Hello there,
It would be really awesome if a couple of tools could be added to handle tree generation and modeling.
I know, everything needed is there, but this kind of work require math skills and expertise I don't have, and despite the large size of our studio, there is no resource to create that kind of tools in-house. (We are only a bunch of Houdini artist here @Gameloft).
This is one of the only reason I have to start 3dsmax these days, only for GrowFX (https://exlevel.com/features/) … it's a really great product, but it will be a such a better fit in Houdini, … relying on a stack modifier system for this kind of modeling is a real PITA. Having to use Max to create procedural content hurt me every time
Beside, TheGrove for blender (https://www.thegrove3d.com/releases/the-grove-release-6/)has a very nice approach too, it's more on the life simulation side (self organization) than the simple recursive distribution. It's however deadly slow to generate half dense model … and again, this kind of procedure should probably flight once done properly in VEX … well I suppose.
I don't know what would be the better approach, or the easier to implement … but a little bit like heightfields was a really amazing addition (and easy to use), maybe a couple of HDA might help for this kind of tasks. Anastasia work on this looks just wonderful ! : https://vimeo.com/229252148 [vimeo.com]
Thanks.
Found 89 posts.
Search results Show results as topic list.
Houdini Lounge » Tree / plants generation tools.
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Houdini Lounge » Modeling primarily in Houdini
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Hi there,
To me, hard surface modeling doesn't mean boxy surfaces, so at some point you need good tools to deal with edge loops/slicing for subdivision surface modeling.
Coming from Modo, I could probably request hundreds of features, but instead I will try to focus on the most obvious one.
Please let me know if some of this feature exist, as I might miss some functionality ?
1) Subdivision display mode.
We (I) badly need a subdivision display mode the doesn't just mix a cage display with the subdivision result.
Once in sub-d display mode (-, it's very difficult in Houdini to select points or edges, as they might be under the subdivision surface.
Modo version display the limit surfaces on the subdivision model, and you can easily select components and do your modeling in this mode.
2) Local LoopSlice.
They are few handy options in Modo :
- The slice is only done on the selected poly
- You have a visual feedback where the slice is created (%)
- There is symmetry mode than will really speed-up the edge looping work.
3) Edge Slide / duplicate
- This is really my favorite edge loop method
- You can specify a numeric distance for the sliding … when creating support edges for subdivision surface, you try to keep this distance
constant all over the model.
SDS modeling for hard surfacing is all about creating support loops to crease the model … and it's a very boring tasks.
That's probably the reason why solid modeling (Nurbs) get a lot of success lately, with product like Fusion 360, and MoI3D (by far my favorite tool for this tasks).
In Fusion you can do hybrid modeling, turning cages SDS model into Nurbs surface, and use all the solid tools to add details/trims and fillets.
It would perfectly fit the nodal procedural aspect of Houdini, but that's an other story : https://www.sidefx.com/forum/topic/55277/?page=1#post-248072 [www.sidefx.com]
Traditional DCC try to copy this solid modeling method too, with product like MeshFusion (Modo) and HardMesh (Maya) for example.
Because dealing with flat surfaces and booleans are really fun in Houdini, but the bevel tool is useless on curved surface.
In Houdini we have Soft-Boolean, part of the Direct Modeling from Alexey Vanzhula … and so far it's really my preferred product (partially because Houdini's node graph ).
I really hope some collaboration can be done with Alexey on the subject !
Pascal.
To me, hard surface modeling doesn't mean boxy surfaces, so at some point you need good tools to deal with edge loops/slicing for subdivision surface modeling.
Coming from Modo, I could probably request hundreds of features, but instead I will try to focus on the most obvious one.
Please let me know if some of this feature exist, as I might miss some functionality ?
1) Subdivision display mode.
We (I) badly need a subdivision display mode the doesn't just mix a cage display with the subdivision result.
Once in sub-d display mode (-, it's very difficult in Houdini to select points or edges, as they might be under the subdivision surface.
Modo version display the limit surfaces on the subdivision model, and you can easily select components and do your modeling in this mode.
2) Local LoopSlice.
They are few handy options in Modo :
- The slice is only done on the selected poly
- You have a visual feedback where the slice is created (%)
- There is symmetry mode than will really speed-up the edge looping work.
3) Edge Slide / duplicate
- This is really my favorite edge loop method
- You can specify a numeric distance for the sliding … when creating support edges for subdivision surface, you try to keep this distance
constant all over the model.
SDS modeling for hard surfacing is all about creating support loops to crease the model … and it's a very boring tasks.
