As I said, find a picture of the earth that is big enough that one pixel equals 1 kilometer, and is high-def enough that the edge can be defined down to a single pixel, and was taken from an orbit exactly in line with the equator. Now zoom in and measure the pixels from north to south and east to west, because if you just look at the complete picture, it will still look perfectly round.
If you have an image editor program, creat a new image that measures 13000x13000 pixels, use the circle tool to create a circle 12756 across, resize the image leaving the width the same but scrunching it down by 44 pixels. Observe circle.
WOW! It still looks perfectly round. So no, you're not going to find a photo of the earth that shows a noticeable 'flattening' of the poles.
Convenient. "It's there. It really is. By coincidence, there's no way you could ever see it, but it reaaaaaaally is there!"
Just like the sub-moon, anti-moon, the edge of the flat earth and the people who guard it (or infinite plain, depending on your preference), moonshrimp, dark energy field, non-euclidean folded-space earth, the 1:1 scale map re-sizing issue, and probably some others.
Anyway, whether you believe in the round earth pole/equator diameter difference or not, I'm just explaining why a difference that small in a picture of a circle that big won't be noticeable just by looking at it.
*edited to remove 'harmful moonlight' from list, as some people here have convinced themselves so thoroughly that it's harmful, that it might really be (for them anyhow).