Photons from stars--how do they fill in such large angular distances? It would seem that far-away stars are at such a distance that I should be able to take a step to the side and not have the star's photons hit my eye. How do stars release so many photons to fill in such great angular distances?
 A: The answer is simple: Yes, stars really do produce that many photons. This calculation is a solid (though very rough) approximation that a star the size of the sun might emit about $10^{45}$ visible photons per second (1 followed by 45 zeros, a billion billion billion billion billion photons).
You can do the calculation: If you're 10 light-years away from that star, you are nevertheless getting bombarded by 1 million photons per square centimeter in each second.
$$\frac{10^{45}\ \text{photons}/\mathrm s}{4\pi (10 \ \text{lightyears})^2} \approx 10^6\ \text{photons}/(\mathrm{cm^2\ s)}$$
A: A star radiates in all directions. You would still see the star regardless of the number of steps you take to any side, just not the same photons.
A laser radiates in only one direction (or in a very small cone). If you took a large enough step to the side (larger than the angular size of the emitted beam) so as to exit this cone, then you would no longer see the source. 
A: Although I agree with all three of the above answers let me present a slightly different perspective on the problem.
It's tempting to think of the light from the star as a flood of photons that behave like little bullets. However this is oversimplified because a photon is a localised object i.e. we observe a photon when something interacts with the light and localises it. 
The light from the star is not a hail of photons but instead the star is transferring energy to the photon quantum field and this energy spreads out radially and evenly. If you were to describe the light as photons you'd have to say the photons were completely delocalised i.e. they are spread over the whole spherical wavefront and you could not say in which direction the photon was travelling.
As the energy reaches you it can interact with the rhodopsin molecules in your eye and transfer one photon's worth of energy. It's at this point, and only at this point, that the energy is localised into a photon. Even if the star were so dim that it only emitted a few photons worth of energy per second there would still be a finite probability that your eye could interact with it and detect a photon, though that probability would obviously be ludicrously small.
So stepping aside would make little difference because as long as your eye intersected the spherical wavefront somewhere there would still be a finite probability of detecting a photon and therefore seeing the star.
Have a look at my answer to Some doubts about photons for some related arguments.
A: The only stars you can reliably see are ones that are spewing enough photons at your eyeballs to appear stable.
Any star which is so dim that photons entering your eye can literally be counted one by one, simply will not register in your vision, because your eye's retina is not sensitive enough.
So your question is basically embroiled in observer bias; it assumes that the stars you see are all the stars there are, and it assumes that you could see a single photon if it hit your eye.
A: Allow me to channel something akin to the anthropic principle here.  You can only see the stars that have a lot of photons reaching your eye.  If a star were so far away that photons were reaching your eyes only occasionally then the star would be too dim for you to see in in the first place.  Even if you could see the photons, the star would appear to blink.
So because you can see the star and it's relatively bright, that means there is enough of a continuous stream of photons reaching the Earth that stepping side to side doesn't change anything.  Also, angular resolution isn't quantized so there is never a situation where stepping side to side (while maintaining the same radius from the star) ever changes the probability of receiving a photon.
A: A very non-technical answer, but in trying to get your head around this, have you thought about the speed of light? 
The angle distended by the star on your eyeball (or by your eyeball on the star) is very small. So it seems like a very tiny region of space must be 'full of photons' for the star to be constantly visible, and since the point where you are standing is not special, all similar regions must be equally 'full'. But the region in question is actually a very narrow beam whose length is the speed of light multiplied by the time that images persist in our vision. If the latter is 50ms, the length of the column is 15,000 km - the diameter of the earth. In this there would need to be a few dozen photons for the star to be marginally visible iirc.
Not a rigorous explanation I know, but it might help reconcile your intuition with the science.
A: So starlight propagates spherically and each human eyeball creates localized photons just at the intersection of wavefront and retina. No matter where you are in relation to the star some part of this wavefront will reveal the photon stream. Some kind of sensor that could image the path of all the photons/wave functions as they were emitted would reveal a solid hemisphere of light expanding away from the star...
