This is an interesting but confusing picture....although I've only rarely seen the 'sun dog' effect, on those occasions (and in any pictures depicting it) the parhelia are parallel to the visual horizon: or, at equal apparent heights above the horizon (as per the exemplar picture on the Wiki page op cit).
Your picture makes me think I might've been wrong in my lifelong expectations about this. Partly because I can't establish a proper horizon datum, especially with your first picture.
May I ask what the type of location was, where you took these pictures?
My initial impression was almost similar to the effects visible from within an aircraft at high altitude, where the sun is 'setting' (or 'rising') below high cloud layers.
The second thought I had was a picture taken facing out to sea...and the third was almost like the effects visible at great height from a mountain during sunset/sunrise.
But none of those scenarios explain (within my potentially-flawed expectations on this) why the parhelia are 'canted' relative to the viewers implied metahorizon....
I don't mean anything to do with the short upsloping rays from each sun-dog, I mean the markedly-higher elevation between the left sun-dog (viewer's left) and the 'ground', in comparison with the lower position of that on the viewer's right.
Why the 'skew'? Or does that just happen sometimes, and I've never known it could?
