Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jonathan Moore]

>
> This is what I would love to understand if you don’t mind…


A conversation best partnered with pint's of ale to fuel the conversation
at some point. :)

On 3 May 2018 at 18:17, Jordi Bares  wrote:

>
>
> And by my judgement, Houdini is no closer to being a generalist
> replacement for Softimage.
>
>
> This is what I would love to understand if you don’t mind…
>
> jb
>
>
> --
> Softimage Mailing List.
> To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com
> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
>
--
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with 
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.

Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jordi Bares]

> And by my judgement, Houdini is no closer to being a generalist replacement 
> for Softimage.

This is what I would love to understand if you don’t mind… 

jb

--
Softimage Mailing List.
To unsubscribe, send a mail to softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com with 
"unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.

Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jonathan Moore]

Why is this turning into an argument Jordi.

I said something in jest about hourly rates, which I then reiterated was in
jest, you brought VFXTD veterans of 20 yrs in to the equation.

Everything I've written in this thread goes back to the original post about
Houdini being used as a generalist tool.

I very much keep on top of what you guys are up at Framestore and have even
commented on your output on this list (the Paddington M campaign at Xmas).

We obviously have very different views with regard to Houdini as a
generalist replacement for Softimage and those different views have come up
on more than one occasion on this list. But there is no doubt that at this
current time, the manner in which Framestore are using Houdini as a
generalist toolset is a minority use case. Ever since Softimage was EOL'ed
certain voices have been predicting that Houdini would become it's natural
replacement but we're a fair way down the line from when you published your
excellent transition guide. A mammoth effort by anybodies standards. And by
my judgement, Houdini is no closer to being a generalist replacement for
Softimage.

Sure Houdini is more popular that it's ever been, mainly because of the
wisdom and foresight of the Apprentice and Indie initiatives. And Houdini's
made significant inroads into gaming and motion design pipelines. But even
in motion design the most successful, famed and popular proponents of using
Houdini for mograph - ManvsMachine and Aixponza; still rely on C4D for the
majority of their output.

And finally ref Jake Rice - this is who I'm talking about:

https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__jakericedesigns.com_=DwIFaQ=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA=YkPGtEtcoS54wGeD88AU-mteieYytvLQKnH89Q2bQ6Y=QGvF3kUOFrwIkryrtkQt7-uAJwHTkc5FOQA8Bi0LY8M=


On 3 May 2018 at 17:10, Jordi Bares  wrote:

> below
>
> On 3 May 2018, at 15:27, Jonathan Moore  wrote:
>
> You and I are members of the same private Houdini Discord server and one
> of the smartest individuals on that server only graduated a year or so ago
> (Jake Rice), and he studied motion graphics not VFX.
>
>
> This Jake Rice??
>  
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jake-2Drice-2D97ba25129_=DwIFaQ=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA=YkPGtEtcoS54wGeD88AU-mteieYytvLQKnH89Q2bQ6Y=frF1xBsjL_ZqXnjvEcGD5dYbOZKmixkAsnZJTF5VJlY=
> 
>
> The core of the broadcast and advertising market is very different to the
> VFX market (I understand you service this segment at Framestore),
>
>
> Mmm… in what sense? Framestore is quite big and has quite a few
> departments tackling all aspects of post-production… I think the only thing
> we don’t do is architectural visualisation.
>
> Click on the departments drop down
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.framestore.com_work=DwIFaQ=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA=YkPGtEtcoS54wGeD88AU-mteieYytvLQKnH89Q2bQ6Y=NpOqtN1MQLlrPEKZE_DQvHyOTbry-X_8dJJIET4NHKc=
> 

Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jordi Bares]

below

> On 3 May 2018, at 15:27, Jonathan Moore  wrote:
> 
> You and I are members of the same private Houdini Discord server and one of 
> the smartest individuals on that server only graduated a year or so ago (Jake 
> Rice), and he studied motion graphics not VFX.

This Jake Rice??
 
