Curiously I ve been reading the transition guides you kindly wrote lately,
thanks Jordi! I am sure that Houdini provides the scalability and resources to
be an end to end solution. But for the time being thatdecision is not up to
me. At AF we have a katana(vray) & maya pipe. Houdini is used for hero fx
stuff. Its on my plans totry and create a production ready asset to show
production (once I figure out how to create something actually "useful"!) and
only then see the plausibility of using Houdini for environment work (as an
additional tool... who knows then..). As this concept is still a bit "new"
(although I know its not the case...) I have not seen much cg environment
pipelines based on this software if at all. The only case I am aware is rising
sun pictures... but I dont know someone there atm. I ve seen houdini used in
videogames environments... but dont have much examples of that for film (not
talking about fx of course), I am guessing that the main "idea" is somehow
similar... ?!
cheers
-Manu
IMDB | Portfolio | Vimeo
| Linkedin
From: byronn...@gmail.com
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2015 16:14:34 -0400
Subject: Re: Very OT: for the love of your career.. try houdini
To: softimage@listproc.autodesk.com
How are you finding your new found Houdini knowledge to be fitting into the
needs of the marketplace? Are there many shops adopting it? Or are you a lone
wolf or able to turnkey shots for people? I too have found Maya unintuitive and
uninspiring. Houdini looks interesting but I'm wary of jumping on something
that I'll never get to use. Unlike many of you here, I am in a small market so
there aren't many 3D jobs to go around.
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Simon Reeves <si...@simonreeves.com> wrote:
I always worry that Houdini is not such a friendly app to be used as a
'backbone' as you (Jordi) phrase it.But I'm basing that on the logic that most
of our 3d artists will HAVE to use it, but that's not really the case...
I've started to settle into the idea that maya is OK for being the base, (after
some love) so perhaps this is the moment I need to give Houdini a proper look
before I fall down into the abyss of Maya.
On Tuesday, 17 March 2015, Jordi Bares Dominguez <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote:
That certainly is a great approach but even better is if you go in the other
direction, use Houdini as the backbone and render from
Mantra/Arnold/Octane/PRMan/3Dlight/whatever as the FX live inside Houdini and
therefore it is the natural backbone.
Ultimately you will be using a myriad of tools that will funnel “dumb” cached
data (just baked geometry, particles with attributes and little more) to
Houdini and from there you are free to assemble your scenes as you need to.
Furthermore, if you need to scale you will find Houdini excels at that so imho
it is a no brainer.
hope it helps
jb
On 17 Mar 2015, at 18:15, Manuel Huertas Marchena <lito...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I am wondering if any of you guys working in film use houdini for digital asset
production, or is it still more of a fx tool for most part? (having said that I
do realize that houdini is not and end to end solution or all kinds of assets,
but still I feel that there is a lot of stuff that could/can be created using
a procedural approach,ex: buildings, concept modeling, snow, rocks, trees,
props...etc..)
--
Simon ReevesLondon, UK
si...@simonreeves.com
www.simonreeves.comwww.analogstudio.co.uk
