I’m with Christina, this looks correct to me as well. (Also, I can’t believe you could do all that from a phone! That’s dedication.) I’ve generally treated the boarder case as “I’m not editing the image itself when placing on the slide, therefore it is not distinct enough to justify it as a new work”, but where I get hazy is that the slide itself with the composition of images would be a ‘new work’. This might be splitting hairs, but I’ve been wondering lately if the tool/form factor makes a difference for the border case. For example, I can download your slides and then edit them from there. All the text and images are still individual moveable pieces. But, if I export the deck as jpegs then the three images and the text are all baked together (I use the baking a cake metaphor with a lot of media). So then the slide with the three images on it becomes a ‘single’ image which contains the other works. A remix? I’m not sure.
A few years ago, I think I recall Clint Lalonde sharing a story about an image that was used as the cover of the book and that seemed to be fine, but it was a single image. I wonder what would have happened if it was 2-3 images with different (and incompatible) licenses.
In both those cases I tend to justify the use because I haven’t changed the images themselves and that the attribution statements I include clearly spell out the TASL for each. Maybe it’s less like baking a cake and more like laying brick?