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_jake-2Drice-2D97ba25129_=DwIFaQ=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA=W_y3vP1m2g6guCicf4usZGNNqZLo2_khDJvEMp2ALwE=93jiUIJYbzRzGpxKMsyy8I6gCE5SbW6opcZH-Y2sK7Y=

> The core of the broadcast and advertising market is very different to the VFX 
> market (I understand you service this segment at Framestore),

Mmm… in what sense? Framestore is quite big and has quite a few departments 
tackling all aspects of post-production… I think the only thing we don’t do is 
architectural visualisation.

Click on the departments drop down
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.framestore.com_work=DwIFaQ=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA=W_y3vP1m2g6guCicf4usZGNNqZLo2_khDJvEMp2ALwE=kgcbNTfSzgVmWiM-j_Dd2itmPr49rtWXq_c46leKSEA=


> I'm happy that SideFX have made Houdini more accessible to uses outside of 
> typical VFX pipelines. The work of Luiz Kruel on the real-time shelf over the 
> last 18 months has been outstanding, and I expect similar efforts with motion 
> design over the next 18 months. But that doesn't mean that my architectural 
> client should stop basing the core of the pipeline around Max or that my 
> advertising clients should move from C4D for the core of their 3d output. For 
> all Houdini's power it's fundamentally an operating system for 3d. And for 
> generalist 3d output, Houdini use means that the proverbial wheel has to be 
> reinvented on a daily basis if pipelines aren't staffed by expert TD 'tool 
> makers' (as happens on typical FX pipelines). Budgets are smaller, turnaround 
> times are equally smaller, but client expectations are just as high. This 
> means that more focused tools such as Max and C4D often fit the bill better. 
> But that doesn't stop Houdini being a perfect facilitator for those occasions 
> when Max and C4D comes up short.
> 
> My clients use Maya to a lesser extent but there are other 3d segments where 
> Maya is a better workhorse than Houdini. 

Nobody said there is no space for anything else, simply that I doubt the rates 
for senior Houdini artists will go down as their expertise is essential, 
specially those that have been around for a while, are creative and resourceful 
and technically apt.

jb

> 
> None of this means I'm any less of a Houdini champion, it simply means that 
> I'm not a Houdini evangelist. They're two very different things.
> 
> Equally, my tuppence worth for today. ;)
> 
> On 3 May 2018 at 14:17, Jordi Bares  > wrote:
> Is it realistic assuming anyone at all (except someone with a brain the size 
> of a watermelon ;-) can come out of a 2 year course and command Houdini in 
> any meaningful way? I don’t think so… let alone their art, C4D and Houdini.
> 
> In terms of market realities and "in-house teams able to compete”, I am not 
> sure of that either… we are in times of both, commoditisation and 
> consolidation, with big companies attracting the very finest talent to the 
> finest projects and many agencies, production, broadcasters and others moving 
> into the VFX arena in the hope of a slice of the money they now spend outside 
> which ultimately will fulfil the simplest projects as scale is truly 
> challenging and therefore expensive.
> 
> Those guys that are worth their salt will have ambitions to work with the 
> best, and they will leave to get better project, better money and more 
> fulfilling careers.
> 
> My 2 cents of today
> jb
> 
> PS. BTW, Sky has closed their VFX unit.
> 
> 
> 
>> On 2 May 2018, at 22:26, Jonathan Moore > > wrote:
>> 
>> Unless there is a major breakthrough in education I doubt a 20 years 
>> experience Houdini FXTD will have his rates go down… if anything is going to 
>> be the total opposite.
>> 
>> We're already seeing a leveling of the playing field with junior & 
>> middleweight motion designers. A few years back a technical artist with both 
>> C4D and Houdini skills was able to command a good 25-50% premium. These days 
>> it's an expectation of any technical artist hire (that their skills cover 
>> both C4D and Houdini, and for an hourly rate equivalent to that paid to a 
>> purely C4D technical artist a few years back). But that's as much a case of 
>> Houdini education breaking free of FX focused Universities such as 
>> Bournemouth (UK). These days Houdini is included as part of the mix in some 
>> graphic and fine arts based courses such as those on offer via the various 
>> UAL 

