Problem With Converting OGM to AVI to play on ps3

Discussion in 'Digital Video' started by spacemanspiff13, Aug 7, 2011.

  1. spacemanspiff13, Aug 7, 2011
    Last edited: Aug 7, 2011

    spacemanspiff13 macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    #1
    So I have some ogm files that I quite simply converted using visualhub. That being said I ran into another problem. the avi files look good on the computer but when I play them on the ps3 the aspect ratio looks like 2:35:1 almost instead of 4:3 which the ogm plays over the ps3 media server but I want avi or mp4 that i can put on flash drives.

    the ogm file on media server will start 4:3 correctly and I can even fullscreen it but the avi aside from already being very thin can only zoom(much to close I might add).

    The video codec in the ogm is mpeg-2 and the the avi and mp4 don't change the aspect ratio or anything just the video codec. would that really cause the ps3 output to look so thin when the aspect ratio isn't changed? Mpeg files work but they're more than double the size of the ogm. Any ideas?
     
  2. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
  3. spacemanspiff13 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    #3
    I'm not sure I follow you. I posted in an existing thread which I saw after was from a few years ago so maybe obsoleste.

    Then couldn't find anything else so I started a new thread on a related yet updated and new problem and didn't want to type a whole new message.

    Is that wrong? elaborate please. Cheers.
     
  4. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    #4
    Yes, it is wrong. It is a violation of the rules of this forum. In general, it is a violation of Internet etiquette. You began by necroposting. Necroposting is adding a new post to a dead thread. The practice is frowned upon. However, necroposting appears to be a requirement of newbies so you are forgiven for that. However, you doubly-compounded your error by creating a new thread to post essentially the same message that you had posted earlier.
     
  5. spacemanspiff13 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    #5
    Ok fair enough except that in order to acquire any information on the subject when I've found none available would I not be required to start a new thread anyhow if that one is "dead" as you've deemed so. I get that I double posted but how do you propose I ask my question when I can't find another similar thread available?

    As stated I figured that no one would see that message as I noticed AFTER I wrote it, the thread was old(I get your point on necroposting don't worry) and a whole new message that says essentially the same thing anyway seems pointless.

    So again I ask you, how do I ask questions without starting a new thread when I can't find a similar one available and the other is "dead" as you've proclaimed it. I realize you "wizards" love bashing newbies and all but providing some assistance would help a great deal more. Thanks=)
     
  6. MisterMe macrumors G4

    MisterMe

    Joined:
    Jul 17, 2002
    Location:
    USA
    #6
    Starting a new thread was OK. However, once you necroposted to an older thread, there was no need to create a new thread unless you delete the first post.

    There is no need to get snippy. If you need help, then it is a very bad idea to preemptively call names of the people who may have the knowledge that you need.
     
  7. spacemanspiff13 thread starter macrumors newbie

    Joined:
    Aug 7, 2011
    #7
    I didn't call you anything and it seemed your intent was hardly to provide help but criticism instead. I see no sign of problem solving intentions.

    I did try to delete the post in the old thread cause thats where I posted first but saw no way to do it in the edit section of the message so I proceeded to just make a new thread since that one was years old.

    I see this apparently offends people for some reason and I apologize but none of this really makes sense if the thread was "dead" as you put it. It sounds like the issue here is that I didn't delete my first post because I didn't know how and the messages were minutes apart. Had I been able to delete my first message, only the new thread would remain and all would be well.

    Unintentional necroposting at most since I only wanted the 2nd message(the new thread) to appear but couldn't make the first disappear. Do you kindly have the knowledge so that I might do so and we can avoid further infractions in the future? and do you possibly have a solution to my original question then?
     

Share This Page