[Sidefx-houdini-list] houdini modeling? (Sam Cuttriss)

Lisa Reynolds lisa at red3d.com
Tue May 12 19:38:02 EDT 2015


The most efficient process is to use a low-cost organic modeler like 3D-Coat and import the model into Houdini and run with it from there procedurally. I was in the middle of working on that, but had to table the project for a couple months. I’m hoping to get back to it next month. When I left it, the importing wasn’t working as well as I hoped, losing detail when it came into Houdini. I couldn’t find any information to help me figure out if there were some settings that needed attention to make the process better. Does anyone know of tutorials that cover this in detail? 

-Lisa

> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Tue, 12 May 2015 16:18:37 -0700
> From: Sam Cuttriss <teanau at gmail.com>
> To: sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> Subject: Re: [Sidefx-houdini-list] houdini modeling?
> Message-ID:
> 	<CAMHD0N3oJVBLEdgLQzEnLAY_tchNn34ob+yCm=M9r4=zHnk6zw at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
> 
> Sure maintaining proceduralism would be incredible. But if it adds a single
> click to a modeling operation  I'm afraid it would need to be abandoned (
> in this rapid modeling sandbox scenario )
> 
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 4:11 PM, Sam Swift-Glasman <glassman3d at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> 
>> I think it could  be argued that the edit sop is fairly black-box already?
>> 
>> Why not take this further and give modelers the tools that they need whilst
>> still having access to other sops down the line
>> Maybe also if it can done efficiently, why not include a history of edits
>> to give the procedural purist access to every stroke if they so desire
>> 
>> 
>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:48 PM, Sam Cuttriss <teanau at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Yes, im looking for a very fast/ very stupid sandbox to model without the
>>> benefits / burden of proceduralism.
>>> I want the sandbox to prioritise efficiency and ergonomics, reducing
>> clicks
>>> to the absolute minimum, eliminating workflow dependence upon commands /
>>> attribute wrangling /
>>> I would even prefer primary interactive properties to be represented in
>> the
>>> viewport at the site the modification will manifest using context
>> sensitive
>>> handles / parameters whenever possible.
>>> Multiple sticky keys acting simultaneously were very successfully
>>> implemented in softimage reducing what could be 10 or more sequential
>> steps
>>> to a couple of modified mouse clicks.
>>> 
>>> I realise what im asking for is !Houdini
>>> and i recognise the output geometry of such an arrangement would probably
>>> eliminate any procedural modification opportunities.
>>> 
>>> but im more than willing to give that up to model quickly and
>> expressively.
>>> 
>>> besides, it seems like a great opportunity to capture the hearts and
>> minds
>>> of autodesk refugees.
>>> _sam
>>> 
>>> 
>>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 11:00 AM, Jordi Bares Dominguez <
>>> jordibares at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> I think we should argue the two variants we encounter
>>>> 
>>>> - Procedural modelling tasks : nodes, for sure (booleans, architecture
>>>> stuff, etc?)
>>>> 
>>>> - Normal modelling tasks (which is 90% of the cases) : it has to be one
>>>> too, it is a destructive process by nature and thus trying to shoehorne
>>> it
>>>> onto a procedural paradigm gives you a very cumbersome workflow.
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> If you try to build it all with very granular tools we will end up in
>> the
>>>> same situation we are in, almost nobody uses it.
>>>> 
>>>> jb
>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>>> On 12 May 2015, at 10:49, Andy Nicholas <andy at andynicholas.com>
>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> The thing is, individual SOPs are great, and yes, we should
>> definitely
>>>> have that list that Srecko put down, but the fact is that to
>>>> (non-procedural) modellers, having to put down SOPs, create groups,
>>>> attributes, etc. breaks the modelling workflow and can quickly kill a
>>>> moment of inspiration while they look up VEX syntax for the umpteenth
>>> time
>>>> ;)
>>>>> 
>>>>> So yes, I?d say that an uber editing SOP is still very much
>> necessary.
>>>> Maybe it has a button which says ?Make SOP network? to automatically
>>>> creates a network based on what you?ve just done. That would be
>> awesome,
>>>> although it would be a tough challenge for SideFX to define the
>>> heuristics
>>>> of how it would do that.
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> If one wants an UBER modeling node it's easy enough to just create
>> an
>>>> OTL
>>>>>> yourself :)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> Hehe! Careful, someone might think you?re being serious ;)
