LBS (left) vs spring-based skinning (right)


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

With normals visible


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

Armadillo

Spring forces with LBS

Spring forces with rigid skinning

Splits wireframe

Left: all forces but length. Loss of detail around abdominal muscles
Right: all forces. Better preservation, minor loss


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

Same, but with normal map


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

LBS ROM

A little difficult to compare due to video size. Will crop these so more of the mesh is visible on each side without so much filler space in between.
Left: without forces
Right: with forces. A couple of frame-to-frame artifacts (slight bulging on the arms), but also better volume preservation in the bends.


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

Force combinations

Length force only. In this LBS pose, the mesh has 14% less volume than when it's in bind. After the length forces are applied, the mesh has 3.74% less volume than bind.


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

Length and surface forces. Almost identical to using length-only forces


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

Length, surface, attachment torque, and bone torque

Using position-based updater - no acceleration, only velocity.


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.

Using Physics-based updater - acceleration, velocity


Ah shoot, if you're reading this, your browser doesn't support video tags. Here's a download link instead.