I think people need to accept that just as they understandably expect SideFX to push the software to be more approachable for themselves they really ought to try and push themselves in the opposite direction also.
If there was a theoretical race to DCC dominance, I'd really favour Houdini right now. I think starting with so many of the hard things solved and working 'creative' workflows into the software is a far more enviable position to be in than having to go in the opposite direction. Really exciting times ahead as far as I'm concerned! DAN On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> wrote: > I hate to sound inflexible in my views but Houdini is such a powerful > application because of its technical approach. > > > > Just because Softimage is no longer available and Maya is ‘problematic’ > (to say the least) shouldn’t mean that SideFX should have to change their > development strategy. > > > > I believe that SideFX have in fact done a fantastic job of listening to > customers that have moved to Houdini from other packages including > Softimage. The speed with which they implemented a suggested change ref > dropping VOP nodes over wires the other day is a fine example of that. But > there‘s a danger of allowing the ‘tail to wag the dog’ so that Houdini > gets changed for the worse rather than the better. I think SideFX have the > balance of things pretty much spot on. There’s still huge improvements that > can be made to the approachability of certain aspects of the user > experience but I it’s never going to transform into something radically > different to what’s available today. If anything, with so much of Houdini > moving away from Hscript style expressions to VEX expressions (for very > good reason - multithreaded performance) certain aspects of the Houdini > user experience are in fact getting more technical. > > > > The best way to learn how to adapt to Houdini is first to accept it for > what it is. And part of the Houdini user experience has always been > scripting and programming. That’s why it’s so often described as a 3d > operating system rather than a DCC. > > > > Apologies for spelling things out so bluntly but I can’t see Houdini > evolving into something less technical. > > > > > > *From:* softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com [mailto:softimage-bounces@ > listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Nicole Beeckmans-Jacqmain > *Sent:* 30 March 2017 19:57 > *To:* Official Softimage Users Mailing List. https://groups.google.com/ > forum/#!forum/xsi_list <softimage@listproc.autodesk.com> > *Subject:* Re: Houdini Digital Assets for Softies > > > > hi. yes, was forced to stop following this week's entagma taurus tutorial. > > again, these monthes i spend most of my time to write & storyboard. > > got recently interested by _computer_ 2d possibilities, new for me. > > but as discussion advances here, i am getting discouraged to be able to > talk in the future, about a project with a Houdinist. > > (i don't want to just supervize) because i am foremost a visual artist, > isn't it that Houdini should evolve upside down, > > so that Visual controls Math Thinking, and not the other way around. > > Procedural Innovation looked nice, so far, i guess? > > so, in a way i donot opt if a new community shift occurs between > > Maya artists and Houdini vop sop artists. or do you think it necessary, > and why? > > thanks > > Nicole. > > > > 2017-03-30 18:04 GMT+02:00 Morten Bartholdy <x...@colorshopvfx.dk>: > > > > I just also wish Houdini would be made more accessible for less > technically inclined artists like myself. > > > ------ > Softimage Mailing List. > To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com > with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >
------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
