I've done technical photography for a long time so I take offense by you calling my comments crap. I'm not saying anything was done intentionally, but when you take a photo with a short focal length lens without a known reference length (as in the field) the fact is you will obtain photographs that appears to be Photoshopped.
Here's some technical background on why that is.
https://api.ning.com/files/FyLL0CPW...UduSxme2Aqx/IMG_0220.JPG?width=737&height=550 is a link to a photograph of a 400 pound boar in the back of a Polaris 4 wheeler. Here's another picture of the vehicle.
https://allabouturanch.com/photo/pict0025-2/next?context=latest
The hog is positioned at the hinge of the tailgate that is 54" wide, and the hunter is leaning against the back of the box which is 36.5" deep. The height of the bed is 11.5"
https://www.polaris.com/en-us/ranger-utv/ranger-crew-900-eps-titanium-matte-metallic-le/specs
Here's a drawing on how you measure a boar.
https://www.google.com/url?sa=i&rct...MSNV9Ip0DfGtdZjNv_Hb6YlA&ust=1394824312484036
Here's a journal article on how to measure a boar and how to relate the measurement to weight.
https://www.aspajournal.it/index.php/ijas/article/view/ijas.2010.e9/1250
Another article on weighing pigs by body measurements here.
https://sugarmtnfarm.com/how-to-weigh-a-pig-with-a-string/
It's pretty clear that weight is proportional to the length x girth squared or is proportional to the cube root of the length.
If I scale the photo of the 400 pound boar on the back of the Polaris to a 500 pound boar, the length scale factor equal to the cube root of (500/400) = 1.08. For comparison a 500 pound boar posed in the same position on the back of the Polaris would have its eyes over the right hand side of the bed.
Without a reference distance which provided by the Polaris bed in the photo I referenced, you could have vastly different perceptions on the size of the boar which is exactly what you get when you take a picture of a boar in the woods with a hunter in the background.
In the days of film photography, if you used a 50 mm focal length lens to take the photo, you would have your normal perspective. If you took the picture with a 28 mm lens, the foreground object seems larger than the background object just due to perspective. If the photographer used a 100-200 mm lens and stood back, the perspective is flat and the foreground object and the background object would appear to be closer and similar in perspective. A good comparison is taking a model launch photo with a house in the background. This happens at CMASS launches frequently where a house 2000' away looks like its almost next to the pads!
It all the illusion of perspective, and it doesn't have to be intentional.
Bob