Re: ice to maya workflow

[Jonathan Moore]

Chris,

If this is still causing you problems, the missing part of the jigsaw is
likely to be UserData in Maya. This is used by the renderer to pick up the
per particle attributes and map it to the renderer. This is a simple
example for Redshift in Maya (but the tree looks identical for Arnold but
with Arnold) equivalent nodes. As you'll notice, the Softimage
attribute of *Color
*is automatically translated to it's Maya equivalent by Exocortex Crate and
this is *rgbPP. *I've also included a link to all possible per particle
attribute names below. Use this to find the Maya equivalent of any ICE
attributes exported with the pointcloud by Crate. It's best not to be too
ambitious here as Crate may not find logical mappings but all the bread a
butter particle attributes should be translated without problem.

http://help.autodesk.com/view/MAYAUL/2018/ENU/?guid=GUID-E882C129-B93D-4394-931B-453026C9D374

Hope this helps.




On 3 May 2018 at 15:31, Orlando Esponda  wrote:

> Hello Chris,
>
> I'm not sure what kind of attributes are you trying to send from Soft to
> Maya, but this video may help (or not hehehe)  Softimage ICE instances to
> Maya
> 
>
>
> It's rather old and to be honest I haven't tried again for a while. It
> uses nCache format instead of alembic.
>
>
> Orlando.
>
> On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Jonathan Moore  > wrote:
>
>> So I can see my particles in Maya, I just need to figure out how to add
>>> some of the attributes that they had in soft.
>>
>>
>> My bad. I should have stressed that you need to use the Exocortex Crate
>> Alembic exporter from Soft too (presuming you've installed it). And this is
>> hidden away in the following menu:
>>
>> *File > Export > Alembic 1.1*
>>
>> And be sure to change to the faster/newer Ogawa file format as it
>> defaults to the old (and painfully slow) HDF5 format.
>>
>> I've just done a quick test (to be sure nothing get broken in 2018) and
>> all per point Soft attributes are automatically remapped to their Maya
>> equivalent on import (color, age, velocity etc).
>>
>> jm
>>
>> On 2 May 2018 at 14:06, Chris Marshall  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks a lot Morten!! That works! Superb!
>>> So I can see my particles in Maya, I just need to figure out how to add
>>> some of the attributes that they had in soft.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2 May 2018 at 11:21, Morten Bartholdy  wrote:
>>>
 Chris, I have just been there – same issue. A couple of bits are
 missing n the Exocortex installation info.

 You need to create a folder directly in the C: root and name it
 ExocortexCrateAlembic and unzipped or copy the maya version folder directly
 into it – like this:

 C:\ExocortexAlembic\Maya2016\Module\

 The Maya installation path and where to put the .mod file:

 C:\Program Files\Autodesk\Maya2016\modules\Maya2014ExocortexAlembic.mod

 Then edit the last path in the .mod file to look like this:

 + Maya2014ExocortexAlembic 1.0 C:/ExocortexAlembic/Maya2016/Module

 The missing part is in Maya, open Plug-in Manager and browse for this
 file:

 C:\ExocortexAlembic\Maya2016\Module\plug-ins\MayaExocortexAlembic.mll

-

open it, refresh, and tick autoload (not that Maya cares always
anyway, but hey)

 Then Alembic should pop up in the top menubar in Maya.

 Have fun – oh no I almost forgot, it is Maya…

 MB

 Den 1. maj 2018 klokken 18:38 skrev Chris Marshall <
 chrismarshal...@gmail.com>:

 Hi Jon, No not yet. I'm updating my soft licenses and have had issues.

 But I looked at it this morning and was following installation of the
 maya .mod files but as I've never done any installation of maya plugins
 before, I was struggling. I was trying to follow the Exocortex instructions
 but it kept referring to .mod files and example .mod files I wasn't sure
 

Re: ice to maya workflow

[Orlando Esponda]

Hello Chris,

I'm not sure what kind of attributes are you trying to send from Soft to
Maya, but this video may help (or not hehehe)  Softimage ICE instances to
Maya 


It's rather old and to be honest I haven't tried again for a while. It uses
nCache format instead of alembic.


