The median absolute deviation (MAD) will not commute with the monotonic function of the data, in most cases. Intuitively, this is because the absolute deviation operation "folds" the data around the median, so the monotonicity of the function is "lost" (cannot be utilized).
Allow me to propose a slightly different, but practically similar solution:
The MAD is a robust measure of dispersion (spread) of the data values. Therefore, practically speaking, perhaps your goal can be achieved using a different measure of dispersion (spread) of the data values, which can accommodate the monotonicity of the function.
Specifically, I propose the Inter-Quartile Range (IQR), defined as: $\text{IQR}(X) = \text{Q}_3(X) - \text{Q}_1(X)$, where $\text{Q}_3(X)$ is the value below which 75% of the values exist, and $\text{Q}_1(X)$ is the value below which 25% of the values exist. Note: $\text{median}(X) = \text{Q}_2(X)$ is the value below which 50% of the values exist.
The advantage of this proposal is that for all 3 measurements $\text{Q}_k(X)$, $k = \{1,2,3\}$, for a monotonic function $f(\cdot)$, we have that: $$\text{Q}_k(f(X)) = f(\text{Q}_k(X))$$
This fact is a generalization of what user @Henry already mentioned in a comment to the question: $\text{median}(f(X)) = f(\text{median}(X))$. In fact, every quantile (not just the 3 quartiles mentioned above) commutes with a monotonic function of the data, because a monotonic function will not change the sorted order of the data.
Finally, note that for a symmetric distribution of the data $X$, the median will equal the average of the first and third quartiles, and therefore the MAD will equal half the IQR. But in general I doubt your pixel data $X$ will be symmetric; Nonetheless, if the users of the system/software expect values previously reported by MAD, then if you decide to use IQR, you can simply report half the IQR.