[Sidefx-houdini-list] RealFlow4

Pablo Giménez pablogipi at gmail.com
Mon Oct 2 09:29:57 EDT 2006


On 9/30/06, g m <thecouze at hotmail.com> wrote:
> Hi Jed,
>
> I wont go against what Mark said as I have not tested RF4 in depth or in
> production. I visited Nextlimit the other week and they showed me the Python
> "part"... it is a good thing. As long as the user is ready to get his/her
> hands dirty with scripting ( or knows python or any scripting/programming ),
> it gives you some great freedom and you can customize your sim as you wish.
> Also, they did some effort on the user interface, I mean compared to RF3, I
> felt some improvment.
Yes comparing with RF3 scripting is a great advance.
Some NL customers have claimed for this some time ago.
Anyway these are the first steps into scripting in RF so I think that
it needs more improvement to do the scripting job cleaner.
But I think that RF is an overpriced product compared with other
solutions. maybe NL will tthink to adapt the RF price to the market in
a short future.
> Maybe have a chat with NL as they are nice people and ask them to have a try
> at RF4 ( more than the available trial version ).
Yes I am sure they will give you a demo version so you can take your
own opinion.
And, now comparing H and RF, the fluid demo in the past london event
was very impressive, I think that with these fnew fluid weapons H is
far better than RF for fluids, at least in concept and design of the
tool, obviously I don't know about the solvers speed, we have to wait
some months more to know the answer :)
>
> Regards,
> Gerome.
>
>
> From: mstory at xion.org
> Reply-To: sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> To: sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> Subject: Re: [Sidefx-houdini-list] RealFlow4
> Date: Fri, 29 Sep 2006 09:11:53 -0700
>
> Hi Jed,
>
> I've been testing RF4 for a while now, not all too impressed frankly.   The
> plugins will be done this weekend, there's some confusion over how  they
> deal with the objects transform coming out of Houdini.
>
> The new RF4 particle file has a "vorticity" attribute, but I haven't  seen
> any real changes in the emitters to notice any true "vorticity
> confinement", but I haven't done any significant testing.
>
> I suppose the Python interface is good thing, but how many RF users
> actually script?  Not sure of the usefullness of this feature.
>
> And there's that nasty issue of support from NL ... I hope that's  gotten
> better.
>
>
> --Mark
>
> >We are just starting production on a large project that has a bunch of
> >shots that require a variety of fluid dynamic simulations. We've been
> >working with realflow3 for this sort of thing in the past and the
> >obvious chioce is to upgrade to RealFlow4. Before we spring for the
> >upgrade, I thought it was worth asking if anyone on the list knows of a
> >better FD simulator and if RF4 is much improved from version 3?
> >
> >Thanks in advance for your thoughts!
> >
> >Jed-_______________________________________________
> >Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
> >Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> >https://lists.sidefx.com:443/mailman/listinfo/sidefx-houdini-list
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ====================================================================
>
> The dude abides.
>
> ====================================================================
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
> Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> https://lists.sidefx.com:443/mailman/listinfo/sidefx-houdini-list
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
> Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> https://lists.sidefx.com:443/mailman/listinfo/sidefx-houdini-list
>


-- 

Un saludo
Best Regards
Pablo Giménez



More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list