That's probably the reason why solid modeling (Nurbs) get a lot of success lately, with product like Fusion 360, and MoI3D (by far my favorite tool for this tasks).
In Fusion you can do hybrid modeling, turning cages SDS model into Nurbs surface, and use all the solid tools to add details/trims and fillets.
It would perfectly fit the nodal procedural aspect of Houdini, but that's an other story : https://www.sidefx.com/forum/topic/55277/?page=1#post-248072 [www.sidefx.com]
Traditional DCC try to copy this solid modeling method too, with product like MeshFusion (Modo) and HardMesh (Maya) for example.
Because dealing with flat surfaces and booleans are really fun in Houdini, but the bevel tool is useless on curved surface.
In Houdini we have Soft-Boolean, part of the Direct Modeling from Alexey Vanzhula … and so far it's really my preferred product (partially because Houdini's node graph ).
I really hope some collaboration can be done with Alexey on the subject !
Pascal.
Edited by PaQ WaK - Aug. 24, 2018 12:07:56
Houdini Indie and Apprentice » Creating spiral sphere
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Houdini Lounge » A plea for better nurbs surfacing tools !
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Houdini Lounge » A plea for better nurbs surfacing tools !
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
@bobc4d
Yes I know Rhino a little bit, I actually played a while with Grasshopper before starting Houdini.
It was a really great experience, but I can't go back to anything but Houdini for procedural/parametric modeling, the main reason is probably the way Houdini display the data flow (sop node graph), I find it so easy to read and to manage compared to the spaghetti mess from many other package.
@amm
I'm not expecting Houdini to compete with fusion360 (I would love to see that, but I try to stay realistic too) … but just some enhancement of the skin operator for example, so it might handle more complex surfacing based on curves. Again I'm seeing the problem in the parametric modeling perspective. For direct modeling Modo, Moi, or Fusion are just fine.
(Houdini with Direct Modeling HDA from Alexey Vanzhula is actually not that bad either).
And what I have posted on the Modo forum is maybe a little bit misleading, because there is no way I could write my own network/sweep/rail hda. The interest from me is there, but I know my limits too
Yes I know Rhino a little bit, I actually played a while with Grasshopper before starting Houdini.
It was a really great experience, but I can't go back to anything but Houdini for procedural/parametric modeling, the main reason is probably the way Houdini display the data flow (sop node graph), I find it so easy to read and to manage compared to the spaghetti mess from many other package.
@amm
I'm not expecting Houdini to compete with fusion360 (I would love to see that, but I try to stay realistic too) … but just some enhancement of the skin operator for example, so it might handle more complex surfacing based on curves. Again I'm seeing the problem in the parametric modeling perspective. For direct modeling Modo, Moi, or Fusion are just fine.
(Houdini with Direct Modeling HDA from Alexey Vanzhula is actually not that bad either).
And what I have posted on the Modo forum is maybe a little bit misleading, because there is no way I could write my own network/sweep/rail hda. The interest from me is there, but I know my limits too
Edited by PaQ WaK - April 18, 2018 22:45:47
Houdini Lounge » A plea for better nurbs surfacing tools !
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Hello,
Just to introduce myself, I'm CG generalist since nearly 20 years, and I have spend lot's of time modeling stuffs (mostly hard surfacing).
I started with Subdivision modeling during the first 10-12 years (Lightwave, Modo, 3Dsmax), and added nurbs in my tool-bag 8 years ago, with a very easy nurbs software called MoI3D.
(Purpose of the images is to illustrate that I have suffer with both technics).
I'm using Houdini 18 months ago, mainly for environment and procedural modeling, and recently I started to focus a little bit more the nurbs surface tools (rails, skin, sweep), and I'm a little bit confuse how “rustic” this tools are, especially the skin operator (had a violent fight with this one this weekend).
So I did some research too, and it seems like the main idea about this tools are :
“we did nurbs tools for years, nobody cared, the maths are super hard and apparently not worth it, don't expect any updates”.
I don't think that I can change anything about this statement, but I had to try something.
So here's 3 ‘simple’ surfacing example from MoI3D, a tool developed by a single person (Michael Gibson), and I think he's using a library called SOLID++ from Integrityware (http://www.integrityware.com/).
Example 1: Loft.
Lofting between 4 closed curves, with different number of CV's, one of the profile is actually a filleted square shape. No curve sorting needed, starting point of every curves are not aligned.
Example 2 : Sweep.
Sweep along 2 rails, with a third curve as additional control (scaling rail). No special alignment for the profile closed curves is needed.
Example 3 : Network.
