It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
The rock in the distance that you are making as a reference point has two smaller rocks behind it. If the camera angle has changed as much as you have indicated, wouldn't the position of the two rocks behind your reference point also have changed? They appear to be in exactly the same position, it is as if they have just been cut and pasted there.
The second photo does look as if it has been taken at a lower angle, which would account for the foreground difference, but the two disappearing rocks look to be large enough to still be seen. But then again, maybe not.
Their position does change. This animation flips between the two images, and you can see the perspective change:
One can always check the drive log here to see how much change in position the rover had between two images: curiositylog.com...
Between this image and this image, Curiosity moved 16.17 meters.
There are literally thousands & thousands of plausible explanations for them not showing up in the photos,, which makes next to impossible to prove some kind of fakery is going on
I get the perspective issue, even in the background of the big rock.
What I have a problem with, is that the second small rock, closest to you when looking at the picture, appears to be in front of the large rock, almost "even" with the split rock, closer than the "outcropping" of the front of the big rock.
So in the next picture, where they seem to have disappeared, you can still see the split in the split rock. Shouldn't you also then be able to see a part of the "front" rock, if they are lined up? It is still closer (more forward) than the "main" rock.
reply to post by nenothtu
Yup, excellent explanation. Here's a "shaky cam" version, quickly alternating between the two frames, for those people who have trouble seeing the cross-eye version.
I want to thank all the members that have contributed to evidence the change of perspective of the images taken by the rover and the depth of the 2D/3D.
But nobody has still explained where it is gone the "CUB Anomaly"... That appear and disappear....
reply to post by wmd_2008
Already done. And however...
hemm.... hemm.... wmd_2008, dear wmd_2008,... really, but really,.... WTH (%&V&/£) do you want from me?
curiosityrover.com has pointing data for each Curiosity image, showing the direction the camera was looking, and its field of view:
Hopefully that will help with figuring out the perspective.