Which Is The Higher Quality Source: VC-1 Or Two-Pass AVC High@L4.1

[LouieChuckyMerry]

Happy Saturday! and a simple question for which I've been unable to find a definitive answer. If I want to rip a Blu-ray, then use that rip as a source for denoising-shriveling in AviSynth, which would be the higher quality: VC-1 video at 13+ Mbps or AVC video at 14.0 Mbps High@L4.1? It seems to me that the original, unadulterated VC-1 video would be better, but perhaps the two-pass AVC is an improvement because it's able to redistribute bit rate more efficiently and that would translate to the encode? Thanks in advance for any clarification .

[Kerry56]

If your original Blu-ray movie was encoded by the studio with VC-1, you should use that as the source material for any future processing/encoding.

[jagabo]

An exact copy of what's on the Blu-ray disc is the best source, whether it be VC-1, h.264, or MPEG 2. Any re-encode with a lossy codec can only give you less quality.

[LouieChuckyMerry]

If your original Blu-ray movie was encoded by the studio with VC-1, you should use that as the source material for any future processing/encoding.

An exact copy of what's on the Blu-ray disc is the best source, whether it be VC-1, h.264, or MPEG 2. Any re-encode with a lossy codec can only give you less quality.

I figured that was the case but wanted to be certain, and now I am. Thank you both very much .