and now Admin, calling other a "troll" is not "harassing" people? Let's see what you are going to do about it.

Poor troll...

Thank you!

It’s strange how you jump in to defend some users and not others, it feels like the admin have some favorites here. And no, feel free to delete my comment. Maybe fake -2B- will stop crying about it

Can you please stop harassing others here?

Nice username buddy!

admin could you please rid the site of this AI slop?

Thanks, but just pasting the AI RESPONSE IS NOT NECESSARY, as I mentioned in the question.

Here, if you are able to understand, don't need to cry about it.
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journal...39AC0F26A4

[spam]

Thanks for your response, it is clear now.

Thanks for your response.

God forbid I try to help anyone I guess. But I'm afraid you haven't addressed the x264 part.

If you transcode and encode the same video to another codec, it will inevitably lead to quality degradation due to the nature of video compression.

So, if you have an HEVC video and transcode it to AV1, then transcode it again to HEVC, you will lose quality at each step: first from the original BD to HEVC, then from HEVC to AV1, and from AV1 back to HEVC (resulting in blurriness, pixelation, etc.). That is why a visual side-by-side comparison of sample frames is the most efficient way to assess quality loss.

The question is clear enough to understand, so be a ware of fake users just fusing around to get attention.

There is no method to determine the previous codec from the final file alone.

The only way is to get the person encoding the file to tell you that it originated from an HEVC source (in your case) but then, what tells you that HEVC used for the encode was not itself reencoded from a VP9 source? That that VP9 encode was not also reencoded from NVENC (h264/h265) source? Etc.

SOURCE => NVENC => HEVC => VP9 => HEVC : could you tell that last HEVC took this road to "be" ? Nope.

So no, there's no magical way to get any certainty, you can only assess the damage.

Thanks for your response.

I very much understand the abbreviations, it's that your question was very poorly worded. And the answer below is quite simply misconstrued.

Why would you respond to a question if you do not understand the abbreviations or the question itself. Any way i already have my awnser.