[Sidefx-houdini-list] New obfuscation of Lookat - am I the only one saddened?

Floyd Gillis floyd at afcg.com
Sun May 7 17:47:10 EDT 2017


I agree.

Makes me wonder, "What Kool-aid were they drinking?".

Also, isn't there similar added complexity with animating a camera along 
a path object now?  Used to be dead-simple.


On 5/8/17 2:27 AM, Peter Bowmar wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Just curious if I'm the only one saddened by the new, much clumsier, Lookat
> "constraints" on Cameras, Lights etc?
>
> I recall commenting on how the multiple levels of obfuscation and lack of
> UI saddened me before, but now that I actually want to use it for
> something... wow it really slows down the workflow.
>
> -You _must_ use a shelf tool for something that previously was a single
> drag and drop operation. Massive workflow slowdown.
>
> -the actual parameters that get created are buried on nodes inside the
> object itself (!!) so both obfuscation and a massive workflow slowdown as
> you jump contexts
>
> I get that it's "more powerful" in the sense it's a CHOPnet you can
> intercept and manipulate, and I think that's great. However the tradeoffs
> aren't worth it since you don't actually manipulate the CHOP data in 99% of
> simple "LookAt" cases.
>
> I'm not opposed to the actual calculation being done in CHOPs, I love CHOPs
> like any self-respecting Houdini zealot.
>
> I just the think the way the UI and requirement for a shelf-tool has been
> done is a massive leap backwards and makes me sad :(
>




More information about the Sidefx-houdini-list mailing list