La verdad es que no quería postear en este tema. Si digo una cosa se "enfadaran" unos, si digo la contraria se "mosquearan" otros.

Dicho esto, ¿por que, en vez de opinar no se coge lo que "la normativa" dice? La recomendación ITU - Rec. 709 (revisión 5, la mas reciente), si. Se puede mirar aquí: http://www.itu.int/rec/R-REC-BT.709/e (eso si, hace falta estar suscrito para bajarte el pdf). Comentado esta cuestión, señalar que se puede encontrar un extracto de dicho documento en la pagina wiki (en ingles): https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Rec._709

En ese pdf, que recoge la wiki, pone esto (esto no es opinable, es la "normativa"):

Cita Iniciado por ITU-Rec. 709
Rec. 709 coding uses “studio-swing” levels where reference black is defined as 8-bit interface code 16 and reference white is defined as 8-bit interface code 235. Interface codes 0 and 255 are used for synchronization, and are prohibited from video data. Eight-bit codes between 1 and 15 provide footroom, and can be used to accommodate transient signal content such as filter undershoots. Eight-bit interface codes 236 through 254 provide headroom, and can be used to accommodate transient signal content such as filter overshoots and specular highlights. Bit-depths deeper than 8 bits are obtained by appending least-significant bits. Ten-bit systems are commonplace in studios. (Desktop computer graphic systems ordinarily use “full-swing” encoding that places reference black at code 0 and reference white at code 255, and provide no footroom or headroom.) The 16..235 limits (for luma; 16..240 for chroma) originated with ITU Rec. 601.
Que cada uno saque sus conclusiones...


Saludos