I have an old AMD driver so it might be different with more recent ones. It's in the Video > Advnaced Video Color section:

@nick Yes, indeed, I have more recent drivers and all these parameters are gone. I wonder what are the default settings now with more recents cards/driver and if it may be adjusted in Registry...

Thanks so much everyone for the great input. Sorry I've only just today had the time to read all the posts in depth.

So to sum it up rather roughly - make your footage look good by working your contrasts within the 16-235 range and you're pretty much safe for all the different players' / browsers' behavior? At least that's what i think i've learned here, makes a lot of sense too.

Thing is, I now tested Nick's S curve approach. It gives me nice contrasts indeed within the legal range, that fine white kind of veil finally disappears, great! ( I usually tried to do most of these adjustments in Colorfast 2 ) But if I apply the levles filter to studio RGB after it, the image gets washed out again. But theoretically it shouldn't if I'm already in legal range, or should it?? Sorry, tryin' to get my head asround this.

Then again, reports and results seem to vary, as confirmed in the thread too. Nick, in your levels test clip with the violonist, did I get you right that you exported in studio level? JCP shows full swing here in Firefox an my Eizo, I can't read the words. In fact, all of the internet, including the whites in this forum, are displayd at 255 here.

EDIT: I now exported a good looking render with the S curve applied, limiting things to 16-235. And it looks too contrasted, the render with the simple levels filter to studio RGB looks better. Why is that?

Thanks!

On my desktop my AMD driver default dynamic range is "Full (0-255)". If I change that to "Limited (16-235)" it only affects playback in WMP and MPC-HC (allowing me to see the words). It does not have any effect on playback on YouTube or in VLC, Quicktime Player, Chrome or Firefox.

That's very helpful information, Nick. I suspected that the graphics setting didn't affect browser video, but that difference between players--just wow.

So to sum it up rather roughly - make your footage look good by working your contrasts within the 16-235 range and you're pretty much safe for all the different players' / browsers' behavior?

Yes

Thing is, I now tested Nick's S curve approach. It gives me nice contrasts indeed within the legal range, that fine white kind of veil finally disappears, great! ( I usually tried to do most of these adjustments in Colorfast 2 ) But if I apply the levles filter to studio RGB after it, the image gets washed out again. But theoretically it shouldn't if I'm already in legal range, or should it??

No. If your curve starts at 16 and ends at 235 then you don't need the levels filter. You're just "doubling up" the contrast reduction if you use that, and will end up "washed out". Using video scopes would show you that.

Nick, in your levels test clip with the violonist, did I get you right that you exported in studio level?

I exported it "as is"; no FX on the important section in the first 10 seconds. So the "black" was at 16 and the "white" was at 235, except for the words, which were 0 and 255. On the violinist, which was added just so I wouldn't get a YT strike, I made the blacks 16 and the whites 235. The sky was almost completely blown out in the original footage so you don't really see the benefit of reducing the whites to 235 in that particular example.

EDIT: I now exported a good looking render with the S curve applied, limiting things to 16-125. And it looks too contrasted, the render with the simple levels filter to studio RGB looks better. Why is that?

125? Did you mean 235? Maybe it looks too contrasted because you simply overdid the S curve for the footage in question. In conjunction with using the video scopes, get your setup so that you have WYSIWYG monitoring. Read this comment about how to do that. And then it's just a matter of taste.

Mindmatter, in case you haven't seen the Alfred E. Neuman levels method ---

https://www.vegascreativesoftware.info/us/forum/pc-to-tv-levels-a-comedy-of-errors--107325/

So, is it true to say that, no matter how and independently of how you will render your video, some people will see it as you see it in the Preview window set to PC (seMW extension) and other may see it like you see it in the Preview window set to Original ?

Not just that; people will see it thousands of different ways, all of them wrong!

Maybe .001% will have a properly calibrated screen with no consumer enhancements and the "stupid switch" turned off.

Up until that point of near-total annihilation, the average consumer with an NLE and no background may have about 1 in 32 chances of getting it right first time. By far, Apple is the biggest player in the confusion, because the iPhone broke all the established rules and standards without asking anyone else in the industry. Imagine that.

So, the BEST any of us may be able to do is stick to the REC709 recipe and hope that catches more flies than catering to any of the mindless anti-conformist marketing abominations people are told to call "right."

One thing is certain: REC709 isnt going away in our lifetimes. There will be billions of teevees, players, and devices that still need 16-235, long after REC2020 becomes the norm, which is still many years away.

Anyone care to share their reference monitor / output card setup?

I used to have a Blackmagic Intensity for this, but it was HD only and I edit mostly 4k/UHD now. Blackmagic has a cheap Decklink 4k mini monitor card (~$150). May be an option for the OP. Of course you still need an accurate monitor. Are modern computer monitors good enough for rec709? Opinions?

Both HD and UHD are REC709, which basically means 16-235. SD is REC601, which for all practical uses, is interchangeable.

