Hi Gabor - the projection issue is one that could be included in the "definition" of a panorama, while another could be whether the picture includes objects that the eye could not see without rotating (in) the head, or by requiring a minimum angle for the field of view, etc. Your (nice, BTW!) images follow the pattern of the original photographer who coined the term in the 19th century, but I don't think Mike and I are the only ones who use the word more loosely. How to define an image such as this one, which was taken without moving the lens, but by shifting the camera and simply pasting together (Canon 24 T/S lens, 20D full left/right shift in landscape mode)? I think a lot of folks would call this a panoramic image. I got the impression, perhaps mistakenly, from your post, that you would not call this a panorama, and I wondered why not. (As a parallel discussion, there are some who restrict the term "macro" solely to those images at 1:1 or greater magnification, while many others mean (very) close-up - definition is often only convention )

http://www.fototime.com/6A2B4C0541ADD0B/orig.jpg