many people up front, where it was taken as other photographs do from the same vantage point. And it also concurs with the view on the crowd up front at the stage that is provided from other vantage points where the front of the crowd is visible. It doesn't show radically more. Whatever that means. Radically more than what?

Nobody is disputing that there were a lot of people who were at the front. But it doesn't provide the slightest bit of helpful view on the total crowd size. Because the total crowd isn't in its view. The rows and rows of people in the back are impossible to judge from the Gigapixel's perspective. This is just basic photography. Angle, lens, perspective, all that shit. It matters. The Gigapixel's subject was the main stage and immediate area. It provides no help to the discussion of the total audience.

Ever been to a concert, especially on stage? The throng at the front always feels massive and overwhelming. But you can't fully judge the total attendance from that perspective, especially in a setting like the Mall.

I'm not anti-Trump. In fact, I don't think less people showing up to inauguration means anything significant or negative.

It's just about comparing two photographs. Everything the other person said I agree with. One is about distance, and distance isn't visible in one of the photographs.