Quote - The results are definitely a bit imprecise.  I I'm wondering whether there's theoretically any hope of finding a more precise method, even if that precision still falls short of the ray-casting results.

 
I don't know... I think the new / fixed weight code is a generally good solution for the close-vert method, but I'll keep thinking about it.  At the very least, it no longer tosses out verts, so there should be less piggy-backing.

Related to that issue, I think I'd look at changing your close-vert-gathering code to never cut off less than 3 vertices - regardless of the tolerence value - that should help avoid some of the more extreme piggy-backing.  WIth only a single vert, it's going to use that vert's location.  With 2 verts, you'll end up on the edge between those 2 verts somewhere. With 3 verts you get some play off of that edge and each target vertex is going to be a different distance from those 3 verts (even when they come up with the same 3 verts as thier 'closest'), so there's less clumping.

[EDIT: the above paragraph is relative to the close-vert method and/or when the ray-cast method fails and falls through to that... in other words, any time that weight-generation code gets used, it would be best to have at least 3 verts/distances to work with]

Cinema4D Plugins (Home of Riptide, Riptide Pro, Undertow, Morph Mill, KyamaSlide and I/Ogre plugins) Poser products Freelance Modelling, Poser Rigging, UV-mapping work for hire.