Quote - I haven't tried your scripts, so I don't know if it's happening or not, but based on my understanding of what you're doing, even a perfect line-up of the meshes might still have this problem, depending on the topology and shaping of the mesh in some areas.

If you "correlate the (up to) 5 closest verts, within some tolerance distance", one or more of those closest verts could be on the other side of a mesh fold.

If the check adds much time, you could always make it an option.

EDIT: Of course... depending on how some morph is created, this may not be an issue anyway (ie. the morph creator may have also included those vertices within the morph) - so you may not always 'see' that there's a problem.  The only time it might show up is on something like a morph that made the nostril opening smaller/larger diameter, without affecting the outside of the nostril.

I thought about it for a bit, and I think adding the option to test the normals is a good idea.  I'm also considering a secondary option to test the normals of the base geometries instead of the worldspace geometries.  Depending on the re-shaping in use to accomplish the best match of the actor surfaces, some vertices may have normals which vary greatly from those on the base geometries.  (I'm thinking about my Antonia to Vicky 1 test case, which upon recent examination proved to have the lips and inner mouth of both actors badly morphed, creating incorrect correlations in the lips.)

I think speed issues may not be as bad as they were in the old, pre-.pyd version of TDMT.  As ADP tried to point out once or twice in the Long TDMT Thread, the old code wasn't using Numeric to full advantage.  Rather than splitting coordinates into their x,y,z components for processing, Numeric can handle them much like the pyd.  That proved to be faster with vector subtraction.  I'm hoping it will be with the dot product, as well.

So far I've not noted this normal-direction issue to be a problem with most morph transfers.  It's showing up more pronouncedly in shape transfers, I think.  But tools to improve the correlations will help in both cases.

Once again, thank you for the excellent and useful input!  :woot:  Just don't let me suck you into this.  :lol:  I tend to grab the smart person and try to wheedle information out of them.  Bad habit of mine.   

===========================sigline======================================================

Cage can be an opinionated jerk who posts without thinking.  He apologizes for this.  He's honestly not trying to be a turkeyhead.

Cage had some freebies, compatible with Poser 11 and below.  His Python scripts were saved at archive.org, along with the rest of the Morphography site, where they were hosted.