OpenCV Q&A Forum - RSS feedhttp://answers.opencv.org/questions/OpenCV answersenCopyright <a href="http://www.opencv.org">OpenCV foundation</a>, 2012-2018.Tue, 10 Jul 2012 11:50:35 -0500Is stereoRectifyUncalibrated efficient?http://answers.opencv.org/question/233/is-stereorectifyuncalibrated-efficient/hello everybody,
I'm using of OpenCV 2.4 for rectification of images with findFundamentalMatrix and stereoRectifyUncalibrated. nearly 2 weeks ago, I saw a matlab code about rectify and I became interested to compare the result between them. at the first I thought that the result of opencv will be better than matlab but after several experiments, I found that the matlab code is better. but why?
I searched in internet about them and I found that they use of two difference algorithm according by 2 papers.
I think the opencv uses of "Theory and Practice of Projective Rectiﬁcation" paper by "Richard I. Hartley" that you can found [here](http://users.cecs.anu.edu.au/~hartley/Papers/joint-epipolar/journal/joint3.pdf).
But the base of matlab algorithm code is a paper from "[A. Fusiello, E. Trucco and A. Verri](http://profs.sci.univr.it/~fusiello/demo/rect/)" with "Quasi-Euclidean Uncalibrated Epipolar Rectiﬁcation" title that you can find [here](http://profs.sci.univr.it/~fusiello/papers/icpr08.pdf)
and the matlab source code is [here](http://profs.sci.univr.it/~fusiello/sw/RectifKitU.zip). if you see the compRect.m file, you will notice that they use of non-linear least square method (Levenberg–Marquardt algorithm) to find the extrinsic parameters (rotation matrix and focal point).
And my question:
why opencv don't use of second method while the result of that is better than opencv. If somebody used of second method (matlab code) already, please explain his experience.
Amin AboueeTue, 10 Jul 2012 11:50:35 -0500http://answers.opencv.org/question/233/