I agree Jordi. The area that I'm pushing SideFX on is UX not capabilities. The original point of the discussion here was regarding which current DCC is the most natural home for XSI artist's. The consensus on the recent 'Procedural in Motion' panel, which included Tim Bolland from Glassworks, was that there currently isn't a single package replacement. It's likely to be a mix of Houdini & Maya or Houdini and C4D depending on the type of work your shop is known for. Houdini isn't currently a replacement for XSI and it's still got a way to go in the UX department before it could be considered a like for like replacement for XSI. Take rigging as an example. 16.5 contains lots of improvements to the rigging toolset but Michael Goldfarb the lead TD for the Houdini rigging toolset freely admits that rigging is far to technical at the moment and the UX aspect of rigging in particular has a long way to go. Technically, there are some awesome rigging tools in Houdini, but getting your rigs fit for purpose in a speedy fashion still lags considerably behind Soft.
I've not been arguing against Houdini, but have simply been stating that I don't believe it to be a like for like replacement to Softimage. It shows the most potential of attaining that lofty goal but isn't there yet. On 27 October 2017 at 17:10, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: > Sorry if it feels like I am going on circles, I am trying to distill some > important thoughts from this constructive chat. > > On 27 Oct 2017, at 16:59, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > To be clear, I'm happy working with particles in Houdini (although I still > turn to a Mootzoid powered XSI more regularly than Houdini). I'm speaking > for the artists I support. > > Jordi, even those nodes you list require knowledge of local variables and > VEX Expressions if > > > That is the key word... “IF" > > you want finer control over the the default behaviour (and what creative > worth their salt doesn't want to go beyond the default behaviours). > > > Wouldn’t the finer control in any other package also imply you need to get > a bit deeper and learn the idiosyncrasies of the tool? > > For example, in Softimage you have to accept you have to dive into ICE and > you will surely have to understand all the variables exposed along with the > “vocabulary” of nodes ICE provides which is not trivial. > > In a way, the more freedom you demand, the more knowledge the software > demands from you and that is unescapable. It is only thanks to Mootozoid > awesome tools that you don’t need to dive into flocking in Softimage. > > My 2 cents on a Friday > > Jb > > > > > > On 27 October 2017 at 15:03, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> BTW, I am sure you guys are aware but there are some tools for flocking >> like the ones you have in Cinema4D >> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidefx.com_docs_houdini_nodes_dop_popcurveforce&d=DwIFaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=9Q6aYm1tPdpCgZbM9fxgY7rTQYGzx4O1CW3TUuWkDqk&s=7t_rflP4snOlV17on7EHt78Q0GIAuVZ20sDnZj4RBus&e= >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidefx.com_docs_houdini_nodes_dop_popcurveforce&d=DwMFaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=HG4yc6di4pSPGmjjCQ4nMw4HMQzz-WNeoV_iUe2V20Y&s=ZAZwrCLfNzu1gwYSL6rpD8PdDhZ4Zl70odynEqbVLtY&e=> >> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidefx.com_docs_houdini_nodes_dop_popmetaballforce&d=DwIFaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=9Q6aYm1tPdpCgZbM9fxgY7rTQYGzx4O1CW3TUuWkDqk&s=hHcZxtZnieHs9SDhnWUABuvVtogaEkL2_Vy1oov26fA&e= >> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.sidefx.com_docs_houdini_nodes_dop_popmetaballforce&d=DwMFaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=HG4yc6di4pSPGmjjCQ4nMw4HMQzz-WNeoV_iUe2V20Y&s=LVL8fbw4IGn6v-DNxdiz_4nLFXHlulY4W5UpxYu0zdI&e=> >> >> Out of the box, no need for programming >> >> jb >> >> >> >> On 27 Oct 2017, at 14:53, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> I see… indeed you have a few tools there it is true that for motion >> graphics you have to deal with technical things in Houdini that nor XSI not >> Cinema4D force you to… this is something gI would love them to tweak so I >> will ask … who knows. >> >> jb >> >> On 27 Oct 2017, at 12:42, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> What do you exactly mean by “control of motion” >> >> >> That's a very opened ended statement but my own interpretation was that >> you don't get very far in motion design without a good understanding of a >> DCC's particle system and motion paths in general. On that basis the most >> obvious comparison is the intuitive nature of Mograph and X-Particles in >> C4D to Particles in Houdini. You won't get far in Houdini particle effects >> without expressions at the least and Vex Wrangles to match some of the >> stock effects in X-Particles. C4D & X-Particles both put intuitive UX front >> and centre; the whole question/answer metaphor used in X-Particles is a UX >> tour de force. When you couple that with the elegance of C4D's scene >> manager it makes for a very intuitive workflow. >> >> Houdini is without doubt the more powerful and flexible option, but C4D >> enables a motion designer to get the task done faster and more intuitively. >> >> On 27 October 2017 at 09:04, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> I am very interested in understanding the things others see in Houdini >>> that are wrong or not quite there. >>> >>> What do you exactly mean by “control of motion” >>> >>> Jb >>> >>> Sent from my iPhone >>> >>> On 27 Oct 2017, at 00:48, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> The short answer to your question Phil is no. Control of motion in >>> Houdini isn't as easy or intuitive as it is with XSI/ICE. But the longer >>> answer is that you can easily build bespoke tools in Houdini to provide the >>> exact flavour of motion control you favour. >>> >>> Houdini gives you less out of the box but it's far easier to create >>> bespoke tools in Houdini than with any other DCC. >>> >>> On 27 October 2017 at 00:18, phil harbath <phil.harb...