Different things can be seen in panel A in Figures 1 and 2 probably because the orientation and height of the camera were probably different from they were in the original photo. Although these were specified in the Methods, approximate heights/distances were given, which may have led to these differing results. The leaves in B, C, and D all had different patterns of variegation between Figure 1 and their corresponding panel in Figure 2. This can be explained because different leaves were probably used in Figures 1 and 2. This is probably because the Methods did not specify clearly enough where the exact leaves that were used in the original photos were located.
The fact that in panel B in Figure 1, the ruler uses cm, but in panel B in Figure 2, the ruler uses mm allows me to infer that different rulers were probably used in generating these two flowers. The arrow heads and lengths were different most likely due to the fact that these specific characteristics were not specified clearly enough in the Methods section. The pictures taken in C and D show more of the background leaves in Figure 2 than they do in Figure 1 could be due to a variety of reasons. Perhaps the camera was held further away from the leaves in Figure 2 than in Figure 1, or perhaps the cameras' default settings were different. It is also possible that the different types of iphones were used entirely.
Anoter factor that contributed to differences was the weather. The weather was almost certainly different from when the replicate photo was taken than from when the original photo was taken. Although the weather was specified in the methods, this factor could not be controlled by the person doing the replicate photo. Thus, the sunlight and brightness in all the panels differ slightly between the two figures.
A different type of iphone may have been used to take the photos. This may be an explanation for why the overall size of the images are different. The original photos may have been uploaded, and then scaled accordingly, but if the original photos' were different sizes, then when they were scaled, they would have been different sizes. This would have led to a difference in sizes overall between the two figures. This may also be a reason as to why the photos appear to be scaled differently.