Orlando.

On Wed, May 2, 2018 at 10:58 AM, Jonathan Moore 
wrote:

> So I can see my particles in Maya, I just need to figure out how to add
>> some of the attributes that they had in soft.
>
>
> My bad. I should have stressed that you need to use the Exocortex Crate
> Alembic exporter from Soft too (presuming you've installed it). And this is
> hidden away in the following menu:
>
> *File > Export > Alembic 1.1*
>
> And be sure to change to the faster/newer Ogawa file format as it defaults
> to the old (and painfully slow) HDF5 format.
>
> I've just done a quick test (to be sure nothing get broken in 2018) and
> all per point Soft attributes are automatically remapped to their Maya
> equivalent on import (color, age, velocity etc).
>
> jm
>
> On 2 May 2018 at 14:06, Chris Marshall  wrote:
>
>> Thanks a lot Morten!! That works! Superb!
>> So I can see my particles in Maya, I just need to figure out how to add
>> some of the attributes that they had in soft.
>>
>> Cheers
>>
>>
>> On 2 May 2018 at 11:21, Morten Bartholdy  wrote:
>>
>>> Chris, I have just been there – same issue. A couple of bits are missing
>>> n the Exocortex installation info.
>>>
>>> You need to create a folder directly in the C: root and name it
>>> ExocortexCrateAlembic and unzipped or copy the maya version folder directly
>>> into it – like this:
>>>
>>> C:\ExocortexAlembic\Maya2016\Module\
>>>
>>> The Maya installation path and where to put the .mod file:
>>>
>>> C:\Program Files\Autodesk\Maya2016\modules\Maya2014ExocortexAlembic.mod
>>>
>>> Then edit the last path in the .mod file to look like this:
>>>
>>> + Maya2014ExocortexAlembic 1.0 C:/ExocortexAlembic/Maya2016/Module
>>>
>>> The missing part is in Maya, open Plug-in Manager and browse for this
>>> file:
>>>
>>> C:\ExocortexAlembic\Maya2016\Module\plug-ins\MayaExocortexAlembic.mll
>>>
>>>-
>>>
>>>open it, refresh, and tick autoload (not that Maya cares always
>>>anyway, but hey)
>>>
>>> Then Alembic should pop up in the top menubar in Maya.
>>>
>>> Have fun – oh no I almost forgot, it is Maya…
>>>
>>> MB
>>>
>>> Den 1. maj 2018 klokken 18:38 skrev Chris Marshall <
>>> chrismarshal...@gmail.com>:
>>>
>>> Hi Jon, No not yet. I'm updating my soft licenses and have had issues.
>>>
>>> But I looked at it this morning and was following installation of the
>>> maya .mod files but as I've never done any installation of maya plugins
>>> before, I was struggling. I was trying to follow the Exocortex instructions
>>> but it kept referring to .mod files and example .mod files I wasn't sure
>>> which was which.
>>>
>>> On 1 May 2018 at 14:46, Jonathan Moore 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Chris,
>>>
>>> Did you manage to get your ICE particles into Maya?
>>>
>>> jm
>>>
>>> On 30 April 2018 at 11:02, Chris Marshall 
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi,
>>> Is there a workflow for getting ice particles into Maya?
>>> Thanks
>>> Chris
>>>
>>> If you'd like to unsubscribe and stop receiving these emails click here
>>> >>  
>>> 

Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jonathan Moore]

Yet again Jordi, I think we're comparing apples with watermelon's.

You and I are members of the same private Houdini Discord server and one of
the smartest individuals on that server only graduated a year or so ago
(Jake Rice), and he studied motion graphics not VFX.

