Andrew D Lyons
tstexture at gmail.com
Thu Mar 30 14:08:17 EST 2006
It is true that in Houdini you need to spend a little time making a
good SDF proxy of your collision geometry. In Maya you need to make a
low resolution proxy of models in most cases as well, otherwise your
simulation times slow to a crawl. Even then collision detection in
Maya is still flaky and intersections occur regularly. The studio I
work at devoted a lot of time to RBD tests last year because Maya RBD
basically didn't work, and tried every 3rd party tool out there (Havoc
etc) before deciding upon Houdini. It is true that there are more
controls for RBD in Houdini - but more controls are usually desirable.
In shot work I've repeatedly run into instances when I've needed those
extra controls in Houdini, and the fact that they don't exist in other
packages are the reason they aren't being used as much for RBD
On 30/03/06, rafal <baq8 at op.pl> wrote:
> Hi people.
> I would like to hear your opinion about new dynamics in Houdini. I
> have much more experience with other 3d app but really would like to do
> some cool stuff with DOPs but... After few days of playing with it I get
> enough. Maybe it's just me but in my opinion it takes too much time to
> set all these stuff to work correct. In example in other 3D app I just
> select geo and set it as rigidBody active or passive or just can apply
> gravity to geo and it follows down. Is this approach (just one click and
> make it rigid) wrong?
> Also rigidBodyConstraints are strange to me. What U people think
> about DOPs comparing it to another dynamics engines/solutions in other apps?
> Have U more advanced Houdini users plan to use it in any movies?
> Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
> Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
Andrew D Lyons | Digital Artist | http://www.tstex.com
More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list