@jamination.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> I would be interested to know if Motion Creation is as easy and >>>> powerful as it is in ICE, I can find I can do whatever I want to do for >>>> the most part in ice, create point clouds in most any fashion, pop them in >>>> and out at any time, and apply animated colors to them as I see fit, I >>>> would think that you do much of this in C4D but without the complete >>>> control you can get with ICE, however I wonder if the same ease of creation >>>> is there with Houdini. I agree with others I would just assume continue to >>>> use Softimage/Ice, however, I worry about the day, Soft just doesn’t open. >>>> I have had problems like this with other programs where just recently some >>>> updates whether it be windows 10 or the video drivers, have caused certain >>>> things to crash, and has caused me great anxiety. >>>> >>>> *From:* Jonathan Moore >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, October 26, 2017 7:07 PM >>>> *To:* Official Softimage Users Mailing >>>> List.https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__groups.google.com&d=DwIFaQ&c=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA&r=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA&m=9Q6aYm1tPdpCgZbM9fxgY7rTQYGzx4O1CW3TUuWkDqk&s=0LM5ITESE_mvaTcguQ0b9hFLjOm0QaB7XVupFrkSvzM&e= >>>> /forum/#!forum/xsi_list >>>> *Subject:* Re: Softimage - not going away... >>>> >>>> Those coming from the likes C4D and After Effects doing wonderful stuff >>>> in Houdini were in many cases already technical artists. One of the >>>> Aixsponza/Entagma boys (Manuel) started out in XSI as it happens, the other >>>> was skilled in Processing (Moritz). And Simon Holmedal was a math nerd long >>>> before he gazed eyes on C4D, never mind Houdini. Ben Watt on the other hand >>>> is a great example of a C4D artist not used to technical workflows who >>>> rapidly adapted to using Houdini as his main platform. >>>> >>>> Motion design is my thing and I encourage any artists I know to learn >>>> Houdini, but sadly for some, things don't click. At the moment I'm working >>>> with others on a Mograph/MASH type suite of tools for Houdini. Creating the >>>> cloners, effectors and falloffs of a typical motion graphics plugin suite >>>> is the easy part, making it a 'gateway drug' into the delights of Houdini, >>>> a little harder! But we feel one of the major hooks is performance and >>>> luckily the v16 release cycle has seen critical SOP nodes become thread >>>> friendly (e.g. the Copy and Point SOP's for starters). C4D and Maya's >>>> motion design tools are throttled by a single threaded core, so a suite of >>>> tools in Houdini with similar capabilities, whilst being optimised for >>>> fully threaded workflows will hopefully provide further encouragement for >>>> motion artists to deepen their Houdini knowledge. ;) >>>> >>>> On 26 October 2017 at 21:30, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>> >>>>> No worries Jonathan.. >>>>> >>>>> It is nevertheless interesting that non-technical artists like those >>>>> coming from C4D and AfterEffects are jumping on Houdini and some really >>>>> are >>>>> doing amazing work the like we haven’t seen so may be it will be an >>>>> evolution in the sense that understanding the processes may be fundamental >>>>> for the type of work they intend to do. >>>>> >>>>> Anyway… good luck though >>>>> >>>>> hugs >>>>> jb >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 26 Oct 2017, at 19:41, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I wasn't intending to pick holes Jordi, so apologies if it came over >>>>> that way. But yes, be it nodal shading, nodal compositing or full featured >>>>> end to end procedural modeling and animation; nodes scare the bejesus out >>>>> of a many artists. Personally, I find nodes a more visually descriptive >>>>> view of things but have come to realise there are many that don't share my >>>>> view. :) >>>>> >>>>> On 26 October 2017 at 19:29, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Indeed you are right, I probably have a skewed vision due to the fact >>>>>> that everyone is now exposed to Nuke (and here XSI) which have node based >>>>>> approaches but may be outside is not so obvious. >>>>>> >>>>>> I hope you have fun though. ;-) >>>>>> jb >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On 26 Oct 2017, at 18:44, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> Jordi, I'm only recounting the feedback I get from the artists I >>>>>> support. Some of these artists find nodal approaches per se as being >>>>>> technical. >>>>>> >>>>>> You, I and most on this list know this not to be the case, but we >>>>>> have to be considerate that not all artists are wired the same as us. >>>>>> >>>>>> On 26 October 2017 at 18:13, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Could you give me an example of various stages of a production where >>>>>>> you need those skills? I can only see a few places where you do and >>>>>>> others >>>>>>> that you might if you want to do complex stuff (like modern abstract >>>>>>> motion >>>>>>> graphics for example) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Let’s also remember, only recently we have Wrangle nodes and >>>>>>> although they are awesome, you didn’t even have them a few years back >>>>>>> yet >>>>>>> you were able to do anything (slower of course) in other manners. A good >>>>>>> example is the new Point Wrangle versus the old Point SOP. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I still think for Previz, Modelling, Animation (not technical FX >>>>>>> animation), Layout, Shading, Texturing, Lighting and Rendering you need >>>>>>> Zero skills. