to my disappointment I had to notice you did not heed my advice to keep it simple and comprehensible. Instead you chose to flood another scenery-making thread with guesswork and half-knowledge. Please take into account these forum discussions are not for the enjoyment of participants only: there are "innocent" readers out there as well. They're looking for solutions instead of juggling pseudo-problems.
That's exactly what made me unhappy: attempting to nail a certain problem is beneficial to all readers, spilling a bucket full of assumptions is not. And I won't even mention the "contributions" of some smc66x, as I'll scroll away that moronic drivel immediately (where is the "ignore"-button?). An attention-deprived kid announcing his "photolistic sceneri" every second day but obviously unable to figure out the most basic scenery commands (let alone spelling)... pathetic.
Now take your planetarium analogy for example: It immediatly collapses under closer scrutiny for these reasons alone:
- The visitor of a platetarium remains fixed in his seat; but in a chase view, the camera location moves by definition. Wasn't that what your first wikipedia quote said? - Observer's motion is the key! You won't experience parallaxes within a fixed environment, but you'll notice the absence of them as soon as you start to move. Therefore: swiveling your head in a pano is fine, translating your viewpoint is not. Did you notice none of the commercial simulators provide this feature, despite it beeing technically easy to acchieve? Why is that so?
- The distance between stars in space is huge compared to your planes's movement relative to the earth. You will simply not cover the distance required to notice parallax errors in a starlit sky. Same rationale in a planetarium: everything shown is too far away to expect visible parallaxes at all. Therefore: Every seat is a good seat despite minor prespective errors, but switching seats repeatedly during a show will destroy the illusion.
That said, you might get "close" with a pano only showing distant background and a 3D-scenery in the foreground, but how will you blend them over seamlessly?? Albhang? - Sorry, the cross-over is extremely distracting and ugly.
It is astonishing you would ignore my (relevant) flying field example and replace it with your (irrelevant) planetarium example just to make a point (and fail). Instead of quoting half of the encyclopedia britannica you would better use your time to understand what I meant and respond to that. Pen and paper are your best friend when it comes to visualizing geometry. If you honestly believe I'd pick up an intellectual gauntlet, please remember how many illustrated explanations I had to provide until you would swallow the simple fact a spherical panorama needs to be mapped onto a sphere (or be remapped)...
Just on thing to note: I did provide you with a spherical pano .scn-file for your telki scene. This is meant for fixed viewing position only. If you want to experiment with pano and chase view, you will need to develop an appropriate panorama mapping on your own.
Another thing to note: What I said about the FIXED-keyword and the PILOT_POSITION is valid for my .scn-file as well. If you believe it's in error, why did you use it without complaint in the first place? I'd like to improve it if possible, but funnily it works perfect for me (and several thousand users)...