The entirety of what you propose was covered by Einstein, in general relativity. This covers the bending of time and space.

Photons always travel in a linear fashon. According to general relativity, when we observe light that has been bent, it is instead space that was bent and light was simply travelling a straight line through that bend in spacetime.

Even though light may travel in a straight line with space bending around it, this still means that space is not where it appears to us. Also, given that the speed of light changes as it travels through media other than vacuum, light traveling through various densities of hydrogen and other elements floating out in space must influence the photon's velocity. As gravitational strengths change along the course of the photon, the radius of variation will differ based upon the density of elements in that region. As an example, fiber optics allow for optical vectoring of photons which includes direction and velocity control.

Fiber optics reflect the light down it's path, like thousands upon thousands of mirrors. Still a straight line.

Photons are the sole force mediator for quantum electrodynamics. So yes, they do interact with plenty of stuff. But they do not interact directly through gravity, which is a completely different fundimental force.

How things will actually move through "apparent to us" space is covered by Einstein.

How space actually looks, in a higher dimensional sense, is still a subject under study and much debate (see string theory and branes).

Still further complicating the matter, again as described by Einstein, is that in order to preserve the laws of phsyics between two observers, objects experience time and space differently (as in time dialation). So, exactly where things are depends very much on how fast you are moving in relation to said thing. Doesn't matter here on earth, but at relativistic speeds it becomes important.

"Create mathematical adjustments for errors in the perception of our viewable space..." I don't believe Einstein exactly covered what Junk is looking for- that being a true view of the night sky above. Whereas some of the principles Albert put forth could be utilized in our quest of solving this problem you are still missing the bigger picture... the power of our math and the dynamics of our universe. Unfortunately I don't think today's arithmetic could ever give you the outlook you desire. I got to noodling this one and realized that I was going to need a very powerful computer to help with just one of the computations. Then a domino effect started that the most powerful computer in existence could not keep up with. The problem is quite simple; every computation leads to another set of integers that you have to go back and use in the previous calculation. Given the dynamics at play (and a constantly morphing universe) you could never have a complete picture. Who knows, perhaps if you were able arrive at an answer, or view if you like, you might find yourself back where you started- The sky above your head.

Most of the stars you see when you look at the night sky with the naked eye are actually relatively close by. All the objects you can see are within our own galaxy and most of them are in our sector of the galaxy. As a result, in most cases the light has not traveled all that long or passed much matter on its way here. So most of what you see must be very close to where it appears to be.

Dwayne Anderson:

Not quite true. Gravitational Lense effect is used by astronomers to detect planets around their respective stars.

http://www.4p8.com/eric.brasseur/remote_earths.html

Wouldn't a relatively static body of dark matter distributed in gradients across our field of view distort what we see? Who is to say how much dark matter is distributed in our our observable Universe?

http://www.cfht.hawaii.edu/News/Lensing/

Notice that there is an observable pattern in the dark matter distribution!