Yay!!, Thanks T.
I must have seen something because I had a memory of barbed wire, hence the thought that he might have snagged on it.

This was darn funny btw – I meant to say so.

Gleaned, thank you lol.

Ok, moved or not. I’m really not sure but I can see why you think it was. The photo with Hal kneeling certainly looks like the car is closer to the edge of the road and nowhere near the same amount of space that they appear to have in the other shot where they are standing between the car and the edge of the road. The edge of the road thing is quite pronounced but if you look at the posts this ‘effect’ seems less defined so it could be a perspective thing caused by the camera lens, I’m guessing, I don’t know for sure but there’s just something in the back of my mind that says "it’s visual" as opposed to actual.

So, if that fence was still there, I’d have to sit on it. What does everyone else think?

Well, I think ’twas probably moved – but I don’t think it’s gonna break the case, don’t get me wrong!

Not that it matters as my comments really don’t matter…haha…if it was in gear, I don’t think they could have moved it with a rope. Or is that a girl comment?

Not that it matters as my comments really don’t matter…haha…if it was in gear, I don’t think they could have moved it with a rope. Or is that a girl comment?

I don’t drive so I can’t help. Also I might incriminate myself as being a girl lol.

Ok.

So this is just rough work but it might help give us a better idea. The top image shows that the distance between the car and the road edge is roughly the same as the distance between ‘nodules’ on the bumper so if we could find out what that measurement is it would give us a better idea.

The bottom image I have roughly drawn a green distance marker from the edge of the car to the tallest piece of grass. Now that grass is closer to the camera I suspect so the distance is actually larger than I have indicated but it’s just a rough idea and the difference is probably negligible. Anyway I’ve taken the top image and overlaid the bumper marker section (in purple) but I enlarged it to match the size roughly of the wheels. Now there’s perspective on these shots so it’s just an approximation but it does seem to show that the distance marked on the top photo is pretty close to the distance marked on the bottom photo.

What I think throws this visually is the rear right corner of the car in the top shot as it draws the eye to it and the grass to make the distance comparison whereas the wheel is a better point to judge that from. Perspective makes the rear right corner look a lot closer to the edge than the car actually is.

That’s my guesses anyway.

I have no idea of the distance between the do-hickey’s on the bumper but North America has a standard measurement for license plates. Maybe that will help.

In 1956, all North American passenger vehicle license plates, except for French-controlled St. Pierre and Miquelon, were standardized at a size of 6 in × 12 in (152.40 mm × 304.80 mm), although a smaller size is used for certain vehicle classes, such as motorcycles, and for the state of Delaware’s historic alternate black and white plates, which are 5.25 in × 9.5 in (133.35 mm × 241.30 mm).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_r … and_Canada

I have no idea of the distance between the do-hickey’s on the bumper but North America has a standard measurement for license plates. Maybe that will help.

In 1956, all North American passenger vehicle license plates, except for French-controlled St. Pierre and Miquelon, were standardized at a size of 6 in × 12 in (152.40 mm × 304.80 mm), although a smaller size is used for certain vehicle classes, such as motorcycles, and for the state of Delaware’s historic alternate black and white plates, which are 5.25 in × 9.5 in (133.35 mm × 241.30 mm).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vehicle_r … and_Canada

Good thinking Batgirl.

So we’re in and around a ballpark figure of 2 1/2 – 3ft or 0.75 – 1m rounding off on both.

So you reckon……?

Anyway, although that doctored photo’s fabulous, (a ghostly negative Kharmann Ghia hanging around in the background? I love it!), I don’t know if you need it though does ya?
The car’s 1634 wide says the internet (and it never lies). That’s 64.3307087 inches or about 5 foot three-and-a-half inches.
So if you were to guess the distance from it to the fence in that shot, would you say it was wide as the distance in t’other shot?
(And you risk an error of parallax (oooooer!) in your line extended from the bumper, too. Get that off by a few degrees and the distance looks far greater. Which with respect, I believe you have.)

Mind you – the girly questions about having the handbrake on aren’t at all girly, If the handbrake’s on or the car in gear, towing it’s not going to happen, so….

But I’m still going to stick with my first answer. And risk that million dollars, Chris.

Next question – whats the tow-rope for if not towing, then? To keep people away from the car? Step over this rope at your peril? Yes, could be.

Nevermind all that. You thought parallax was worth a Frankie Howard?

I thought parallax was worth a small Frankie, yes, but only a small one. I ommitted the "Missus", you’ll note, which I’m reserving for any posts which mention "pushed at the rear" or similar.

The do-hickeys are "over-riders" by the way.
And why has no-one mentioned the odd thing(s) which looks like stacked-up cans of film, or a small(?) R2D2, which features in that photo?

Had someone asked me this a few years back, I’d have just gone out in the driveway and measured the Ghia

Yup, had one, liked it. Fun car. (I need a "car nut" smilie)

-glurk

Damnit G., I insist you go and buy another one immediately, and take various photos of it parked near a fence. It’s important!

Hmmm, there’s a car show coming up which may have one.
(I need a "completely obsessed" smilie, in a straitjacket with circulating tweety birds.)

I thought parallax was worth a small Frankie, yes, but only a small one. I ommitted the "Missus", you’ll note, which I’m reserving for any posts which mention "pushed at the rear" or similar.

The do-hickeys are "over-riders" by the way.
And why has no-one mentioned the odd thing(s) which looks like stacked-up cans of film, or a small(?) R2D2, which features in that photo?

I think that’s one of the posts. The ‘division’s are probably just where the wire connects but the shading makes them look like separate or stacked thingy’s.

‘Tis a wide post then. Or a lot closer to the camera than first appears. But I guess you’re right, since I can see no reason why they’d have propped up a light or something in that position. Curious.

The whole thing’s curious. I’m looking again at that first photo where Hal Snook is very kindly ‘hunkered’ down to provide a reference and I’m not sure he would fit all that comfortably in the space apparent between the car and the road edge in that photo.

It’s slightly exasperating but I do suspect it’s the nature of how things appear in photos that’s causing the exasperation as opposed to there being something weird going on. Still, just goes to show what you can, or think you can see, when you re-look at these photos that we’ve all seen hundreds of times.

EDIT: Just to add, or ask rather. How come there’s no crime scene doodles ala LHR and BRS showing distances and such? Or are there?