[Sidefx-houdini-list] houdini modeling?

Srecko Micic srecko.micic at gmail.com
Wed May 13 13:43:51 EDT 2015


I do not see much difference between modelling in Maya using shelf and Houdini, except that Houdini lacks some essential tools, and maybe more viewport widgets (not sure how to name them). Basically select component, click shelf icon to perform operation, follow guidelines, tweak options and that is it. If you have lot operators you can delete history like in Maya too. 

Right?


> On May 13, 2015, at 17:29, craigleehoffman at aol.com wrote:
> 
> Any chance you could give us a little video example of what you would like to do using Softimage or your modeler of choice - or point us to an existing example?  (Like, I am not sure what you mean by “multiple sticky keys acting simultaneously”, etc.)
> 
> 
> You can model interactively in the Houdini Viewport without having to worry about SOPs, commands, attribWrangle for most standard modeling things.  I know most tutorials never seem to show that (always diving into SOPs and using expressions, etc.) but it is set up to work that way- just maximize the viewport, use shelf tools (or drop tools down with the Tab) and enter modeling parameters at the top of the Viewport for the active modeling operation (which gets added to the SOP network in SOP-land but is hidden from view if you want).
> 
> 
> If I knew what you wanted to do, I could try to do a quick video tutorial for interactive modeling works in Houdini…  Plus it would help me learn where it breaks down.  I have always intended to do some Video Tutorials of modeling and UV’ing for Artists without all the back and forth to SOP-land and expression stuff that makes most Artists go glassy eyed and turn away from even considering Houdini.
> 
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> -Craig
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sent from Windows Mail
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> From: Sam Cuttriss
> Sent: ‎Tuesday‎, ‎May‎ ‎12‎, ‎2015 ‎3‎:‎48‎ ‎PM
> To: sidefx-houdini-list at sidefx.com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 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




More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list