Quote - For just sky, you can get away with a large amount of camera disagreement or movement within the sphere.

The trouble is when you try to point the camera down. For example, trying to place a car on the "ground" - it just doesn't look right if you deviate much at all in camera viewpoint, unless the ground is wide open.

I get away with it in Doge's Palace, as this is open courtyard and there's nothing nearby but pavement. But the Doge's Palace image is so low in resolution that it's only suitable for demonstrations - not for a published work.

Thanks Bagginsbill... I kind of suspected this.

That issue wouldn't be there, I don't think, for a shot like Khai-J-Bach suggests... where the ground would be in the distance, down the way.

But for shot where, say there is a car or people on the ground and the camera is looking down at them, its best I guess to have a prop / set...such as your Car Patio ;-) ...providing the Poser ground... and employing some sort of trickery (e.g. a wall or balustrade or brow of a hill) to blend the extremity of that with the ground that recedes off to the horizon, as portrayed by the spherical panorama image...?

For example in Santel's image earlier in this thread, using my first test render, I presume he's used a ground plane prop with a water shader in the foreground, under the boat...? ...and that manages to blend into the sea from my Vue render.

So, I guess my concern is more how much camera position leeway there is, assuming that the foreground ground in Poser will be some sort of blended prop...