Exclude them from processing.
They would not normally be included in the range of input values to a Real-World Value Map either (if present).
[...] since they are at the top end of the range of stored pixel values, the expectation is that a rendering pipeline (e.g., "dumb viewer") that is unaware of or ignores the Supplemental Palette Color attributes, will render them as the maximum values (i.e., beyond the top end of the range of valid values).
BTW. If a Real-World Value Map is present, that is a guide as to which pixel values are meaningful in the sense of having a mapping to a physical or abstract property.
..which means that for the mapped pixels we do not have _any_ grayscale information for these pixels at all? In terms of segmentation this would render the whole image unusable for the algorithm. Do you agree with this conclusion?
How can a "dumb viewer" know that they are "beyond the top end of the range of valid values" ...
To me this leads to the conclusion that there is no reasonable way of ignoring the Supplemental Color LUT
BTW. If a Real-World Value Map is present, that is a guide as to which pixel values are meaningful in the sense of having a mapping to a physical or abstract property.But since a Real-World Value Map maps grayscales, not pixel rows/colums, this would mean that for "index grayscales": ...
Should I submit a CP?
As a practical matter, do you actually have any images of this type. or is this just a theoretical discussion. I ask because I haven't seen much, if any, implementation of the Supplemental Palette Color LUT in real devices.
Should I submit a CP?If you like - "meaningless" might be a better term than "less useful" :)
And adding a note about the consequences for image processing (and the analogy to the effect of Pixel Padding Value) might be useful.
|Location:||Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK|
|Nodes:||8 (1 / 7)|