polar configuration offset

[Ellengerger:]
"Due to parallax, in the polar configuration' (PC) Venus would 
NEVER be centered on Saturn as seen from latitude 45 degrees, but 
would be distinctly off center, unlike the sun-in-circle symbols which 
resemble ordinary lunar and solar halos.

[Talbott:]
Not just wrong, but very strange.  In three dimensional renderings that 
put Venus close enough to Saturn to provide a general correspondence 
with the pictographic motifs, the observer will not even notice the 
displacement of Venus from center--Saturn is so much bigger than 
Venus.  What will be noticed is the slight displacement of *Mars* 
from the visual center, due to its juxtaposition with Venus, which 
appears as a narrow band around Mars, therefore emphasizing the 
visual displacement.  Because Mars is so small, a viewer at the 45th 
parallel will see "over" Mars a bit, so that it will appear in a position 
slightly lower than perfect center.  It is the small size of Mars that 
permits the planet to visually descend from the center as it approaches 
the Earth, even dropping below Saturn without ever departing from the 
polar axis, thus fulfilling its role as the hero descending to the 
underworld.   In fact, let's be honest about it.  The degree to which the 
actual sizes of the participating planets enable the line-up to present 
the required images is astonishing--a one in a thousand proposition if 
you will think about it.

I've reproduced the saturn-and-venus-only image as from the pole, the saturn-and-venus-only image as from 45 degrees, and the saturn-venus-mars image from 45 degrees.

I think the images speak for themselves, more or less. In my opinion, Talbott's position is a bit dismissive of a real problem with the polar configuration or "saturn thesis". True, the images from 45 degrees are still striking, but the offsets and asymmetry are also quite noticeable, and are more of a problem, even just the venus offset, than Talbott seems willing to admit.