... apart
from the hope of some entirely new equally flexible as unfriendly *USER-FRIENDLY* DCC,
Autocorrect :)
On 04/13/17 21:18, Jason S wrote:
I also don't mind the posts, apart
from the hope of some entirely new equally flexible as
unfriendly DCC,
to me Houdini represents the best hope for later.
(later-later... for when SI would not run, or or for when
Houdini would significantly revamp VOP, while hoping and pushing
for the latter )
maya is just too painful for a lot of
things...
Indeed, it can also be a mouthful for a variety of things,
notably for particles ...
Can anyone determine what the following describes just by
looking at it?
vector $n=unit(particleShape1.normal);
vector $p=particleShape1.position;
$n=rot($n,dnoise(0.5*$p),noise(0.5*$p+100));
particleShape1.normal=$n;
vector $v=particleShape1.velocity;
vector $u=unit($v);
float $m=mag($v);
vector $vn=dot($u,$n)*$n;
vector $vt=$u-$vn;
float $bias=0.25;
float $conserve=0.96;
particleShape1.velocity=$conserve*$m*unit($vn*$bias+$vt);
If we were looking at high-level nodes made of other nodes, made
of other nodes... for describing the same effect,
we could, simply by looking at the node graph.
Shouldn't we be way past describing effects in text editors by
now?
Just a thought.
On 04/13/17 5:06, Juan Brockhaus wrote:
all cool.
keep on posting.. no time to look properly at the moment...
but I bookmark the posts since planning to go houdini. maya
is just too painful for a lot of things...
;-)
thanks so much.
------
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.