I don't have an issue at all with the perspective distortion in the original image.
Perspective is a fact of life. When we are in the real world, our brain corrects for the perspective distortion that we see all the time and all around us.
We see a long rectangular building sideways and we KNOW that the nearest front wall of that building is not higher than the back wall that is so far away from us.
In the same way, I look at the original photo and I KNOW that that table is a normal rectangular surface that is not skewed. That knowledge is subconscious, but it is enough.
In a sense, I've always found it odd that people feel the need to "correct" perspective in a photo.
And I've had professional experience with this, like when I photographed for an architectural digest book, and the publisher wanted me to "correct" my images, to make them appear like they were all shot from an imaginary spot roughly halfway up the height of the building, when in reality I had not had access to floors opposite those buildings, much less a crane to take me to the right height.
So I corrected some of these images and they looked awful, because perspective distortion correction always goes hand in hand with some stretching and compressing of the visual information, resulting in (for instance) a top floor of a large building that was much higher than it had been in reality. There were some photos that I just could not bring myself to torture like that.
Having said that, you (Dan) did a good job here with the distortion correction.
Good, but (for me) unnecessary.