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> But may be I am missing something. >>>>>>> jb >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 26 Oct 2017, at 17:29, Jonathan Moore <jonathan.moo...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The only way to learn a language well is to fully immerse into it, >>>>>>>> same thing here… Houdini is not hard any more, UX and specially a more >>>>>>>> viewport centric approach makes it very easy to start. >>>>>>>> True there is some vocabulary and weird things in a few areas but >>>>>>>> those come easy if you really go for it. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I say this as a Houdini fan. Houdini is only an easy transition for >>>>>>> technical artists. I support teams of artists from fine art backgrounds >>>>>>> as >>>>>>> well as technical artists and those with a fine art background even >>>>>>> found >>>>>>> ICE a challenge. For larger teams made up of both TD's and artists this >>>>>>> isn't a major issue, but the fact that so much of Houdini is >>>>>>> Wrangle-centric these days causes problems for those with a purely art >>>>>>> school background who don't know their way around a scripting language, >>>>>>> never mind a C-like programming language. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I think it's untrue to say 'Houdini is not hard anymore', but more >>>>>>> true to say that Houdini is easier to transition to from another DCC >>>>>>> (for >>>>>>> those with a technical aptitude). You won't get far in Houdini if you >>>>>>> can't >>>>>>> at the very least think programmatically, and that still goes for those >>>>>>> that stick to VOP's rather than Wrangles. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> One can argue that 3d is an inherently technical art, but there are >>>>>>> plenty of professionals working in media & entertainment based studio >>>>>>> businesses that get by just fine without any aptitude for scripting & >>>>>>> programming. Unfortunately, I don't think it's untrue to state that it's >>>>>>> difficult to get past the basics in Houdini without a technical >>>>>>> aptitude. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> On 26 October 2017 at 17:01, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> >>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> The only way to learn a language well is to fully immerse into it, >>>>>>>> same thing here… Houdini is not hard any more, UX and specially a more >>>>>>>> viewport centric approach makes it very easy to start. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> True there is some vocabulary and weird things in a few areas but >>>>>>>> those come easy if you really go for it. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> :) >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> jb >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> > On 26 Oct 2017, at 16:07, Morten Bartholdy <x...@colorshopvfx.dk> >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Houdini is still to technical to even start using. Blender I have >>>>>>>> actually looked at and it doesn't look half as bad as Maya, but it also >>>>>>>> very much depends on where you are working or aspire to work. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Maya is a ticket to work in most places these days I guess, but >>>>>>>> it is also certain to drive you mad, and hate going to work everyday. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > Honestly I would love to work with Houdini, and might even sit >>>>>>>> down and try and learn it some day, but it is still damn hard to start >>>>>>>> using, so downtime is considerable. >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > MB >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> >> Den 25. oktober 2017 klokken 14:53 skrev Gerbrand Nel < >>>>>>>> nagv...@gmail.com>: >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >>> I read the stories by people who had the bad fortune to have to >>>>>>>> learn Maya earlier and I have to say everything they wrote is true and >>>>>>>> then >>>>>>>> some. After 3 months+ of everyday Maya punishment I actually only like >>>>>>>> some >>>>>>>> modeling tools and being able to see layered textures in the viewport >>>>>>>> - the >>>>>>>> rest is a horrible mess. And our Maya artists are blissfully oblivious >>>>>>>> to >>>>>>>> how much easier their lives could have been if things had been >>>>>>>> different. >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> >>>>>>>> >>> Morten >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> If you read on, the story splits. >>>>>>>> >> Kinda like a "choose your own adventure" >>>>>>>> >> Some people choose Maya, and THEY DIE!!!! >>>>>>>> >> Others choose NOT-Maya and live. >>>>>>>> >> Honestly I would rather use bryce and poser. >>>>>>>> >> Why not Houdini or Blender, Morten? >>>>>>>> >> G >>>>>>>> >> >>>>>>>> >> ------ >>>>>>>> >> Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>>>> >> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>>>> odesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>>>>>> > ------ >>>>>>>> > Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>>>> > To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>>>> odesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>>>> odesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>>> odesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ------ >>>>>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>>> odesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------ >>>>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>> odesk.com with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> ------ >>>>>> Softimage Mailing List. >>>>>> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.aut >>>>>> odesk.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 >>>> 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 >>> 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 > 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.
