On 9/4/03 2:39 AM, "Ben Ing" <vbing at mac.com> wrote: > Not entirely sure, but I think that this could simply be because of the > physics of scanning interlaced video. Isn't 30 20% bigger than 25? With > fewer frames, the same scanning rate would produce a larger picture, > wouldn't it? Hmmm...same ratio. Could be, I don't know. Mark