I did mention that their the same ones from OpenVDB. Not everybody knows that the Masterclass files files released back at Houdini 12.5 are hosted at OpenVDB and more importantly that their still very relevant.
I did tidy them up a fair bit so they’d work as well as possible in H16. > On 15 Apr 2017, at 17:12, Petr Zloty <petr.zl...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry, but how exactly are your examples different from the ones available > directly from openvdb.org <http://openvdb.org/>? The look very same: > http://www.openvdb.org/download/ <http://www.openvdb.org/download/> > > 2017-04-15 17:22 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com > <mailto:jonathan.moo...@gmail.com>>: > I agree Oliver. But we have the advantage of having first come from XSI’s ICE. > > I personally find Rohan’s tutorials bad from a procedural modelling > perspective too and his rendering tutorials (especially the Redshift ones) > are also poor. But artist’s with no experience of procedural techniques find > his tutorials very accessible. His approach to Houdini is to treat it like > the 3ds Max Modifier Stack. > > However, anything that makes Houdini more approachable has to be applauded > even if it teaches bad habits along the way. You only appreciate bad habits > after you’ve learn good ones after all. :) > >> On 15 Apr 2017, at 16:02, Olivier Jeannel <facialdel...@gmail.com >> <mailto:facialdel...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> I'm not a big fan of Dalvi's tutorials. They are nice, but going to the more >> "fundamental" learning is the only way imho. >> First it unties you from the tool >> Second the execution speed. (Wich mean vex and or vop) >> If I'm able to explode and rotate 200000 primitives, making them go from >> state to state and controling them exactly I'm free to test and create. >> Not the over way around waiting for some sop to be made. >> >> >> On Saturday, April 15, 2017, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com >> <mailto:jordiba...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> I think we are going to see a massive change in perception and the new >> sidefx reel is going to look sooooo different this SIGGRAPH and next!! >> >> Jb >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> >> On 15 Apr 2017, at 12:46, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com <>> >> wrote: >> >>> I agree Tim. >>> >>> When people talk about Houdini being a 3d Operating system, it is exactly >>> that. In every nook and cranny you'll find programming interfaces that >>> allow you to use VEX and Python to help package your project for a wealth >>> of purposes. As Jordi says Houdini is as much an integrator as anything >>> else. >>> >>> But I've been spending the weeks since H16 was launched on the Modo forums >>> helping a bunch of converts to Houdini through their tentative steps. There >>> are a group of artists there that have no intention of learning VEX (or >>> Python for that matter), they're primarily using Houdini for good old >>> fashioned modeling, scene layout and rendering with Redshift or Octane. The >>> reason why is simple price. These are hobbyists attracted by Houdini >>> Indie's pricing and access to 3rd party GPU renderers. The modelling >>> improvements in H16 (especially the booleans and radial menus) have been >>> enough that they're willing to put up with Houdini's more esoteric ways. >>> And they have a champion too in Rohan Dalvi who specifically puts tutorials >>> together for hobbyists telling them they can ignore all that nasty VEX >>> stuff! :) >>> >>> From hobbyists come professional artists so it will be interesting to see >>> how this the influx of very non-technical artists influences SideFX over >>> the next year or so. They may recoil in horror or they may find ways of >>> accommodating them without destroying the user experience for the vast >>> majority of houdini users - technical artists. >>> >>> Personally I think it is possible to make modelling and rendering workflows >>> in Houdini that are less clumsy and over time I hope that artists explore >>> Houdini's technical side as it offers so many rewards. >>> >>> On 15 April 2017 at 12:07, Tim Bolland <tim_boll...@hotmail.co.uk <>> wrote: >>> I would agree with that if the final result out of Houdini was on par with >>> what Maya and other DCC's were delivering. The reality is some of the >>> assets you can make with Houdini, with very minimal scripting, can be far >>> more complex and superior than what you can make with other applications. >>> In fact, depending on the asset I would say making it in Maya would involve >>> far more scripting and technical know how than the Houdini workflow. Of >>> course 'Horses-for-courses' as the British like to say, if your talking >>> about modelling high-rez characters, then perhaps Z-Brush would be a better >>> choice, or Maya if your more used to it. I just don't see 3D as a single >>> software process anymore. I'll use the best software to get the best >>> results out, what ever that is. >>> >>> Cheers, >>> >>> Tim >>> >>> >>> >>> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com <> >>> <softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com <>> on behalf of Nicole >>> Beeckmans-Jacqmain <arc.ann...@gmail.com <>> >>> Sent: 14 April 2017 22:52 >>> To: Official Softimage Users Mailing List. >>> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/xsi_list >>> <https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/xsi_list> >>> Subject: Re: Anybody finding the Houdini example files I've posted useful? >>> >>> textcoding will cost money to our clients: >>> it's time consuming, and >>> not responding to the (cinema)scope of the producers demands. >>> >>> >>> just watched today's houdini16 geometry workflow tutorial. >>> the only result of these avant-gardist mathematical researches, >>> is the corresponding repetitivity in any 3d exploration and cinematic >>> workflow: >>> - i really mean by this that, so much time and energy you spend in >>> controling your workflow with textcoding, >>> the less time you can possibly have to think about the image workflow and >>> plasticity. >>> this costs money and artistic quality. it brings some of the visual >>> repetitions >>> back to the sofwtare user, to handle them with code and expressions, but >>> your artistic >>> attention gets distracted away from your (clients') real needs. >>> >>> i am only saying this to be contradicted and seek the answer from a >>> different angle. >>> as an artist this seems so evident though.. >>> >>> >>> 2017-04-14 11:30 GMT+02:00 Andy Goehler <lists.andy.goeh...@gmail.com <>>: >>> I don’t think so. As Jonathan mentioned already, conditionals and flow >>> control is often easier to ‘read’ in text form than it is in a node graph. >>> >>> Every tool has its place, so does code in text form :D >>> >>> Happy weekend. >>> Andy >>> >>>> On Apr 14, 2017, at 3:18 AM, Jason S <jasonsta...@gmail.com <>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Shouldn't we be way past describing effects in text editors by now? >>> >>> >>> ------ >>> 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. >>> >>> ------ >>> 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 >> <mailto: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 > <mailto: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.
------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
