I think Houdini is the next logical step for most Si users, going back to Maya just made me go numb and lethargic for the entirety of the last project i worked on. But i did have a chance to do a couple of days work in Houdini and i have to say, until they get the viewport working perfectly its going to have to wait it out a bit. Things were disappearing left and right, wire-frame shading appearing randomly on objects, flickering, glitching. It was chaos. I did get the scene passed on to me. So it could have been the guy that created the scene, but when i approached him on the topic he just told me to ignore it....
I dont know if Houdini has fixed this in 14, they claim the view port is much better, but i still haven't seen it in action so im a bit ignorant on that. On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 6:02 AM, Demian Kurejwowski <demianpe...@yahoo.com> wrote: > houdini never change hands like other software that several companies own > them, / change developers etc.. etc.. > > > > El Martes, 17 de marzo, 2015 18:51:44, Adam Sale <adamfs...@gmail.com> > escribió: > > > Thanks for that Gerbrand. I had started dabbling with Houdini over the > spring and summer before the start of our new school year in September. My > experiences with it were very positive, and I was having fun learning it. > It made sense after a couple weeks mucking around with it. In the end I > went with maya for our Fx and rigging courses based on the fact I had > marginal experience with Maya over a number of years prior. So far I am ok > with Maya for rigging, and skeletal work, but deformation is really > frustrating as everyone else here has contended. > FX in general has not been a lot of fun in Maya either. The scale issue > alone in Maya has taken at least a year or more off of my life. > > I am going to give Houdini another shot this coming spring when I have > more downtime, as May just chokes on a lot of things I would like to do, > most specifically with Fluids and Particles. I am still hopeful and waiting > for Bifrost to be more than a great tool for simming water bodies. > > Irie, > > Adam > > > > On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Raffaele Fragapane < > raffsxsil...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > For anybody following this who's still on the fence let me put it simply: > If you're used to XSI, and you have to do deformation work with Maya's OOTB > toolset you either are insane, or about to go insane very quickly. > > Rig authoring and animation are mostly fine, but when it comes to > deformation there is very, very little in Maya out of the box, and what is > there is supported by tools and workflow that will age you a year in a > month of use; when they don't break they are still painful, and it's not > very often that they don't break. > > If you have to do it, and are proficient enough to clobber deformers and > some helper tools together but not enough to write C++ close enough to the > metal for it to perform, start learning Fabric. In fact, start learning > Fabric anyway if you do rigging. > If you have to do it, and are more of the artistic persuasion, see if you > can change your role to something else, anything between animation and > potato farming will do, and have the company hire someone who only worked > in Maya before for that kind of work and is therefore unaware of how much > pain he's in. > > > On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 8:07 AM, Manuel Huertas Marchena < > lito...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > 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 that > decision 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 to > try 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 <http://www.imdb.com/name/nm4755969/> | Portfolio > <http://envmanu.com/> <http://envmanu.carbonmade.com/>| Vimeo > <http://vimeo.com/manuelhuertasmarchena> | Linkedin > <http://www.linkedin.com/in/manuelhuertas> > > > ------------------------------ > 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 Reeves > London, UK > *si...@simonreeves.com <si...@simonreeves.com>* > *www.simonreeves.com <http://www.simonreeves.com/>* > *www.analogstudio.co.uk <http://www.analogstudio.co.uk/>* > > > > > > -- > Our users will know fear and cower before our software! Ship it! Ship it > and let them flee like the dogs they are! > > > > >
