The edge even has a slight bevel to it,
Point it out.
the inner border is way too sharp to be a shadow. Also that shadow is just way too dark, showing no features at all of the supposed surface that would have to be there.
Shadows in bright sunlight have sharp edges.
Also that shadow is just way too dark, showing no features at all of the supposed surface that would have to be there. Yet even the vertical edge the clasts are stuck in, which is in shadow itself, is so light it would reflect light enough to pick up features in that dark shadow even in the original photo, if it really was a shadow on the same level, but that is not the case. All this is so obvious I see I can't trust anything you say about a photo image.
BS. Obviously you don't know anything about dynamic range in photographs. I do. The HDR picture I posted shows that the shadowed area is illuminated, showing features within. The original image didn't have the dynamic range required to
Of course, in your scenario the bottom of the "depression" wold be illuminated in the original picture.
Then tyou go on to outline in green a part of the higher surface on the bottom left along with the lower shadow in the depression, claiming they are on the same surface. Sheesh, this is ridiculous.
The features in the shadow are obviously extensions of the features in the light, as my ellipses indicate.