Recent Forum Posts
Concept Art. Is Houdini up for it? Jan. 27, 2018, 9:40 p.m.
khoseaOf course. By the way I believed, it is your future studio who's suggesting Houdini for concept art too, so you're asking how to utilize it. Anyway I think that Maya - as it is today - probably is not best reference for making a conclusions about proceduralism or non-destructive approach, how it can help in let's say everyday modeling work.
Maya is very widespread as far as I know, but to ask them get Houdini for concepting, I dont know, I dont have that experience yet to say what will happen. Houdini is coming up according to many, and they, like you say, do increase the modeling comfortability, and that is a good thing. Im entangled in many choices, but I need to make one, very soon. (No I didnt play with japanese multiplication table, but my mom took me to cinema all the time. Japanese movies included.)
By some tradition in 3d apps, procedural approach fits better to ‘patterns’ repetitive details, things like city generators, trees, terrains, vegetation. So, closer to description of environment art.
In any case, once people are able to see the benefits, they'll find a way to utilize even ‘technical’ approach. While ago I was running a few small utilities based on Softimage ICE, always been impressed how ‘non-technical’ people (precisely, artists who were focused on result of tool, instead of dissecting the tool itself) were able to get more, perhaps it is something about distribution of (always limited) time. Also, as far as I'm able to figure out, frontmen of ‘Houdini doodles & Discussions’ thread on Modo forum, become Houdini users just a few years ago. You never know what future holds.
1050 TI Suitability Jan. 22, 2018, 6:04 a.m.
GTX 1050 Ti is working well here with Houdini 16, at least for basic tasks like OpenGl display. Older 750 worked well too. However when it comes to GPU computations like OpenCL or Octane render, you won't see miracles. I think Octane bench is around two times in favor of 1070, four times when it comes to 1080 (something like that).
Concept Art. Is Houdini up for it? Jan. 17, 2018, 6:30 p.m.
What is in Maya modeling that cant be done in HOudini in equal time if you know both of them? How you achieve your set goal is up to you. Another thing that sort of bipped on my radar, is the technical learning curve in H. Im no stranger to this,nodal systems are very incoporated in our craft, and they are the building blocks of almost all serious software. There is a special way of thinking in HOudini I suppose, and I want to explore that, because during the summer I will be looking for work. Cheers everybody!!!
I've played with that Houdini ws Maya modeling question recently, here's visual conclusion [www.matkovic.com]. Full thread on odForce is here [forums.odforce.net]. I'm not a student, I'm switching from 10 years of Softimage. At least from that point of view, I think this is unhappy, somehow mad comparison between extremes. While Maya theoretically can go procedural, in practice that's unbelievable hard because of tons of exposed, not so relevant parameters (intermediate objects,separated transform-shape, whatever), while one still has to dig into jumble of nodes just to change resolution of some primitive if there's deformer alive on top. After all, Maya is only software on planet, where basic controls over operator (create, inspect, edit, reorder, disable, delete) are dispersed over several windows, and not even consistent. In short, no hope for competitive proceduralism in Maya as it is today.
On Houdini side, it was pretty much linear, comfortable experience to ‘take’ a nodal, indirect part of Houdini, after Softimage ICE experience. While with Houdini ‘direct’ modeling, I found another, unseen madness, tools changing behavior by own criteria (move tool that became tweak tool by own decision), ‘faked’ solutions like ‘surface distance’ proportional tool based on normals ( Ok that one is fixed in 16.5), and, and… at some point just decided to forget Houdini ‘direct’ part, for greater good.
So at the end day, for hard surface polygon modeling, choice is 3d Studio Max or Blender if Max is not possible. Not because groundbreaking possibilities of any of two - it's mainly because of good direct-indirect balance (tweaking ws modifiers) and predictable, consistent workflow, *without* too much of handles, radial menus, ctrl+shift+alt+space+…, glowing lines in viewports and such BS. For NurbS and more real output, these days, Autodesk Fusion 360 is king - has usable construction history (contrary to Rhino), has strong filleting-blending engine *and* subd style modeling presented by former T-spline plugin. Price is great, too.
Houdini (Indie) still stands for experiments and for what McNistor described as ‘alien patterns’, well I'm huge fan of them.
Anyway, if you're already in Houdini world, IMO requirement on your side is, I'd call it a ‘positive attitude toward basics of applied math in 3d apps, and programming’. You definitively don't need to be programmer or math wizard - but there should be something to keep the motivation. If you liked to play with abacus or Japanese multiplication method as a kid, that's good start. Otherwise I don't know…. Of course there's huge improvement in Houdini's direct modeling in short time between v13 and v16, however, ‘indirect’ part is a several times stronger.