Houdini Engine offers more than just a ppg to change a few values. You can for example create a "forest" digital asset, take it to C4D or Maya and use your local models as instances. So that's where the benefit is, you essentially created a tool that you can reuse. A bit like fabric I guess?
By the way there is a Houdini Engine API so it can be ported to any aplication. So expect to see this implemented in other apps and game engines in the future. On Wednesday, 23 April 2014, <pete...@skynet.be> wrote: > Nice insight, Luc-Eric. > See how you downplayed it as "doing the particles" - AD's standard > description of ICE and Softimage. > Is that company prescribed reply to competitor's initiatives? > > What I read here, is an opening for C4D and Maya studios to get (a) > Houdini artist/s to collaborate with the rest of the team, opening up new > possibilities. > > Perhaps shareholders don’t care much for cross platform solutions and > collaboration, but studios and artists do. > > > > -----Original Message----- From: Luc-Eric Rousseau > Sent: Wednesday, April 23, 2014 3:36 PM > To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > Subject: Re: Houdini Engine for Cinema4D > > Sounds pretty cool! C4D could use more proceduralism, and extra tools. >> Is it becoming a real Softimage alternative by this? >> > > I'm willing to be that if you had it, you'd never use Houdini Engine > in Cinema 4D. This doesn't give you any procedural authoring in C4D, > just the ability to run an asset that was authored in Houdini, > typically with a simple PPG of settings. > > As a freelancer looking for an alternative to ICE, it would quite a > waste of time to author the graph in houdini and do all the work to > package it up to run it in C4D. In real life, you'd probably just do > it all on the houdini side and cache out or render there. Or more > realistically, if you spent that much time in C4D that this would be > hugely important, you'd likely do everything there except for the > occasional case when you can't.. and then you probably would not have > had spent enough time with Houdini to be at ease with it to solve the > problem there efficiently. You'd probably end up doing the particles > in C4D's thinking particle instead. > > On Wed, Apr 23, 2014 at 4:59 AM, Eugen Sares <sof...@mail.sprit.org> > wrote: > >> >> Cross-posting from si-community: >> http://www..maxon.net/en/news/press-releases/singleview/ >> article/maxon-announces-partnership-with-side-effects-software.html >> http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option=com_content&task= >> view&id=2720&Itemid=66 >> >> Sounds pretty cool! C4D could use more proceduralism, and extra tools. >> Is it becoming a real Softimage alternative by this? >> >> Besides, did anyone happen to attend the Maxon presentation on FMX >> yesterday? >> >> >> >> ________________________________ >> >> Diese E-Mail ist frei von Viren und Malware, denn der avast! Antivirus >> Schutz ist aktiv. >> >> >> >