The core of the broadcast and advertising market is very different to the
VFX market (I understand you service this segment at Framestore), in much
the same way that FMX is a very different showcase to NAB; it's one of the
reasons that C4D and Houdini service very different needs as much as they
have commonalities in other areas. And when I speak of SKY and the BBC, I'm
talking about the needs of day to day broadcast graphics for news and
sport, not small scale VFX to compete with the larger shops such as SKY's
failed attempts at Osterley (some very close friends lost their jobs it
that fiasco).

I work with Grey Worldwide and Publicis Groupe helping them with their
internal production facilities and in a completely different creative
segment with Atkins, a worldwide architectural practice, who now spend
nearly 70% of their visualisation budget on real-time and VR. In all three
cases Houdini is part of the production pipeline, but the nature of Houdini
use in those pipelines is very different to the stuff you do at Framestore.

I'm happy that SideFX have made Houdini more accessible to uses outside of
typical VFX pipelines. The work of Luiz Kruel on the real-time shelf over
the last 18 months has been outstanding, and I expect similar efforts with
motion design over the next 18 months. But that doesn't mean that my
architectural client should stop basing the core of the pipeline around Max
or that my advertising clients should move from C4D for the core of their
3d output. For all Houdini's power it's fundamentally an operating system
for 3d. And for generalist 3d output, Houdini use means that the proverbial
wheel has to be reinvented on a daily basis if pipelines aren't staffed by
expert TD 'tool makers' (as happens on typical FX pipelines). Budgets are
smaller, turnaround times are equally smaller, but client expectations are
just as high. This means that more focused tools such as Max and C4D often
fit the bill better. But that doesn't stop Houdini being a perfect
facilitator for those occasions when Max and C4D comes up short.

My clients use Maya to a lesser extent but there are other 3d segments
where Maya is a better workhorse than Houdini.

None of this means I'm any less of a Houdini champion, it simply means that
I'm not a Houdini evangelist. They're two very different things.

Equally, my tuppence worth for today. ;)

On 3 May 2018 at 14:17, Jordi Bares  wrote:

> Is it realistic assuming anyone at all (except someone with a brain the
> size of a watermelon ;-) can come out of a 2 year course and command
> Houdini in any meaningful way? I don’t think so… let alone their art, C4D
> and Houdini.
>
> In terms of market realities and "in-house teams able to compete”, I am
> not sure of that either… we are in times of both, commoditisation and
> consolidation, with big companies attracting the very finest talent to the
> finest projects and many agencies, production, broadcasters and others
> moving into the VFX arena in the hope of a slice of the money they now
> spend outside which ultimately will fulfil the simplest projects as scale
> is truly challenging and therefore expensive.
>
> Those guys that are worth their salt will have ambitions to work with the
> best, and they will leave to get better project, better money and more
> fulfilling careers.
>
> My 2 cents of today
> jb
>
> PS. BTW, Sky has closed their VFX unit.
>
>
>
> On 2 May 2018, at 22:26, Jonathan Moore  wrote:
>
> Unless there is a major breakthrough in education I doubt a 20 years
>> experience Houdini FXTD will have his rates go down… if anything is going
>> to be the total opposite.
>
>
> We're already seeing a leveling of the playing field with junior &
> middleweight motion designers. A few years back a technical artist with
> both C4D and Houdini skills was able to command a good 25-50% premium.
> These days it's an expectation of any technical artist hire (that their
> skills cover both C4D and Houdini, and for an hourly rate equivalent to
> that paid to a purely C4D technical artist a few years back). But that's as
> much a case of Houdini education breaking free of FX focused Universities
> such as Bournemouth (UK). These days Houdini is included as part of the mix
> in some graphic and fine arts based courses such as those on offer via the
> various UAL institutions (University of the Arts London). Many young
> freelancers touting their trade to motion design shops don't see scripting
> or programming as a barrier to creative expression; in many cases, they see
> it as a useful catalyst.
>
> I was only joshing when I spoke about reduced hourly rates, but behind the
> sarcasm was a reality of technical 

Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Olivier Jeannel]

For the motion work I believe Houdini is far superior to C4D. Last C4D user
I talked to told me the normals aren't exposed in Maxxon's software...

