Werner Ziemerink
I'm sure there must be a way to tell Houdini to increase or decrease the amount of zoom by setting the increments it uses.

I think it's hardcoded, but shouldn't be too difficult to add a preference for it.

Simon__hayes
Basically but more just ability to encapsulate a modeling network in a SOP but with the ability to chose to evaluate the network within the encapsulating node or the final result.

I do that in Houdini by collapsing a chain of geometry nodes (box select, shift+c) and then locking the resulting parent subnet. If that gets too long, then you can repeat as necessary, possibly nesting other locked subnets inside. The drawback here is that once you lock a subnet, that has a hardened copy of your geometry that needs to be saved with your scene. So if you nest too many levels and decide you want a smaller file size, then you go inside the subnet, delete everything, resave. Of course, that means the history will then be lost from now on as you each new copy of your scene.

+1, to everything that DaJuice said about the bevel SOP, especially with regards to a proper radius (non-pointy, see his first image) and the ability to make the first set of polys co-planar with the original surface.

twod
I think it's hardcoded, but shouldn't be too difficult to add a preference for it.

On the topic of preferences, a hotkey/action to restore network editor to 100% zoom level would be most appreciated.

If you use Z to go back to previous zoom level, there is a bug that causes the node names to use different scales. The alternative is to create a new network editor and close the old one, but then you lose where you were and all your network editor settings

Is the white glow for the gizmos added recently or did it completely fly over my head in the previous builds?

Whichever the case, it doesn't look good. It looks a bit kitschy and in the same time, a more efficient (while also better looking) way to emphasize the axis when pointing at it would be to simply change color to white or yellow.

Other 3d apps do this very effectively, like Softimage, 3dsMax and Maya too if I'm not mistaken, but I'm sure about the first two.
Not arguing that this should be addressed because X and Y 3d app have it, but because in this case it's a better solution IMO.

Also, it's good to be back.
I'll start reading around to see what has been discussed on this board and hopefully in a day or two I'll manage to update that page a bit. :wink:

p.s. Is the SDK opened as far as viewport gizmos go? I'd really like the option to be able to make some improvements of my own (like removing the small center cube that does nothing other than to obstruct), just for the unlikelihood of SESI not addressing these important (to me at least) things.

p.s. Is the SDK opened as far as viewport gizmos go? I'd really like the option to be able to make some improvements of my own (like removing the small center cube that does nothing other than to obstruct), just for the unlikelihood of SESI not addressing these important (to me at least) things. Smile

Unfortunately the gizmos are hard-coded AFAIK

McNistor
Is the white glow for the gizmos added recently or did it completely fly over my head in the previous builds?

Whichever the case, it doesn't look good. It looks a bit kitschy and in the same time, a more efficient (while also better looking) way to emphasize the axis when pointing at it would be to simply change color to white or yellow.

The locate glow has been replaced for the next major release… with a way nicer glow.

Ondrej
The locate glow has been replaced for the next major release… with a way nicer glow.

There will be lobbying at the ARB to depreciate that function in GL 4.5, if it can't be customised

Ondrej

McNistor
Is the white glow for the gizmos added recently or did it completely fly over my head in the previous builds?

Whichever the case, it doesn't look good. It looks a bit kitschy and in the same time, a more efficient (while also better looking) way to emphasize the axis when pointing at it would be to simply change color to white or yellow.

The locate glow has been replaced for the next major release… with a way nicer glow.

Um, OK. We (me and whoever decided this) clearly have a very different view about what a clean UI is. Glow effects in viewport gizmos is a bad idea IMO, regardless of how nice they are.
“axis changing color” is extremely simple and efficient in delivering the message (axis click-able) without adding unnecessary info (colored pixels on the viewport real-estate).

If we were to talk about purely about aesthetics, UI masters have steered the trend away from glows, drop-shadows, emboss and other now old school effects, a thing occurred either by the surge of the mobile world where interfaces have to be as clean as possible or because it simply was just meant to become like so.

Leaving aesthetics aside, because that's not our no.1 concern, to me it seems that glows and the like should stay out of the viewport manipulation gizmos where you need as few bling-bling as possible in order to better see your objects, points, etc. It would probably be something less to worry about when it comes to video drivers acting crazy and will make a mess out of such effects, just to add another pinch of practical reasons.

modeling is like going to a friend's house. always makes the same journey. always there and there.
What do you need, a spaceship?

chevita.
modeling is like going to a friend's house. always makes the same journey. always there and there.
What do you need, a spaceship?

I don't know if this was your intention, but you're pretty much aiding my point, so thanks.

jordibares
Freeze the operator stack in Softimage was valuable in the sense that things could get really slow sometimes so the idea of a clean zeroed out geometry has always been (and for a while will be) very desirable.

I have learned to live without it by caching out the geometry and although I miss the ability to collapse serial operations in one big operation the truth is that these concepts we may want to play with before putting too much passion… it truly makes sense the Houdini way.

