New version of houdini officially on the way for March 7th, what's on your wishlist lads?
>>667157for autodesk to fix 3ds max
>>667157Max-tier modeling tools pls
Is houdini Jewish?
>>667157Where the fuck are all the totorials at? I was trying to figure out how to make rain in Houdini, fucking rain and could not find a tutorial.
>>667162this. why is modeling and animating in houdini so hard? i can't rig a fucking skeleton at all without having a hundred nodes.
>>667181Rigging in Houdini is a shitty knock-off of Maya's rigging paradigm. Slow to evaluate and awkward to use. Michael Goldfarb is probably autistic and completely unable to listen to criticism about his pet toolkit. They will have to make some deep architectural changes to compete with Maya.
>>667157Vellum tetrahedral softbodies are an aching hole that needs to be filled.I'd like this "Procedural Dependency Graph" whatever it is to play nicely with or integrate USD.
Proper PBR viewport with realtime mantra node preview.
>>667183>Michael Goldfarb is probably autistic and completely unable to listen to criticism about his pet toolkit. They will have to make some deep architectural changes to compete with Maya.lol. I think you're absolutely right as far as competing with Maya on the character animation front. I love Houdini, it is my favorite software of any kind. It does so many things so elegantly, but there are also parts of the program that have just really shitty, un-intuitive workflows. Rigging is borked, DOPs is confusing as fuck, and the modeling/viewport interaction stuff is always a "two steps forward, one step back" affair from one release to the next. SideFX needs to pay more attention to workflow.
>>667351Agree with you on everything except I don't think there's much that can be done to improve DOPs without huge compromises. Maybe they can improve the help documents and the labels, but the basic idea that you need to make simulations declarative instead of step-by-step seems correct.
Would you say Houdini is managable for simple rigging and animations like for game assets? Or is it basically broken at this stage?
>>667474Simple as in a basic bone + skin weights rig that you could do equally well in Maya, Max, Blender, or anything else? Sure, it's perfectly usable for that.
>>667157guize, what the fuck is a vellum?pls no bully
>>667492The first minute or so gives you the gist: https://vimeo.com/294379827
>>667492It's their name for an implementation of a modern "XPBD" dynamics solver. It uses techniques that were developed for game engines. It's very fast and simple to use and it automatically unifies cloth, hair, particles, soft bodies etc. in a single solver. They also added some nice features like a Marvelous Designer style cloth workflow.The drawback is the simulation quality is worse than the dedicated solvers. It's hard to use Vellum without everything looking like soft rubber. But soft rubber is good enough for a lot of simple sims.
https://www.sidefx.com/community/houdini-175-launch-event/Haven't watched it yet since I'm at work.
>>670881Very cool shit. Procedural dependency graphs are going to be a major workflow boost. This kind of advancement is rare.
>>670881PDG looks amazing, viewport render too holy shit
Houdini basically needs 115IQ to even use properly, truly the most big brain software.
>>671352I am certified in the 130 range, but Houdini makes me feel like an idiot. I am an artist not an mathematician/programmer.
>>671369There's your problem, brainlet. Houdini is the dream of every autistic TD, not so much of the bread and butter artist.
>>671369>>671379No. It's clearly a problem of knowledge/skills, not latent ability. Just get an applied maths book and get to it. The 95% of cool Houdini shit can be done with basic calculus and linear algebra knowledge. If you need more, it's because you are looking to implement techniques from research papers or do some research yourself. Which would be awesome, but is entirely unnecessary, as an artist, to use Houdini.
>>671369>I am an artist not an mathematician/programmerThat is a very sad way to look at things. Mathematics are to key understanding the observable, and invisible world around us. The artists of the renaissance held mathematics in high regard, they would be ashamed to know that artists today do not do the same. One of the most beautiful things about Houdini is how easily it lets you be an artist, mathematician and programmer.
>>671369I would agree with you if we were talking about grasshopper. Grasshopper is a hell of domain, range, x(y), sliders, and other insanity. Coming from that to houdini is pure bliss. Houdini still asks you to think a bit, but it does so much stuff for you that GH demands you solve for y like math homework.
>>671414That's not an mindset, its an observation after i tried many times. There is soo much to learn and so little time. I think i rather concentrate on something i can do than to rape myself into doing something i don't like to do. I can do simulations and easier stuff in Houdini just fine, but i will probably never use it intensively on an advanced level. I am not a great sculptor and a bad animator, but if i put some effort in i can become good. Not so sure about math and programming, its just not fun to me.
>>671414artists today do there are a ton of people using code as a medium u just have to look past 4chan
>>671414not him but you can still look at it the way you do and still be only an "artist", it's really just what you want (or are employed) to produce
>>671426It is indeed a mindset. It sounds like you are still new to this medium, so don't rule out the math and programming dimension of the medium. Everything you do in 3d has it's basis in mathematics, at some point you will find yourself needing to employ those mathematics tools. Just keep an open mind.>>671427Yes, I am aware. I would not call it a ton of people though when taken in context of the entire CG artist community. >>671428That's basically what I said. However there is a far greater trend among artists to see programming and mathematics as inherently non-artistic. This is the case even among CG artists, which I find particularly sad.
>>671439No i am not new to this medium, i am a veteran 3D artist. When i tell you this is not a mindset but an observation, than you can trust me, i know myself. I can deal with nodes - Nuke, S.Designer, Houdini no problem, i can also write small expressions, but too much levels of abstractions and my brain just switches off. Maybe i should also mention that i have ADHD so that might be a huge factor. I would love to employ the power of more advanced math and programming, but learning and using it is fucking torture for my brain, and everything my brain doesn't want to do doesn't happen.I can admit and accept my flaws and weaknesses and move on and do something more fun. >trend among artists to see programming and mathematics as inherently non-artistic.That's because creativity/openness and conscientiousness are separate personality traits and if you want to be good at both art and math you need to score high at both personality traits. Which is why technical artists earn the most money - because they are much more effective but also more rare.Most artist score low at conscientiousness.
Bump, too many retards on this board
>>667157Destructive modeling workflow when? Don't need a node for every edge loop i cut
>>671621You can collapse them into subnets, or stash their output and delete them.
>>671621>DestructiveWhy even bother learning houdini at that point
>>671633Sometimes i need to model something fast. Anyway, there is a Polydraw node, which may be used for destructive modeling
>>671633t. never used Houdini
It's out, bitches.
So anything special or are we still on the Blender train?
>>672123>on the Blender train?What do you mean?