Bugfix - Fix pallete size calculation #87
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…epth instead of bitDepth*bitDepth. Calculation is needed because paletteSize in the DIB header is not filled correctly by the most image libs/tools, so 0 is read and calculation was wrong.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Fixed calculation of palette size for most palettized bitmaps.
2^bitDepth (
pow(2, bitDepth) is correct (as mentioned in the comment), butbitDepth*bitDepthwas used instead, which only displayed BMPs with 64 colors or fewer correctly.The calculation is necessary because the paletteSize field in the DIB header is often not filled correctly by most image libraries/tools, so when 0 is read, the calculation was wrong, leading to strange colors for palettized BMPs with more than 64 colors.