First of all, thank you Jordi for all your work on the guides & thanks to SideFX for creating this section on your forum.

Personally, I have still not decided where to go. Houdini 14 looks like a big step in the right direction, but I still have one major concern.

I need to be fast in whatever software I'm using. And, although I realize no matter what app I end up switching to it'll take a while to get up to speed, I'm hesitant to switch to Houdini because I have this gut feeling that Houdini isn't designed to be “fast” but instead it's designed to be flexible.

What I mean is, my feeling is that working in Houdini is like trying to do absolutely everything with ICE in Softimage. I feel like, you can't just quickly slap something together for a rush job because everything in Houdini requires a LOT of initial setup.

I hope I'm being clear enough. I suppose an analogy would be this.

If I was a woodworker and a client asked me to build a birdhouse, the Softimage version would be that I already have all the pieces of wood, pre-cut to the proper measurements to build the birdhouse. But, I also have a toolbox full of tools that will allow me to totally customize the birdhouse if necessary.

The Houdini version would be, I have an enormous toolbox, but in order to build the birdhouse, I have to first go out and cut down a tree, drag it to a sawmill, design, measure, and create all the pieces I need for the birdhouse, then I can start to build the birdhouse. And, some of the tools I need might not exist in the toolbox, but instead I have been given the components necessary to build the tools from scratch. The great news for the client is, this birdhouse is a procedural birdhouse, so even after it's “done” the client can still request changes.

I sort-of feel like a lot of Houdini users are brilliant object-oriented coders who spend an enormous amount of time building things so they can show how customizable and flexible their setup is. But while it's really neat when a staircase can grow or shrink based on a slider, or a bunch of trees can be manipulated based on a random seed number, or a building can have new floors added & windows changed procedurally, 90-95% of the time I go into a project with all that stuff designed and agreed upon before the production started, so adding all those gee-wiz controls is just a waste of my time.

That's what's frustrating about losing Softimage. Softimage isn't perfect, but it combines a lot of the best features from all the packages on the market. It allows me to jam through rush jobs, but still has the power tools ready to go if I need them.

Wow, what a long and rambling post this has become! I sincerely hope you guys don't take what I'm writing as an insult. Houdini is freaking amazing. But, while I realize the trend is towards specialized packages, I still need a core application that handles the majority of my workload.

I personally don't think it makes business sense to spend the amount of money SideFX is charging to use Houdini only in the cases where I need ICE-like power. It needs to be able to do all the generalist stuff Softimage can do (quickly) AND have the muscle to tackle complex procedural stuff as well.

Does that make sense?

-Paul

I'd take a piece of a previous job and just try to do it again in Houdini…
this way you'll actually be able to compare.
some of what you say is true - Houdini often requires more upfront work…but don't be misled into thinking that all the studios using Houdini for film/TV/commercials are always building complex procedural systems - we're not…
most of the time you're getting a model from another application, animation from somewhere else and you're tasked with jamming them together with a bunch of other stuff…and then you cut and paste in a bunch of nodes from an old file
it's only when you've used Houdini for a while that you can start anticipating areas where you can take just a few extra hours and add something tricky that might help you in the future, or re-build an asset from one job to be more generally useable for other jobs…
and very often even the simplest things that you build right out of the box are VERY flexible - just because of Houdini's procedural nature - you often can't build something that doesn't allow rapid adaptation to changes

just my 0.02c

To answer in a single word to your title question: no

The power in Houdini comes from the fact that you can create hard things easier than in other apps (in which you'd need a team of programmers to develop a plugin/tool from scratch), often with no coding.

Given its nature I don't think Houdini will ever be faster than Softimage, but that's not necessarily a bad thing since that's a trade-off for the versatility you get in return. The current problem (IMO obviously) is that the gap is way too big, though I'm confident that SESI (with our help) can make the chasm a lot tighter to the point that the slightly slower workflow is hugely surpassed by the power that comes from fully procedural approach.

I agree: No.
At least not at the beginning.

It's a bit what happens between After Effects and Nuke. In AE you have a “working” comp in no time, slap an AO, a couple of effects and of you go.

In nuke you need to build the tree, spend a lot of time organizing it. Further down the line you appreciate this extra work since it gives you flexibility to make precise changes and not loose your mind. Much easier than making changes on a big AE comp, IMHO.

This quote comes to mind:

Give me six hours to chop down a tree and I will spend the first four sharpening the axe.

With aftereffects you start chopping the tree straight away.

All this setting up do come with some benefits, as you will be able to create library of assets which you can reuse.

I've seen very fast houdini users, if you can be bothered to put the extra hours to get to that level. Learning houdini is not free, at comes at a price of time.

Is this the right tool for the kind of work you do? Only you can answer that.

Thanks guys.

