[a / b / c / d / e / f / g / gif / h / hr / k / m / o / p / r / s / t / u / v / vg / vr / w / wg] [i / ic] [r9k / s4s / vip / qa] [cm / hm / lgbt / y] [3 / aco / adv / an / asp / bant / biz / cgl / ck / co / diy / fa / fit / gd / hc / his / int / jp / lit / mlp / mu / n / news / out / po / pol / qst / sci / soc / sp / tg / toy / trv / tv / vp / wsg / wsr / x] [Settings] [Search] [Home]
Settings Home
/3/ - 3DCG

Thread archived.
You cannot reply anymore.

File: 1516933713595.jpg (24 KB, 398x471)
24 KB
Why is Houdini referred to as "Slowdini" by my coworkers?

Im doing some "flashy" and "poppy" intros for espn using stock footage, apparently they are doing some weird frozen dragon shit, Im just curious to know why it has that nickname
Caches take time to build.

Mantra is not very well optimized.

If you have your bgeos ready to go and use a 3rd party engine like Redshift, Houdini shits on every 3d package ever made.
>3rd party engine like Redshift
I was tempted to go this route, as Mantra is indeed slow, but came across this comparison and found the visual outcome poor: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0Wn6lhGNAQ

There are other interesting comparisons by that same author. I think Arnold gets the best place (workable render time, save for one particular scenario; comparable or better visual results than Mantra, especially with SSS).
That doesn't mean anything. As you can see the Redshift and Vray version has a different density or the density is interpreted differently.
This is what makes the difference. One should be able to create the exact same looking explosion as the Arnold or Mantra one with the other renderers.

I have tested an explosion simulated in Houdini with different renders like Arnold, Clarisse and Vray and i had no problems to get the same thick and dense smoke and fire and i couldn't really differentiate between them afterwards.
the arnold is far better than everything else
Yeah and i just told you why that is.
I am not gonna lie, Arnold just looks better out of the box, not just with Explosions, Materials too, but that doesn't mean that you can't replicate the exact same look with Mantra, Vray or Redshift.
It just needs more finetuning since all of these renderers interpret the simulation data differently.
I'm also interested in knowing what's behind the nickname. I mean, sims are slow, especially those that can't be multithreaded, but that's common sense and people wouldn't call it Slowdini just on that basis, right? It's an algorithmic limitation, to be solved by research; not a sign that the developers of the product (and the product itself) are crap.
I think the term originates from when Softimage was in heavy use and it was being discussed at gaydomain and cgp as being "slow"

Delete Post: [File Only] Style:
[Disable Mobile View / Use Desktop Site]

[Enable Mobile View / Use Mobile Site]

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective parties. Images uploaded are the responsibility of the Poster. Comments are owned by the Poster.