This is a really interesting discussion and covers thoughts from all angles. There is an element to the discussion of technical types telling the rest of us we just need to "git gud" which is a bit disheartening though. (It's disheartening not because it's patronising but because the only way to use Houdini is to master it at fairly high technical level which will exclude a number of people, myself included). I understand that there is a technical learning curve to any piece of software but Houdini is a different beast to the other big three (Max, Maya, eXSI). You can drop a Maya artist in XSI and tell them to achieve a task and they'll do it - maybe not the most efficient way, but a way that works. I don't feel that's the same in Houdini. There's too much "well, nobody really models in Houdini" or "you can, but nobody really animates in Houdini". That's not necessarily bad, Zbrush is probably the "best" software on the market in terms of expectations to results but it's clear about it's narrow focus.
To put it in a personal way, I've worked to some level in 3DS Max, Maya, Lightwave and XSI. I wouldn't consider myself particularly artistically gifted or technically proficient but I am good at understanding the needs of a non-technical person (eg art-director), drawing up a list of requirements and achieving them, getting support from concept artists are pipeline TD's if needed. XSI was* the software that allowed me to go the furthest independently (*was because I've had to move to Maya). I would love to replace that and Houdini appears to be a good fit but I'm not sure. Maybe the "uber-nodes" you're discussing are anathematic to Houdini's overall workflow but would be streamline the on-boarding process. XSI was excellent at getting people into the software and then allowing you to get into the more complex bits on your own; although ICE was the main weapon in my arsenal, it's possible to work for years without ever touching it. On 12 May 2018 at 09:34, Jordi Bares <jordiba...@gmail.com> wrote: > @Matt, Exactly my thoughts (but clearly better explained) > > I would certainly advocate to improve things in terms of node > functionality or assisting better in certain aspects (blend shape manager, > exporting bundles in and out, or adding hierarchical overrides in takes, or > adding certain tools we use every single day, or bringing more “uber nodes” > to VOPs so we don’t have to be so granular) but always without sacrificing > proceduralism or breaking their core design. > > Jb > > > > On 11 May 2018, at 22:04, Matt Lind <speye...@hotmail.com> wrote: > > Given Houdini is a node based system, there is a simple paradox at play > that in order to get the level of cohesiveness Softimage employed, tools > need to share information and work together. A node based system, by > design, requires each node to act independently. To get the Softimage > workflow in Houdini requires either monolithic nodes with enough > intelligence to cover all the bases of a particular task, or the UI needs > to take control and hide the nodes behind the scenes slapping user's wrists > if they attempt to fiddle with the nodes involved. In either case, it works > against a node based system's mantra. > > In short, I don't think it's possible for Houdini to ever become another > Softimage. You'll have to settle for something that has great power but > some degree of cumbersome workflow. > > Matt > > Message: 2 Date: Fri, 11 May 2018 18:44:10 +0100 From: Alastair Hearsum < > alast...@glassworks.co.uk> Subject: Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs? To: > softimage@listproc.autodesk.com > > I think there is real danger in pinning all this grumbling on lack of > familiarity and not acknowledging that there are some fundamental design > issues . The first step to recovery is to admit that there a problem. As > everyone knows there is some fantastic technology in there but its strung > together in an awful way. Its like putting the organs of a 20 year old in > an octagenarian; each organ very capable in its own right but not in the > ideal host to get the best out if it. > > ------ 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.