I really would like to have a face-to-face talk with Carl Bass. He's left me pretty stuck at the moment.

I suppose I'm just going to keep my eye on Houdini and continue using Softimage for now.

After being quite depressed over the demise of Softimage with it's perfect balance of being fast and flexible, I am at least feeling very optimistic about Houdini. I've been doggedly gaining information and experience for perhaps 6-9 months, and while, I may never be as fast as I was in Softimage, I do feel I could get say, 80% of the way there with Houdini.

With H14, I continue to be pleasantly surprised with strides towards a more efficient user experience. 2 very simple but extremely useful things are the middle mouse transform while the curser is off handle (exactly like SI - thank you!!) as well as the quite good pre-selection highlighting and edge/poly loop tools - very SI-like. This is making me smile. If this progress continues, I have no doubt Houdini can become my primary content creation tool as Softimage has. Can I get to 100% speed. I'm not sure, but I'll take 80-90, given the power of what can be created with this tool.

I don't know about your experience learning SI, but I do have to remind myself that it took me a good 2-3 years in using SI on a daily basis before I would consider myself “fast”. What kept me going and building my skill was that it was incredibly fun to use SI and to get better. I have to say, I'm really enjoying the experience of using Houdini.

Hope that helps a bit. And like you say, in the meantime, continue using Softimage when you have a rapid job turnaround. That's probably what I'll be doing for the next several years honestly. In the meantime I hope to build new skills when I can to make the transition at a comfortable pace.

the middle mouse transform while the curser is off handle (exactly like SI - thank you!!)

Nice!!!!! thank's for the tip

Hi Paul, thank you although I did not create the section, Side Effects did. I did produce the guides which I am very happy are helping some of you.

Regarding Houdini as your one tool and how fast it is to work with it, I have an approach that I will try to describe.

Use Houdini as your backbone tool that handles all your rendering FX and little by little get into the animation/rigging/etc…

Today Houdini lacks some important quick tools like deform by curve so your point, shrinkwrap, etc… tools I am intending to build (some I have) and compile them on library you can download so the flow is similar.

Hope it helps
jb

That would be awesome Jordi.

Na, Houdini is as fast as other packages, the only issue is some times you don't have the tool right away to use it and you will have to do it your self.

that's good and bad, good because you can do your own tools with our the need to code, or a TD. and you can customize it to be like you want it to be.

bad thing you need to do it, and for that you need to know a little bit more than a regular CG artist does.

I talk to a guy one time and he didn't even understand what was a point number, or a polygon normal, he just did his job, and if didn't know he just copied a tutorial. well for using Houdini you can take advantage of the normal to do crazy stuff, or need to know the points id of the geometry to preform some action etc…

you need to know the programs to be able to compare. I would suggest to start making one very small and stupid tutorial something that you would laugh about doing it in XSI. like drop a torus and change the parameters.

then drop the torus, change the parameters and connect a mountain node.
if you want to become a Houdini master you need to start with one node. then 2, then how you combine this 2, then add third and keep making combinations.

after the third node you connect you will be SO addicted to Houdini that you will keep dropping node and nodes and nodes, and you will read the documentation to know where or how to use them and so on. and that's it.

isn't much different from all the work you did to learn xsi right? you did a cube, then you move it, then you drop a bone etc…

step by step

btw Houdini can deform by curve.

wire deformers, or you can make a tube and use that tube as a lattice.

Without going into general statements, just to add a few, I've found ‘quicker’ than SI, in universe of one-man-band.

1: copy paste between the scenes. Exactly, select nodes, copy, close scene, open new scene, paste the nodes into appropriate contest. This works with Softimage ICE, too. But, by nature of Houdini networks, it's possible to copy and paste a much more in one go, including things that does not belong to ICE tree, like referenced geometry.
Copy paste ability, especially of this type, definitively is cornerstone of one-man-band survival plan.

2:Expressions, again copy paste option in Houdini. RMB on parameter, copy, paste it somewhere else as values (including all three XYZ components together), link expression, or entire key-framed animation.
Expressions ( I mean, written ones) are not welcome guest in ICE, probably because they are product of much older development.

3: All that small, but useful ergonomic enhancements when it comes to work with nodes. RMB on input or output that opens the menu, ability to insert the null (ICE pass-trough) into many connections at once, copy paste which tries to smartly fit into new network, quick way for node coloring, and so on.

Of course, everything I mentioned belongs to, whatever is possible to do by nodes, scene assembly, ambitious motion graphics, FX - but, well, that's what, very personally, I'm looking for, in Houdini.

pelos
btw Houdini can deform by curve.

wire deformers, or you can make a tube and use that tube as a lattice.

You can also easily plug Your own wiredeform in vex, but exactly the way You want it