[Sidefx-houdini-list] houdini modeling?

Matt Ebb matt at mke3.net
Tue May 12 20:24:39 EDT 2015


Yep, I understand where you're coming from. To me though it seems that
the amount of effort required to create for what you're asking for
would be similar to creating an entirely new modelling app. So why not
just use another modelling app alongside Houdini, that already exists?
:) Then SideFX can concentrate on its own unique place in the market
rather than spending resources competing with all the many other
options out there.

On 13 May 2015 at 10:20, Sam Cuttriss <teanau at gmail.com> wrote:
> Totally valid, I may be totally out of line expecting this of houdini.
>
> I view modeling as the fundamental core of 3d, from which an apps
> specialisation builds upon.
> Without robust / efficient modeling features houdini may be limiting itself
> to very large pipelines?
> vs individuals and small shops trying to get a wide variety of tasks  done
> quickly.
>
> that may be a conscious strategic decision, but as (one of many it seems)
> ICE savvy softimage veterans looking for a home, this is the biggest issue
> i face.
>
> _sam
>
> On Tue, May 12, 2015 at 5:05 PM, Matt Ebb <matt at mke3.net> wrote:
>
>> There are plenty of other modelling apps that do a great job of
>> destructive poly modelling, but really only one (Houdini) that does a
>> great job of procedural modelling. Why not just let your 'black box
>> edit SOP' be a file SOP, and continue it on in another app more suited
>> to the job? IMO there's nothing wrong with using a mix of tools, using
>> the best one suited to the task at hand. I'm happy to let Houdini be
>> Houdini, and let SideFX concentrate on making awesome procedural
>> modelling, because they're the only people who are!
>>
>> On 13 May 2015 at 08:48, 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, François 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



More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list