Not me, but I think he's hit a lot of good points.http://nccasymposium.bmth.ac.uk/syed_junaid/index.html [nccasymposium.bmth.ac.uk]
Cheers,
Peter B
Why Houdini? Well, here's an idea
4348 4 1-
- pbowmar
- Member
- 7025 posts
- Joined: July 2005
- Offline
-
- JColdrick
- Member
- 4140 posts
- Joined: July 2005
- Offline
-
- rofthorax
- Member
- 38 posts
- Joined: May 2008
- Offline
pbowmar
A lot of people come on here and ask “why Houdini” and now someone did some research
http://nccasymposium.bmth.ac.uk/syed_junaid/index.html [nccasymposium.bmth.ac.uk]
Cheers,
Peter B
Looks good.. However it seems biased, it doesn't seem to take into account anything else.. Just a mention here or there..
I donated the DEC Alpha Ton made his first 64-bit port of blender to.
Okay if I survive, SideFX has to be pretty cool. Otherwise this is a totalitarian regime.
Okay if I survive, SideFX has to be pretty cool. Otherwise this is a totalitarian regime.
-
- DrFrankenRex
- Member
- 69 posts
- Joined: March 2008
- Offline
A more accurate question might be: “Why HD for anything BUT movie/cinematic projects”.
I evaluated HD v9.1* for 60 days to help test a ROP for a specific game engine format. To be of meaningful use in this genre of file ‘Render’, more than 2 dimensional ‘images’ need to be output. Rigs/meshes/materials all combined into one single object for the engine to digest and use. At present; HD does not fill the bill for me. At this point in time; I have many low cost alternatives that have enough engine format features to make the purchase of this additional program moot, even at the $99 entry point.
The ability to bring in existing assets, created outside the HD environment, is well… essential. HD is somewhat lacking in this area. FBX support is in it's very beginnings…..
Even at the starving artist entry price of $99, a program will need to bring in and spit out UV'd geometry, UV maps, rigs, LOD's, etc… As I said earlier, I spent 60 days/nights, evaluating Houdini 9.1*, I've used the AutoRig tools and some other HD-UI environment tools, nice; sure. Be even nicer to see a render output for it in FBX or a flavour outside of the HD world. That will be the true key to unlocking the wider market….outside the cinematic world.
I evaluated HD v9.1* for 60 days to help test a ROP for a specific game engine format. To be of meaningful use in this genre of file ‘Render’, more than 2 dimensional ‘images’ need to be output. Rigs/meshes/materials all combined into one single object for the engine to digest and use. At present; HD does not fill the bill for me. At this point in time; I have many low cost alternatives that have enough engine format features to make the purchase of this additional program moot, even at the $99 entry point.
The ability to bring in existing assets, created outside the HD environment, is well… essential. HD is somewhat lacking in this area. FBX support is in it's very beginnings…..
Even at the starving artist entry price of $99, a program will need to bring in and spit out UV'd geometry, UV maps, rigs, LOD's, etc… As I said earlier, I spent 60 days/nights, evaluating Houdini 9.1*, I've used the AutoRig tools and some other HD-UI environment tools, nice; sure. Be even nicer to see a render output for it in FBX or a flavour outside of the HD world. That will be the true key to unlocking the wider market….outside the cinematic world.
-
- phrenzy84
- Member
- 249 posts
- Joined:
- Offline
-
- Quick Links