before saying slow or fast regarding volumes or vdb we have to talk about the
resolution of the volumen, and the amount of fields involve.
same with DOPs , after mentioning ALL the plugings, dops can interact with all
the solver at once, that means will take in consideration, RBD, with liquids
with gases, with wire etc... all togheter at the same time, instead having to
do one, cache it, run sim with other plugin, and repeat.lj (also is cheaper to
get houdini than get all the addons/plugs etc... apart) in advantage you get
great support instead of getting the general we dont support that because you
are using it with another pluging that its not ours.
El Jueves, 19 de marzo, 2015 8:45:56, Ciaran Moloney
<moloney.cia...@gmail.com> escribió:
Network and hardware are fastest I've used. It's just the nature of the work.
Volume data in my case is not very large, only a few Mb per frame. But, e.g. to
make useful collision fields from complex geometry often requires a good bit of
SOPs pre-processing. I get the impression that much of SOPs is still not
especially multithreaded.
DOPs is also very slow vs solvers of comparable classes (FumeFX, Exocortex's
Bullet, nCloth). But, that's generally OK since you can do so much, much more
with DOPs with a very low chance of things failing apart as you scale up.
On Thu, Mar 19, 2015 at 1:09 PM, Jordi Bares Dominguez <jordiba...@gmail.com>
wrote:
Is this processing time or hardware time? (disks, network, etc..)
Of course saving gigabytes per frame is slow but may be a clever local SSD sync
to the main server could do the job to make the process faster?
jb
On 19 Mar 2015, at 12:56, Ciaran Moloney <moloney.cia...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm loving working with Houdini, but sometimes it's just frustratingly slow.
Even with the new VDB tools, converting and caching everything out as volume
fields is a real drag.
But then again the caching workflow is super-slick. I shudder at the thought of
all the time lost to the mysteries of ICE caching.
On Tue, Mar 17, 2015 at 10:11 AM, Gerbrand Nel <nagv...@gmail.com> wrote:
I'm not getting anything out of posting this, except knowing I might save the
life of a fellow artist.
So I spent the last year learning Maya, and got to a point where I can compete
against people straight out of collage.
This got me a bit down, as I'm one of the more experienced softimage artists
here in South Africa.
At the end of 2014 I realized that 3D is no longer fun if it all has to happen
in maya for me.
My brain doesn't work the way maya works.
I'm also not much of a clairvoyant, so predicting what I have to do now, just
in case the director asks for something in 2 weeks from now, lead to allot of
back tracking.
At first I decided to learn Maya over houdini because of the price tag of
Houdini FX.
It also seemed like I would exclude myself from bigger projects if I was one,
of only a few houdini artists around.
Houdini indie, and indie engine has completely nullified these concerns.
The perceived learning curve of houdini was also a bit of a concern to me.
I started learning houdini 2 months ago, and I can do more with it, than I can
with Maya after a year.
The first few days in houdini is pretty hard, but the whole package works as
one. Once you get your head around its fundamentals, doing something new is fun
and pretty easy.
This might not be true for everyone here, but some of us needs a non
destructive open work flow.
So if you guys haven't tried it yet, and if you are fed up with the whole
"there is a script for that" mentality... there is a sop for that
G
