[Sidefx-houdini-list] Shelf Question
antoine at floqfx.com
Sat Nov 15 14:44:07 EST 2008
On Nov 15, 2008, at 11:09 AM, Andy Nicholas wrote:
> I can see why they were put in there; to appeal to people coming from
> other packages who want to transfer their workflow across, but I can't
> help that it's a facade that doesn't represent the reality of the
> day to
> day production methodology of using Houdini.
Along similar lines, has anyone noticed how all the documentation is
now not "SOPs" but "surface nodes", and this'n'that nodes. I agree
it's catering to folks coming from other packages, and unfortunately,
IMO, it *increases* the apparent complexity rather than doing the
That being said, I think Houdini is going through a similar
transitions as synthesizers did during the transition from analog to
digital: it used to be about *synthesis*, i.e. creating something
from just a bunch of control signals, but then went to mostly
*sampling*, and cobbling together pre-existing stuff, kinda like clip-
art rather than knowing how to draw. Looking at operating systems
and programs folks use, the trend has definitely been towards
assembling pre-built stuff and keeping the underlying knowledge
stowed away behind a nice UI.
And that is great, as long as you have a clear, rich library of pre-
built stuff. We're somewhat caught half-way in between right now.
Floq FX Inc.
10659 Cranks Rd.
Culver City, CA 90230
More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list