How much programming and scripting is there involved in creating basic Houdini effects? Can I get away with just adjusting sliders and not doing anything technical?
>>701697>too dumb for anything but Blunder
>>701697The reason Houdini is popular is cos it takes no artistic knowledge but lots of programming knowledge, so it allowed a whole new group of people access to
>>701716What program/addon that is compatible with maya would be best for particle effects for someone with no technical knowledge beyond just adjusting sliders and nodes?
>>701716>takes no artisticoh sure just run the creativity OPerator script in a consoleevery math minded nerd with no art skill can do thatFucking Idiot
>>701716You still need artistic knowledge. I would never say Houdini is popular but it is known for making the deeper technical things far easier than any other package without compromising on power and accessibility.
>>701724math and programming require creativity
>>701716>Houdini is popularSure, very popular.
>>701729>using Google trends to track popularity
>>701730Not the guy above, but please share with us the clearly better objective way of measuring popularity,
>>701724>>701726>>701729 Cope harder blendlets
Houdini has a lot of flexible power. It's like softimage in that regard. You can still be artistic though. I plan to import models from a brush and marvelous into it to do some animation. I wanna see how far I can go in terms of realism for. Hair and skin. No clue how to approach self collision though.
>>701730It probably isn't very far from the truth. See which country is the most interested in Houdini, according to Google? Japan. Do you know which is the first non-English subforum to be added at SideFX's site, only a couple months ago? Yep, the Japanese one.
>>701729>>701992Is this some sort of falseflag to make Blendlets look dumber than they already are?
you don't need to use the scripting language (vex) at all. there is a node-based, visual programming component (VOP) that let's you 'code' without writing any code. VOP networks generate VEX code.most of the time, however, writing the VEX directly, if you can, is faster (2 lines of VEX vs a VOP net with a dozen nodes) and the code might be more performant.it's not the writing of code itself that you need to be scared of - houdini's massive cliff face of a learning curve is mostly about wrapping your head around the workflow, the way it treats geometry, the multitudes of options available to you, the potential of the absolute fuck ton of data at your disposal etc etc.the documentation is not great a lot of the time.there's probably a node you don't know about that could save you hours of work.every update is meaningful and adds genuinely cool new stuff making the learning curve steeper.every update brings big changes to sometimes very fundamental workflows:>oh you've been writing HSCRIPT this whole time? well you shouldn't, use VEX instead>oh, you like copy stamps? don't use them anymore, use for loops instead. not those old for loops though, we deprecated those>oh, you're used to making RBD sims a certain way? fuck you>oh you remember how you used to source volumes for smoke sims? doesn't work any more, this new way is better>remember the copy sop? we split it up into 3 nodes, enjoy keeping upstuff like that happens every fucking year
>>702316>stuff like that happens twice a yearFTFY
>>702316That's the life of a professional. You have to always adapt to new skills and methods, or someone else will.
>>701697The whole point of Houdini is accessing data.Without scripting you're just using 1/3 of the power of Houdini.Might as well use Blender then.
>>702405it's just a little nuts how willing sideFX are to throw caution to the wind and replace things that their users rely on, on a day-to-day basis.i know they keep the legacy nodes in there and it's possible to get them back into the tab menus, but as someone who got into houdini only at h16, learning was (and continues to be) a relatively frustrating experience because you're constantly running into tutorials referencing legacy systems, which then sends you off on a 20 minute search because houdini docs are inadequate.
>>702409bullshit, even with 1/3 of its power, Houdini runs circles around Blender. When it comes to simulation of stuff Blender can't even compete.
>>702423Honestly I agree. It is daunting to see how fast it evolves, but I do like that I never feel like some new research doc has some tech that it could benefit from. It always has something equivalent that's available. There are several fluid sim algorithms, dynamic fracturing methods, bi harmonic skinning, meatballs, terrain generators, procedural texturing, and hair simulation that's opencl driven. And 18 is gonna have usd rendering which is gonna blow up scene scale possibilities for single user cases. Its amazing that they keep advancing. Meanwhile nothing else matches it. Not Maya or max, or blender or cinema4d. The only. Comparable tool was probably soft image and that's dead. Its really grown into an unrivalled beast for effects but I do wanna master it for character animation due to possiblw flesh and gore simulations via FEM.
>>702425Houdini is shit for character animation, only viable workflow is Maya alembic or fbx -> Houdini
>>702432I disagree on merit alone that it has bi harmonic skinning built into it. AFAIK Maya doesn't.
>>702433Literally clueless about what is important for rigging and animation(Hint: Houdini rig evaluation is single-threaded)
>>702445If you think evaluation threading is more important the skinning method you're in no position to argue about who is clueless. This is on par with saying rendering time is more important than material library.