4 U curves, 3 closed V curves. While the U curves are drawn very carefully, the V one don't even touch the rails. No curves sorting needed, no trimming needed.
This kind of improvements will change a lot the usability of the Houdini tools in that area, because in the actual state, I can understand the lack of success and the limited usage from the users.
Maybe relying on an existing nurbs library might help ?
As a side note, I was only able to load the first 2 models in Houdini, using IGS. The parametrization doesn't look that bad.
It seems there was a good push to add better poly-modeling tools (the new boolean is awesome), it's off course welcome. But I also believe that building shapes from curves is something much more procedural friendly by nature (compared to the hundreds of pushing/pulling/edge looping needed for box modeling).
This last video is just to illustrate what “modern nurbs package” can do .
Cheers.
Pascal.
Just to introduce myself, I'm CG generalist since nearly 20 years, and I have spend lot's of time modeling stuffs (mostly hard surfacing).
I started with Subdivision modeling during the first 10-12 years (Lightwave, Modo, 3Dsmax), and added nurbs in my tool-bag 8 years ago, with a very easy nurbs software called MoI3D.
(Purpose of the images is to illustrate that I have suffer with both technics).
I'm using Houdini 18 months ago, mainly for environment and procedural modeling, and recently I started to focus a little bit more the nurbs surface tools (rails, skin, sweep), and I'm a little bit confuse how “rustic” this tools are, especially the skin operator (had a violent fight with this one this weekend).
So I did some research too, and it seems like the main idea about this tools are :
“we did nurbs tools for years, nobody cared, the maths are super hard and apparently not worth it, don't expect any updates”.
I don't think that I can change anything about this statement, but I had to try something.
So here's 3 ‘simple’ surfacing example from MoI3D, a tool developed by a single person (Michael Gibson), and I think he's using a library called SOLID++ from Integrityware (http://www.integrityware.com/).
Example 1: Loft.
Lofting between 4 closed curves, with different number of CV's, one of the profile is actually a filleted square shape. No curve sorting needed, starting point of every curves are not aligned.
Example 2 : Sweep.
Sweep along 2 rails, with a third curve as additional control (scaling rail). No special alignment for the profile closed curves is needed.
Example 3 : Network.
4 U curves, 3 closed V curves. While the U curves are drawn very carefully, the V one don't even touch the rails. No curves sorting needed, no trimming needed.
This kind of improvements will change a lot the usability of the Houdini tools in that area, because in the actual state, I can understand the lack of success and the limited usage from the users.
Maybe relying on an existing nurbs library might help ?
As a side note, I was only able to load the first 2 models in Houdini, using IGS. The parametrization doesn't look that bad.
It seems there was a good push to add better poly-modeling tools (the new boolean is awesome), it's off course welcome. But I also believe that building shapes from curves is something much more procedural friendly by nature (compared to the hundreds of pushing/pulling/edge looping needed for box modeling).
This last video is just to illustrate what “modern nurbs package” can do .
Cheers.
Pascal.
Edited by PaQ WaK - April 16, 2018 17:44:02
Houdini Lounge » UI/UX: Share your screenshots & tips & tricks & ideas
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
I don't want to go off topic, but I just want to share my simple UI of Houdini running on a 8inch baby laptop.
I didn't expect having Houdini running on an atom cpu, but not only it works really well, but the UI is customizable enough to make it usable Oo (I have to say that I mainly do modeling doodle in the bus with it).
Cheers.
I didn't expect having Houdini running on an atom cpu, but not only it works really well, but the UI is customizable enough to make it usable Oo (I have to say that I mainly do modeling doodle in the bus with it).
Cheers.
Edited by PaQ WaK - March 11, 2018 12:40:21
Houdini Indie and Apprentice » Dissolve a point ?
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Hi Neil,
That's solved my problem (I should have find it myself ….)
Thanks.
That's solved my problem (I should have find it myself ….)
Thanks.
Edited by PaQ WaK - March 2, 2018 21:37:44
Houdini Indie and Apprentice » Dissolve a point ?
- PaQ WaK
- 89 posts
- Offline
Hello,
It scares me that I allready manage to build a stadium in houdini, but I can't resolve simple problem like this one.
How can I dissolve a point and keep the shape like in this image.
(I did an edge dissolve to illustrate the result I'm looking for, but in practice all I have is a group of point)
It scares me that I allready manage to build a stadium in houdini, but I can't resolve simple problem like this one.
How can I dissolve a point and keep the shape like in this image.
(I did an edge dissolve to illustrate the result I'm looking for, but in practice all I have is a group of point)
Edited by PaQ WaK - March 2, 2018 21:38:02
-
- Quick Links