[Sidefx-houdini-list] Siggraph & Maya..
ntmonkey at gmail.com
Sat Aug 15 08:29:01 EDT 2009
I wouldn't worry too much about it, but don't completely dismiss the new
A lot of maya places already have an established compositing pipeline
imbedded to where Toxic would make little sense. My experience has
predominantly been with Shake, and now recently, Nuke, and I'm having a
tough time seeing how Toxic will compete given how well-received Shake/Nuke
The same could also be said for Matchmover since it was removed from the
market, and users simply adopted other tracking software in it's absence.
For now now, they're welcomed additions and definitely provide value to the
package, but one has to wonder how will it be supported in the future.
I'm from the Maya/XSI side and we're constantly looking over Houdini at
Mantra as a solid and cost-effective render solution, powerful DOPs toolset,
distributed farm solutions, etc. If SideFX continues to address the speed
issues then I'm sure Houdini will stay competitive.
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:22 PM, <craigleehoffman at aol.com> wrote:
> Didn't make it to Siggraph but heard that Maya will soon be "Unlimited"
> only and will include 5 Mental Ray licenses, the Toxik Compositor, and a 3D
> So for roughly the same price as Houdini at it's current 50% off price (I
> think- not sure on pricing) Maya folks will be able to work with industry
> standard Video files in their compositor (COPs only handles individual
> frames much to my chagrin), be able to track a 3D camera from that footage
> to bring right into Maya, do 3D Paint of color, bump, etc. maps on the
> surface of models, have decent hardware shading support, have a good fast
> solution for character clothing (n-Cloth), and have fast fluids and cloth
> and wire deformers- all of which Houdini (which used to be a more complete
> solution) lacks.
> Suddenly I think Houdini is going to be a much harder sell for those of us
> who prefer it.? :(
> I have to add that after working more in Houdini's DOPs in H10 more
> recently (wire deformers and fluids) and then seeing how simple and fast
> Maya's are to simulate and render I was quite dismayed.? I am not convinced
> the quality of Maya's dynamics are as good or flexible or powerful as
> Houdini's, but they certainly return 'usable' results much quicker right out
> of the box.? There are a lot of times where you want a small simple fast
> dynamics solution and that is a niche that Houdini hasn't been able to
> deliver on just yet, although it has gotten a lot better in recent
> Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
> Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list