True REC2020 broadcasts (HDR) could be close to a decade away, and fitting that in a 6MHz bandwidth will be quite a challenge.

So, is it true to say that, no matter how and independently of how you will render your video, some people will see it as you see it in the Preview window set to PC (seMW extension) and other may see it like you see it in the Preview window set to Original ?

Yes, but in 2011 the "PC" result won 19-2 vs the "Original" result and I hope/expect that kind of proportion still applies today.

We can do a bit more of a survey now by asking members if you can see the words "superwhite" and/or "superblack" in the first 10 seconds of this video, and how you're viewing it:

Both HD and UHD are REC709, which basically means 16-235. SD is REC601, which for all practical uses, is interchangeable.

True REC2020 broadcasts (HDR) could be close to a decade away, and fitting that in a 6MHz bandwidth will be quite a challenge.

Well, it depends. If you use Netflix today, you have see that they offer by now a lot of HDR Content, so really as HLG or PQ. Gamit P3 65.... Sometimes in HD, sometimes in UHD Resolution.

Delivery specifications: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B37xotBvlV3Qc1E4VW5sMzNwcmc/view

At least what I see here is that Netflix HDR Content requirers about 15 Mbit/s, what is not soo high today. 

In response to your survey Nick initially I could not see either Superwhite or Superblack when viewing the video with Win 10 Home and Intel graphics using:
Firefox 60.0.1
IE 11
Edge

Then I realised last nights Windows Spring update may have reset my video settings and sure enough I found my driver settings for Video had been reset to Limited Range instead of Full Range. Putting it back onto Full Range resulted in IE and Edge now showing Superwhite and Superblack but sadly Firefox still doesn't show the full range and the letters don't appear. I don't know what player Firefox uses.

In response to your survey Nick initially I could not see either Superwhite or Superblack when viewing the video with Win 10 Home and Intel graphics using:
Firefox 60.0.1
IE 11
Edge

Then I realised last nights Windows Spring update may have reset my video settings and sure enough I found my driver settings for Video had been reset to Limited Range instead of Full Range. Putting it back onto Full Range resulted in IE and Edge now showing Superwhite and Superblack but sadly Firefox still doesn't show the full range and the letters don't appear. I don't know what player Firefox uses.

Thanks. That's the opposite way round compared to my results with my old AMD graphics, whereby setting it to Limited range reveals the letters in WMP and MPC-HC. What a confusing mess!

Anyway at least the default behaviour after your Windows update means that a video conformed to 16-235 in Vegas should play correctly on YouTube in all your options.

I don't know if it would make a difference if my AMD card (Fury-x) was set to full range or limited range but here is my result : Win 7 with Firefox, Chrome, VLC or WMP I don't see the words. On my Asus 7 inch tablet, Win 10, with Firefox, Chrome, VLC, WMP and 2 others "players" (from my tablet Asus), I don't see the words either.

I don't see the words on my Surface Pro 3 and Edge. I can check my editing PC later today.

So I guess this makes our role clear as producers -- Don't add another "wrong" to the cauldron.

My Video Workstation (RX480 see my Profile)

I CAN see the text in Internet Explorer.

My Office PC: GTS450, nVidia Control Panel Nvidia Settings = Full Range (000-255)

I can't see the text in Chrome (IE won't play the yourube video)

My Office PC: GTS450, nVidia Control Panel Nvidia Settings = (016-235)

I can see the text in Chrome (IE won't play the yourube video)

My Office PC: GTS450, nVidia Control Panel Nvidia Settings = Settings controlled by Video Player

I can't see the text in Chrome (IE won't play the yourube video)

On My HTPC. intel HD4000 video adapter on i7-3770(k)

* The intel Control panel is mind-numbing but it doesn't matter since I only use this machine to capture, store and stream video to TVs and portable devices around the house though DLNA.

I can't see the text on Internet Explorer

I can't see the text on Chrome

On my iPad

I can't see the text in Safari

Got a 2010 27" iMac sitting in my kitchen and neither Chrome or Safari show the words.

I can't see the words in either my desktop or laptop, using FireFox, Pale Moon and Edge. Same result when I PB the downloaded the video on different players, MP, MPC-HD, Win 10 Movies & TV player and VLC, . My display settings may not be right and/or a Win 10 update forked them up..

"What a confusing mess!"

Thinking about this last night perhaps one answer is to meet the problem half way. Create a Levels FX to apply on export to give a 8 - 245 range. It won't show correctly on either full range or limited range player settings but it won't be as far out on either!

hi awhile further experimenting around the subject, I found a couple of very useful plugins that deal with the matter. while I find the CC plugin good but not very user friendly due to a total lack of numeric references and a bit fiddly to handle, in NB's Colorfixer pro, you can actually set the black and white limits to 16 and 235 - very handy!

In Vegas, there's a native plugin called broadcast colors that lets you set its range limits to studio RGB. But I guess that one's a bit similar to the levels plugin.