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 12 May 2015, at 07:40, Ron Schab <ron.schab at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Agreed with most of above.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If one wants an UBER modeling node it's easy enough to just create
>> an
>>>> OTL
>>>>>> yourself :)
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> I actually love the procedural node trees.  It it one of the many
>>>> reasons I
>>>>>> prefer Houdini.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The cookie-SOP highly depends on mesh resolution amongst other
>> things
>>>> that
>>>>>> i.e. Cinema doesn't needs in order to work.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> beers
>>>>>> Ron
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 4:15 PM, Srecko Micic <
>> srecko.micic at gmail.com
>>>> 
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> I do not see much benefits of Uber tool, at least if it works like
>>> Edit
>>>>>>> Node in 3dsMax. I like to be able to go back and tweak nodes
>> later,or
>>>>>>> combine them in one tool,  that is why I love Houdini :D
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> What I would like to have is more and better implemented (with more
>>>>>>> options) SOPs.
>>>>>>> - For example better Bevel sop that works like Cinema4D.
>>>>>>> - Slide edge/vertices along edge, surface ....
>>>>>>> - Snapping on object surface not just vertices - Retopology
>>>>>>> - Poly bridge.
>>>>>>> - Boolean improved, I find this rarely works, but I think it is
>>>> important
>>>>>>> for Houdini to have this implemented as better as possible.
>>>>>>> - More curve options (easy to round corners, offset, combine them
>>> etc),
>>>>>>> add splines as in 3dsMax, this is also important for Houdini
>> because
>>> of
>>>>>>> it?s procedural approach.
>>>>>>> - Something like Backdrop in Modo, much easier to work with
>> reference
>>>>>>> images than what we have now (transparent, overlay, easy to scale,
>>>> rotate,
>>>>>>> translate).
>>>>>>> - More NURBS tools.
>>>>>>> - Matcaps implemented
>>>>>>> - Enhance DXF and EPS/AI importers
>>>>>>> - Small modelling helpers, like make circle from selected faces
>> etc.
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Srecko Micic
>>>>>>> 3D Generalist
>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------
>>>>>>> Skype: srecko.micic
>>>>>>> Email: srecko.micic at gmail.com
>>>>>>> http://sreckom.webworkman.com
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On May 12, 2015, at 15:22, Jordan Walsh <jordan.h.walsh at gmail.com
>>> 
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> It would be really nice to have an UBER modeling node like an edit
>>>> node
>>>>>>> but
>>>>>>>> with all the modeing tools built in, like divide, add, extrude etc
>>> for
>>>>>>>> organic modeling and also keeping the tools in their normal node
>> for
>>>> for
>>>>>>>> procedural setups.
>>>>>>>> A node that has the same functionality as 3dsMax's Edit Poly
>>> modifier
>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>> be awesome. It is a massive pain to have a giant string of nodes
>> for
>>>> some
>>>>>>>> modelling tasks.
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> Jordan
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> PS, I do love using an Add SOP to remove prims ;)
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 1:05 PM, Fran?ois Duchesneau <
>>>> sidefx at trinix.ca>
>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> I wonder if the goal here is not to be able to set absolute value
>>> in
>>>> a
>>>>>>> non
>>>>>>>>> procedural way. My understanding is while you're editing your
>>> points
>>>>>>>>> sometimes you want to say the selected ones go to 10 in Y and
>> then
>>>> the
>>>>>>> next
>>>>>>>>> selection go 5 in X, in architecture modeling for example.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> The last thing you want is have an AttribWrangle and then
>> conntinue
>>>> your
>>>>>>>>> editing with another Edit Sop. If the Edit Sop had a toggle for
>>> World
>>>>>>> Space
>>>>>>>>> editing then you could use switch from one style to the other for
>>> the
>>>>>>>>> following operation.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Francois
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> Also, if you want something as specific as setting the x
>> component
>>> of
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> P attribute to 10, it doesn't seem like a giant leap to say
>> @P.x =
>>>> 10;
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> 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
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> 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
>>>>> 
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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
>>>> 
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list
> Sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> https://lists.sidefx.com:443/mailman/listinfo/sidefx-houdini-list
> 
> 
> End of Sidefx-houdini-list Digest, Vol 471, Issue 5
> ***************************************************




More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list