So, what is the bottom line on this FBI image of Lovelady? The bottom line is that it is a stage, posed, choreographed, orchestrated, managed image of him, designed to sell you on the idea that he was Doorman. It is not a spontaneous image; it is a Doorman-selling image that may as well been done by a Madison Avenue advertising agency.
And the very fact that there is another version of it sans the shadow tells you that they, the FBI, were operating on the image. They had their experts working it, molding it, shaping it, casting it in different ways. It's a Hollywood photo. And obviously, we are much better off using a spontaneous one.
Fortunately, we have the other image of Lovelady taken about the same time by Mark Lane. It was the winter of 1964. Notice how bundled up Lovelady looks- even has his collar raised. Brrrr. Cold. Must have been a cold day in Dallas, the kind they get in February.
So, we've got the real on the left and the fake on the right. Compare them. Notice how much more hair he has on the right. I assure you that Mark Lane didn't take any of his hair away. The FBI added hair. And they made it short because it's easier to fake short hair than long hair.
You notice that in the other picture Lovelady was looking down. That's probably because he knew that photographers were trying to capture his image. He actually got in a fight with one on a Dallas street, and it became a police incident.
Anyone who cites the FBI photo as being a good match to Doorman is unwittingly being an FBI automation, a robot. You're just walking the walk and talking the talk. It was their best effort to sell you, and it means you bought it: hook, line, and sinker. The FBI photo still falls far short of the mark as a match to Doorman. The eyes are wrong; the ears are wrong; the chin is wrong; and the nose is wrong. And the clothes are completely and totally wrong, even though they are the clothes he claimed to wear on 11/22/63.