2018-05-03 15:17 GMT+02:00 Jordi Bares :

> Is it realistic assuming anyone at all (except someone with a brain the
> size of a watermelon ;-) can come out of a 2 year course and command
> Houdini in any meaningful way? I don’t think so… let alone their art, C4D
> and Houdini.
>
> In terms of market realities and "in-house teams able to compete”, I am
> not sure of that either… we are in times of both, commoditisation and
> consolidation, with big companies attracting the very finest talent to the
> finest projects and many agencies, production, broadcasters and others
> moving into the VFX arena in the hope of a slice of the money they now
> spend outside which ultimately will fulfil the simplest projects as scale
> is truly challenging and therefore expensive.
>
> Those guys that are worth their salt will have ambitions to work with the
> best, and they will leave to get better project, better money and more
> fulfilling careers.
>
> My 2 cents of today
> jb
>
> PS. BTW, Sky has closed their VFX unit.
>
>
>
> On 2 May 2018, at 22:26, Jonathan Moore  wrote:
>
> Unless there is a major breakthrough in education I doubt a 20 years
>> experience Houdini FXTD will have his rates go down… if anything is going
>> to be the total opposite.
>
>
> We're already seeing a leveling of the playing field with junior &
> middleweight motion designers. A few years back a technical artist with
> both C4D and Houdini skills was able to command a good 25-50% premium.
> These days it's an expectation of any technical artist hire (that their
> skills cover both C4D and Houdini, and for an hourly rate equivalent to
> that paid to a purely C4D technical artist a few years back). But that's as
> much a case of Houdini education breaking free of FX focused Universities
> such as Bournemouth (UK). These days Houdini is included as part of the mix
> in some graphic and fine arts based courses such as those on offer via the
> various UAL institutions (University of the Arts London). Many young
> freelancers touting their trade to motion design shops don't see scripting
> or programming as a barrier to creative expression; in many cases, they see
> it as a useful catalyst.
>
> I was only joshing when I spoke about reduced hourly rates, but behind the
> sarcasm was a reality of technical skills in the creative marketplace. As
> Houdini becomes more accessible to generalists, the worth of specialists is
> diluted. It's just the nature of things. I'm not talking FXTD's with 20
> years of experience here, but in-house creative teams at e.g the likes of
> Sky or the BBC, will be able to complete projects themselves, without
> having to rely on expensive freelance specialists. Generalist isn't a dirty
> word in these environments, for some businesses, good quality generalists
> are worth much more than specialists (not that they have the budgets to pay
> them more). SideFX's efforts has made Houdini more accessible to
> generalists to a certain degree, but the reality is that Houdin at the very
> least requires a programmatic mindset and ideally decent scripting skills.
>
> Those at the tail end of their career, that came from a pure fine arts
> education are at a definite disadvantage with a technical application like
> Houdini.
>
> Softimage was unique in it's ability to offer both technical and non
> technical artists uncompromised capabilities for creative expression. I'm
> not certain that another single DCC will come along that offers such
> uncompromised abilities to both audiences. And whilst that doesn't impact
> larger pipelines too much, I'm conscious that a fair number of people on
> this list run independent creative businesses (with 10 or less employees).
> In the past a single DCC such as Softimage was all that was needed to be
> competitive. These days I don't think a single DCC exists to cater to the
> generalist needs of these types of businesses. It's more a case of working
> out which pair of DCC's covers you best for the market your targeting. For
> some that decision will be based purely on native capabilities, for others
> plugin requirements/availability will be a core consideration too.
>
> On 2 May 2018 at 20:42, Laurence Dodd  wrote:
>
>> As soon as I started looking at Maya, it just made me sad, but when I
>> delved into Houdini i felt quite at home and it always feels like they are
>> pushing it forward.
>> Also re Maya I never had that "ooh thats a good feature", but with
>> Houdini its all the time, I just need to up my coding skills.
>>
>> On 2 May 2018 at 19:23, Jordi Bares  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> I personally don't ever see Houdini filling the Softimage void. The
>>> engineering that powers the Houdini user experience very often requires a
>>> totally different mindset for 

Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jordi Bares]

Is it realistic assuming anyone at all (except someone with a brain the size of 
a watermelon ;-) can come out of a 2 year course and command Houdini in any 
meaningful way? I don’t think so… let alone their art, C4D and Houdini.

