Sorry to be writing so much on this, but its been bugging me and Ie found the research useful. After doing some reading and looking at edit programs Ie found this out about pixel ratios Computers have square pixels. CCIR601 video has rectangular ixelsPAL 625/50 576 active lines / 702 viewable samples x 3/4 screen aspect = 1:1.094 (approx 10% wider than tall) NTSC 525/60 486/711 x 3/4 = 1:0.911 (approx 10% taller than wide pixels) (viewable samples allows for blanking signal.) 601 video has no extra pixels for widescreen, therefore anamorphic widescreen is the best you can get. Widescreen TVs stretch the picture out. With digital and high definition standards there will be extra pixels for widescreen. (and hopefully a global standard) So why does pixel aspect ratio matter? If youe using live footage without DVE and going back out to the same system it doesn really. At worst the pictures may be slightly distorted while viewed on the computer. If youe producing computer graphics to go to video you have to compensate to maintain true geometry in the graphics when theye output. In professional use, everything is checked on a video moniter anyhow. Therefore from what I understand to get (PAL) widescreen from Poser you can compensate in poser by putting the camera x-scale to 133% and render to 576 x 768 (PAL fullscreen) or you can render in poser to 576 x 1024 (PAL square pixel 16:9) and compensate in the edit software for pixel aspect ratio. The Digital Factbook is available free from Quantel. (www.quantel.com) The10th edition is out in June and will also have an online version. www.terran.com also has good resources on codecs and architectures for web based video, Quicktime etc.