>>702445Also evaluation drops to single threaded in Maya if it becomes to complex anyway, so it's a moot point.
for basic houdini stuff, not much programming or scripting is needed. you can even do lots of visual coding with just their nodes which is nice. the documentation is really good too and the coding is stupid simple sometimes
>>702447>>702446Seethe harder Houdinifags
>>702433>>702446>>702447>>702446The only useful weight initialization method is nearest-neighbor. but even if "biharmonic skinning" were somehow better, skinning is approximately 10% of the work involved in rigging, just like the 10% FPS Houdini achieves compared to Maya. Meanwhile weight painting is 0% of animating, while playback speed is everything. How much have you ever animated?
>>702464Almosy every cinema grade production uses some form of biharmonic skinning along with deformation cages. The rest of what you stated is baseless, especially your 10℅ figure. I don't know why you're obsessed with saying Houdini is bad for animation. It has the same methodology barring orientation defaults. Maya didn't even have usable parallel evaluation until 2018. Before then It crashed, and I doubt anyone complained about playback speed prior to having it. In summary, your notion of what's useful is built around slandering at best. The fact you think weight painting isn't a factor in animation speaks volumes for this. It's a back and forth process that rigs get adjusted upon request, so it's ironic you ask me if I ever animated after spouting it isn't important. Every tool should be it's best variant, regardless of. Multi threading or single threading factors since that all is hinged on what hardware you have, again debasing your whole performance disparity mindset. I won't deny that parallel evaluation is useful, but not vital. You can't claim that when it isn't even a couple years old.
>>702458You will never reach the perfection of Houdini sims just with Maya plugins. These two should work together.
>>702493Maya bifrost is getting there. give it a few years
>>702475Actually laughing out loud at your arguments right now. Fucking biharmonic skinning, lmfao. Even the biggest Houdini diehard proponents like Matt Estela admit that Houdini is worthless for character animation. Michael Goldfarb is autistic, probably the only person on the planet who thinks Houdini is worthwhile for animation. I did his terrible rigging tutorials and as a result I know firsthand that Houdini is absolute trash and 5+ years behind Maya. (Parallel eval was available in 2015, not 2018.) Go ahead and waste a a few weeks or whatever trying to rig and animate in Houdini if you want. When you give up in frustration with your unusably slow, low quality results and start over in Maya don't say I didn't warn you, retard.
>>702496God I wish I could have merely a glimpse of what SideFX will be doing with Houdini in a few years.
How long until H 18 is released? I want to play with Solaris and Karma, godfuckingdammit.
Mayalets seething at Houdini taking over are always hilarious. Imagine having put tens of thousands of hours into a program that is fading before your eyes.
>>702584>Houdini taking overI love both, they need to work together, but modeling in Houdini doesn't feel good. Also rigging and animation feels very behind. Maya still is the standard here.
>>702584silly little Blendlet
>>702584Houdini is great for what it is, but there's no way it can replace Maya in the near future. I use Houdini for a some basic sims and CFX, but it looks like Bifrost is being advanced to take care of those needs.
>>702645Its just a matter of time until the revamp their animation system and when they do Autodesk will feel like Poland in 1939.
>>702650Best of luck to SideFX, maybe they can make it happen. No way I'll be able to stop using Maya anytime soon though.
>>701716I'm a math major and have no artistic skill, and could not create anything considered artistic.
>>702662Do you use Houdini? If so, what do you create with it?
>>702587>modeling in Houdinii always think of this image when considering polymodelling in houdini
>>702662It would take you considerably less time to learn artistic skills, then it would take me to get a major in math.
>>702863use blender for modeling, maybe rigging and animation, then houdini for everyting elseautodesk can go fuck themselves
>>703622I'm just interested in using whatever tool makes my life easier, not going on some crusade against autodesk
>>703623unless you use propietary tools from Maya there's a lot of missing gaps in the modeling workflow, from what I've seen Blender is more efficient than modo, which its only downside would be that it's a separate license to pay for. I've seen a Blender modeler that can pop out an asset with minimal effort, and stupidly fast as well, the same person had gone through modelling in Max and then Maya and would never go back if it was accepted more outside of freelancing.I use Maya when I really have to since it's an already established standard, but I'd bet that Blender will keep improving at exponential rate just because of the sheer amount of people contributing to it, as opposed to Autodesk growth plan of just acquiring and abandoning development.
>>703625I haven't seen anything that can match AdvancedSkeleton for Maya
>>703665mGear for Maya is pretty fantastic too.
So Houdini sucks for character anim because viewport playback is slow? Is Blender any better?
>>703999When it comes to character animation there is Maya, and then there's everything else.
>>704015IOW if you were thinking of using Blender you might as well just stay in Houdini instead.