CompuServe Messages

My experience with architectural visualization, at least regionally, is that the PAR is a sufficient, if not superior quality to what people are expecting or even hoping for. I wouldn't worry for your type of application. But of course that is a generalization, and I'm not necessarily familiar with your regional competition. I have been trying to do more local, regional, and cable type work of late and I am of course my own worst critic. So I guess I personally wouldn't be happy with digital video if I thought there was something better that one of my competitors might be using against me. <g> All in all you've got to spend a whole lot more money to make the next step up. And even if you fear you might indeed be making that step shortly it would appear that the PAR will hold its value at least in the short term. But bear in mind, the darn board is under $2000, and you can always use an IDE hard drive. BTW, get the big one, 1.7G, and the optional TBC might be helpful if you'd like to have moving traffic, etc. when you plunk your building on that site. What is your output at present? If you want to continue this, maybe we should take it over to hardware. Give a holler. Roger D. P.S. What'd you think about the Halloween Bowl game in Chicago?