I've been trying to understand image rectification. Most of the time the result of image rectification is illustrated by the original image (i.e the image before rectification) and the rectified image, like this:
The original image:
The rectified image:
To me the original image makes more sense, and is more 'rectified' than the second one. I mean, why does the result of rectification looks like that? and how are we supposed to interpret it? what information does it contain? An idea has just dawned on me : could it be that this bizarre shape of the rectified image is dependent on the method used for rectification, because here polar rectification was used (around the epipole)?