Destructive manipulation is fine sometimes.

my 2 cents

Agreed.

To be frank even as a long time Houdini user I steer clear of modelling anything in Houdini other than the very basic stuff, a like box , sphere and teapot . :roll:
Blender does a better job,due to better modelling tools that don't need a degree in maths to get working or some overly complicated work flow to champfer a point.
This raises the point thats its going to be a pretty poor return on your investment to make modelling better while your focus > Fx suffers becuase lets face it money doesn't grow on tree's for development

rob

McNistor

chevita.
modeling is like going to a friend's house. always makes the same journey. always there and there.
What do you need, a spaceship?

I don't know if this was your intention, but you're pretty much aiding my point, so thanks.

McNistor,thank you for answering me .
Recently I read your comments.
i dont´ know but i say, yes.
you know the nature of the modeling, modeling-. if someone asked me; what should i do to learn how to make model into digital context creation?my answer will always be:houdini!. There are few techniques for modeling. Maybe we would teach or learn how to transform a simple object into something more complex. or destroy non destructive workflow appending a filesop-this feature non exist in max, for example. There is some techniques that can be played on houdini and more or less on other systems. And that is perhaps, the complex often find it out. And also, by the same way we lose in the beginning if we do not incorporate them into our understanding

So far I didn't even get into the more technical side of the modeling because I don't want people or Universe forbid, SESI, think that these things I've addressed thus far are not as important as “real” modeling is, things like gizmos, selections, viewport interaction (soon to be expanded upon on my page), etc.

You might think that these seemingly unimportant details have little to no impact on how efficiently one models or their weight on user frustration levels.
Any professional UI designer will tell you otherwise and I'm here to attest to that from the position of an experienced user.
It really is important how the gizmos are designed in terms of visuals, feedback and functionality, how points, edges and polys are looking and how you interact with them or how you navigate your scene, both in viewport and trees.
These things are less obvious when most if not all users in Houdini won't do much in terms of modeling other then some procedural stuff.

I saw a modeling tutorial or rather an introduction to modeling with a jet plane or something and it was painful to watch. Not because of the instructor who was obviously not a modeler but because of some Houdini features and ways of doing things.
There are many things, but one from the top of my head was how the extrude is set by default to not merge the extruded polys or the bevel tool is set to a flat subdivision instead of a rounded and the instructor was constantly switching from the default to the one that's used 99% of the cases.

And before going to “real” modeling or talking about destructive vs non-destructive workflow, these things are in need to be addressed so badly that I don't think people will ever consider H for serious modeling unless this changes. And as I said, this change has to start from the bottom up, not from some aleatory point in the middle.

McNistor
I saw a modeling tutorial or rather an introduction to modeling with a jet plane or something and it was painful to watch.

Can you show us this tutorial- thanks!

Our god make houdini

non destructive workflow: future.

if you wanna use the nose of a character b in character a ¿ HOW?
if you wanna make a procedural animal head generator. with procedural or destructive workflow?
modeling in houdini is the future. you need more @time

in the next release houdini maybe increase the ability of mantra.
character animation.
and sculping modeling.
modeling is not just cut and paste, nor the tools of a carpenter is only a hammer.

MartybNz
Can you show us this tutorial- thanks!

I've sent you a PM as I don't want to negatively (or otherwise) publicize a company, unless I have good reasons to, which I don't in this case.

And there's another one on youtube if you do a google search also with a fighter plane for some reason.

circusmonkey
This raises the point thats its going to be a pretty poor return on your investment to make modelling better while your focus > Fx suffers becuase lets face it money doesn't grow on tree's for development

There's quite a bit of low-hanging fruit in the area of modeling and workflow, so I wouldn't consider it a huge development sink.

chevita.
Our god make houdini
non destructive workflow: future.

We appreciaite the sentiment, but there definitely is room for improvement with the modelling workflow, procedural or otherwise. Always good to keep an open mind to suggestions.

Some ground-fruit would be to the ability to have RMB viewport menus torn-off onto the screen. i.e. the handle tool, polysplit, component selection tools all have awesome options hidden away.

Edit:

There are many things, but one from the top of my head was how the extrude is set by default to not merge the extruded polys or the bevel tool is set to a flat subdivision instead of a rounded and the instructor was constantly switching from the default to the one that's used 99% of the cases.

RMB on the tool ‘Set to Default’ does fix that.

twod.
it seems that sometimes the problem is “how the tools are located.”
3d max if you want to switch from “vertex” a “polygon” you have to move the cursor to the “polygon icon” a red patch, and click. And when one has become accustomed to something like this is very hard to think otherwise. In houdini you have something similar and the ability to use the keyboard,hidden for many people.or telling the people “ remember the keybord is a good friend” Maybe improve the ability of “how to choose something” would be good. The ability for new users to locate the tools as they used in the past.
The English is not my native language

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ac4qV2uIF3Q [youtube.com]

make from 1 to 11 second. and so on ,and only until the second 33. In Houdini
have good exercise