[Sidefx-houdini-list] OT: What compositor do you use if not COPS? (was: houdini crashes...)

Dries dries at urga.be
Tue Jan 10 05:55:22 EST 2006

John Coldrick wrote:

>	Ah, compositing...I love being a frustrated compositor...:)
>	It's Sunday, waiting for clients...time to ramble...:P
>On Friday 06 January 2006 12:43, Peter Robbinson wrote:
>>If I finally get a linux version of Fusion then Windows could pretty
>>much be ditched. Alternatively if Cops ever gets updated then ...
>	Personally, I've stopped holding my breath for Fusion.  They announced a 
>Linux version the previous major release, and it never showed.  Now they're 
>talking about a new one...sometime.  That sort of stuff *really* rubs me the 
>wrong way - I simply have no faith in them.  When I see a full-featured, 
>reasonably stable product on Linux I'll take a look, but not before.  It's 
>fine to have a package popular with Windows users and to toss off comments 
>about a Linux port - but "Show Me the Compie"!  :)
Ref to my post on linux and what I was expecting from it. Linux is not 
getting the push it deserves unfortunately.

>	Tracking:  None in Houdini, an "ok" implementation in Shake(I'm spoiled with 
>excellent tracking via 3DEqualizer and Discreet).
>	Paint: None in Houdini, a fairly good procedural Paint node in Shake.
>	Colour Correct: "so-so" in Houdini, quite nice in Shake.
>	Keying:  "so-so" in Houdini, quite nice in Shake.
>	Memory Management:  So-so in Houdini, with too much user intervention IMHO, 
>absolutely rock-solid, hands-off, fan-frickin-tastic in Shake.(this assumes 
>plenty of memory for both systems).
>	Plugin support/"looks": Vex in Houdini(roll yer own), pretty good in 
>Shake(both third party and roll yer own).
>	Integration:  Excellent in Houdini, none apart from file formats in Shake.
>	Interface:  I prefer Houdini for the most part.  I think their node-based GUI 
>is the best in the biz.  I do love that little shake feature where "shaking" 
>a node disconnects it, though.  :P
>	Hooks:  Excellent in Houdini(duh), pretty good in Shake.
>	Speed:  Here's where I differ from other comments - for the most part I find 
>Shake faster.  It's *very* anecdotal and positively not scientific, but in v4 
>I find it pretty damned fast.  This seems to apply more when working with HD 
>and up, and more than 8 bit.
>	Stability:  Variable on Houdini, rock-solid on Shake.  I'll caveat that with 
>the relevant fact that I only ever use the official release of Shake - 
>Houdini we snag daily builds.
I totally agree with this short review of Shake vs Halo. It does point 
out however, if you're a small shop, you have to revert to additional 
compositing software because no plug-in support, no effective blue 
keying, no tracking, no paint tools are quite show stoppers. Halo does 
have a lot going for it, but just for now, I consider cops only for 
preview compositing. Although Houdini is the best ever in 3D, it's not a 
"complete solution" as some people who hear about it might start 
believing. Conclusion: there is a real-world potential for Halo. 
Excellent coders that reach SESI's standards might be hard to find, and 
I know sesi doesn't lack willingness. I wish them the best for the 
coming year.


More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list