In terms of market realities and "in-house teams able to compete”, I am not 
sure of that either… we are in times of both, commoditisation and 
consolidation, with big companies attracting the very finest talent to the 
finest projects and many agencies, production, broadcasters and others moving 
into the VFX arena in the hope of a slice of the money they now spend outside 
which ultimately will fulfil the simplest projects as scale is truly 
challenging and therefore expensive.

Those guys that are worth their salt will have ambitions to work with the best, 
and they will leave to get better project, better money and more fulfilling 
careers.

My 2 cents of today
jb

PS. BTW, Sky has closed their VFX unit.



> On 2 May 2018, at 22:26, Jonathan Moore  wrote:
> 
> Unless there is a major breakthrough in education I doubt a 20 years 
> experience Houdini FXTD will have his rates go down… if anything is going to 
> be the total opposite.
> 
> We're already seeing a leveling of the playing field with junior & 
> middleweight motion designers. A few years back a technical artist with both 
> C4D and Houdini skills was able to command a good 25-50% premium. These days 
> it's an expectation of any technical artist hire (that their skills cover 
> both C4D and Houdini, and for an hourly rate equivalent to that paid to a 
> purely C4D technical artist a few years back). But that's as much a case of 
> Houdini education breaking free of FX focused Universities such as 
> Bournemouth (UK). These days Houdini is included as part of the mix in some 
> graphic and fine arts based courses such as those on offer via the various 
> UAL institutions (University of the Arts London). Many young freelancers 
> touting their trade to motion design shops don't see scripting or programming 
> as a barrier to creative expression; in many cases, they see it as a useful 
> catalyst. 
> 
> I was only joshing when I spoke about reduced hourly rates, but behind the 
> sarcasm was a reality of technical skills in the creative marketplace. As 
> Houdini becomes more accessible to generalists, the worth of specialists is 
> diluted. It's just the nature of things. I'm not talking FXTD's with 20 years 
> of experience here, but in-house creative teams at e.g the likes of Sky or 
> the BBC, will be able to complete projects themselves, without having to rely 
> on expensive freelance specialists. Generalist isn't a dirty word in these 
> environments, for some businesses, good quality generalists are worth much 
> more than specialists (not that they have the budgets to pay them more). 
> SideFX's efforts has made Houdini more accessible to generalists to a certain 
> degree, but the reality is that Houdin at the very least requires a 
> programmatic mindset and ideally decent scripting skills. 
> 
> Those at the tail end of their career, that came from a pure fine arts 
> education are at a definite disadvantage with a technical application like 
> Houdini. 
> 
> Softimage was unique in it's ability to offer both technical and non 
> technical artists uncompromised capabilities for creative expression. I'm not 
> certain that another single DCC will come along that offers such 
> uncompromised abilities to both audiences. And whilst that doesn't impact 
> larger pipelines too much, I'm conscious that a fair number of people on this 
> list run independent creative businesses (with 10 or less employees). In the 
> past a single DCC such as Softimage was all that was needed to be 
> competitive. These days I don't think a single DCC exists to cater to the 
> generalist needs of these types of businesses. It's more a case of working 
> out which pair of DCC's covers you best for the market your targeting. For 
> some that decision will be based purely on native capabilities, for others 
> plugin requirements/availability will be a core consideration too.
> 
> On 2 May 2018 at 20:42, Laurence Dodd  > wrote:
> As soon as I started looking at Maya, it just made me sad, but when I delved 
> into Houdini i felt quite at home and it always feels like they are pushing 
> it forward.
> Also re Maya I never had that "ooh thats a good feature", but with Houdini 
> its all the time, I just need to up my coding skills.
> 
> On 2 May 2018 at 19:23, Jordi Bares  > wrote:
>> 
>> I personally don't ever see Houdini filling the Softimage void. The 
>> engineering that powers the Houdini user experience very often requires a 
>> totally different mindset for solving the same end goals. I think Houdini 
>> fills an ICE void, but the rounded user experience of Softimage is so much 
>> harder to fill.
> 

Re: Suspected Spam:Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?

