Here's a short video... a screen capture session showing a DVD preview
(NTSC) in MyDVD when using 640x480 and 720x480 images in a movie... the
dotted white frame in the opening scene shows the 'TV Safe zone'.

http://www.eicsoftware.com/PapaJohn/...Dimensions.wmv

It's not meant to suggest that 640x480 is better than using 800x600.... it's
simply trying to illustrate the difference when using 640x480 and
720x480.... someone in a forum asked if there was a difference, and if so,
what?
--
PapaJohn

Movie Maker 2 and Photo Story 3 - www.papajohn.org
Photo Story 2 - www.photostory.papajohn.org
..

Why anyone would want to use a non standard and basically incompatible
image size for a TV screen is quite beyond me...and why anyone would want to
demonstrate it and at the same time show the TV "Safe Zone" on it is also
beyond me...perhaps you can show us where this discussion if it exists is so
that we all might learn more......and perhaps at the same time remembering
that the "Safe Zone" is a consideration measured in pixels how you got that
size to show on top of an image that is only 640 x 480

Duhhhhhhhhhh, what a laugh

--
John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
www.the-kellys.co.uk
Check out free video hosting at www.the-kellys.org
----
\|||/
(oo)
----------ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------
All material gained from other sources is duly acknowledged. No Value is
obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work

After putting the little clip together yesterday to help with the forum
discussion, I added the link and info to the Importing Source Files > Still
Pictures page of my website.... check there for further info or changes to
it.... what's there now is just the beginning of the info about pixel
dimension sizes.

--
PapaJohn

Movie Maker 2 and Photo Story 3 - www.papajohn.org
Photo Story 2 - www.photostory.papajohn.org
..
"John Kelly" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Why anyone would want to use a non standard and basically incompatible
> image size for a TV screen is quite beyond me...and why anyone would want
> to
> demonstrate it and at the same time show the TV "Safe Zone" on it is also
> beyond me...perhaps you can show us where this discussion if it exists is
> so
> that we all might learn more......and perhaps at the same time remembering
> that the "Safe Zone" is a consideration measured in pixels how you got
> that
> size to show on top of an image that is only 640 x 480
>
> Duhhhhhhhhhh, what a laugh
>
> --
> John Kelly
> www.the-kellys.org
> www.the-kellys.co.uk
> Check out free video hosting at www.the-kellys.org
> ----
> \|||/
> (oo)
> ----------ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------
> All material gained from other sources is duly acknowledged. No Value is
> obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work

Yes all well and NOT good. Please answer the question asked...tell us where
the original message is.

With regard to pixel ratio...I still say (and was backed up by an Expert
from Microsoft) I still see no reason why anyone would want to display an
image having either 640 x 480 OR 800 x 600 on a screen that is NOT DESIGNED
to take that size image...the 640 size will blur at the edges because it has
been stretched and the 800 size will lose definition because pixels are
squeezed out....whether "Nearest Neighbour" or "Bicubic" methods are used.

This was wishful thinking on your part + the Instant Expert when this issue
was first raised and it is still wishful thinking today.....

--
Best Wishes.....John Kelly
www.the-kellys.org
www.the-kellys.co.uk
Check out free video hosting at www.the-kellys.org
----
\|||/
(oo)
----------ooO-(_)-Ooo-------------
All material gained from other sources is duly acknowledged. No Value is
obtained by publishing in any format other peoples work