[Jordi Bares]

Well, I suspect they will have a job.. in fact.. probably a good job.
jb

> On 3 May 2018, at 05:43, Angus Davidson  wrote:
> 
> Well we are currently hoping that some of our Honours or Masters game design 
> students will take up a Houdini project. Cant wait actually ;)
> 
> --
> ICT Project Manager
> Digital Arts 
> Wits School of the Arts
> angus.david...@wits.ac.za 
> 011 717 4683
> From: softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
>  
> [softimage-boun...@listproc.autodesk.com 
> ] on behalf of Jordi Bares 
> [jordiba...@gmail.com ]
> Sent: 02 May 2018 08:23 PM
> To: Official Softimage Users Mailing List. 
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__groups.google.com_forum_-23-21forum_xsi-5Flist=DwIFaQ=76Q6Tcqc-t2x0ciWn7KFdCiqt6IQ7a_IF9uzNzd_2pA=GmX_32eCLYPFLJ529RohsPjjNVwo9P0jVMsrMw7PFsA=UIr8RkNCNWR42cR2oLi28JOwFYcAOw4IXvDPlt9aX_A=kzC9Ot9Or5dq5w4hyli60Mca20psIqL8zg8z90DZUDs=
>  
> 
> Subject: Suspected Spam:Re: Houdini : non VFX jobs?
> 
>> 
>> I personally don't ever see Houdini filling the Softimage void. The 
>> engineering that powers the Houdini user experience very often requires a 
>> totally different mindset for solving the same end goals. I think Houdini 
>> fills an ICE void, but the rounded user experience of Softimage is so much 
>> harder to fill.
> 
> I agree the elegant “no-frills" workflow in Softimage is not going to be 
> replicated anytime soon but there have been some truly remarkable efforts to 
> get closer while keeping Houdini true to its procedural roots (which 
> obviously is the right thing to do)
> 
>> Plus I think there are parts of the Houdini community that don't want to see 
>> the user experience to become more artist friendly. If Houdini is easier to 
>> drive, they might see their hourly rates drop! ;)
> 
> Unless there is a major breakthrough in education I doubt a 20 years 
> experience Houdini FXTD will have his rates go down… if anything is going to 
> be the total opposite.
> 
> My 2 cents
> jb
> 
>> 
>> 
>> On 2 May 2018 at 17:07, Laurence Dodd > > wrote:
>> Its something I've been wondering too. I have been learning Houdini for the 
>> last year or more, and I really like it, but I am concerned I'm going to 
>> spend my working days doing vfx sims, which isn't my favourite. Houdini is 
>> still very much shoved into the vfx box.
>> I dread the thought of being forced into Maya, stick with it and hope people 
>> start using it more generally, or start looking at C4D or something, eek.
>> 
>> Laurence
>> 
>> On 2 May 2018 at 11:56, David Saber > > wrote:
>> Hello
>> I'd like to know if Houdini is somewhere used as a generalist tool: not only 
>> simulations and FX but also modelling , texturing, , rigging, animation, 
>> lighting a scene, etc?
>> Is there a company that uses Houdini this way?
>> And if no, do you think a company will use Houdini this way someday?
>> Thanks
>> David
>> -- Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to 
>> softimage-requ...@listproc.autodesk.com 
>>  with “unsubscribe” in the 
>> subject, and reply to confirm.
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>> -- 
>> Laurence Dodd
>> Porkpie Animation
>> E: laure...@porkpie.tv 
>> W: www.porkpie.tv 
>>