I can't talk for FE, but here everybody is pretty relax concerning implementing this or that in Houdini :)
2017-03-31 12:49 GMT+02:00 <[email protected]>: > I think it should definitely be the case that Houdini should become more > accessible. It doesn’t undermine the abilities of the app, to make it more > user friendly. > For example, with Fabric engine, or in ICE, you can make a node that does > ‘everything’ with a bunch of parameters. Say a Fur system for artists, but > you can go down inside through the internal compounds right down to the > core maths, if you like. An artist doesn’t need to, but can do if he so > fancies. This layering system, of complexity is one of the great things > about ICE. It helps you learn it and one day be the guy who’s not just > USING the tool, but making them. thats what happened to me. > But in terms of more ‘traditional’ usage, for example having a nice Shape > making and managing tool etc etc, wouldnt suddenly dumb down Houdini in any > way for the technical people who’d never want to use it. It just gives it a > much broader range of accessibility for artists. At the moment, the people > who use Houdini tend to be people who understand, enjoy and live in the > technical sphere, but that isn’t for everyone. > > In general, there appears to be strange resistance, from people who are > happy in their technical knowlege to ‘Philistines’ coming in and ‘Fisher > Pricing’ their app. When I visit the Fabric forums, for example and > requested some improvements to Canvas, I got a quite a few surprising > replies from people ,in a deriding tone, telling me to learn KL as that > would do what I wanted. > I knew KL could do what I wanted, but I wanted to help them improve Canvas > giving a helpful user point of view. The Devs actually were open to my > ideas, but its certain users that seem to peer down their noses at ‘arty > farty’ non-coders. > > I’m pretty technical for a lowly artist, but I find Houdini a bit of a > slog compared to learning ICE. > > *From:* Olivier Jeannel <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, March 31, 2017 11:24 AM > *To:* Official Softimage Users Mailing List.https://groups.google. > com/forum/#!forum/xsi_list <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: Houdini Digital Assets for Softies > > I'm quite the opposite Morthen. I found that learning little math (add > subtract vector mostly...) is just an open path to what's called > "creativity" nowaday. > I'm more in the particles "do stuff" part of the work than in the > character-toon-story telling though. > I can't say that I'm excited by the modeling tools added in the 16 (I'm > sure they are great), but having that wide software that's able to not lost > attributes whatever the context, that constantly amaze me. > > > 2017-03-31 12:00 GMT+02:00 Morten Bartholdy <[email protected]>: > >> Don't get me wrong - I understand the power and flexibility of Houdini >> and the fact that it stems from its core architecture and I am not looking >> for the 3D equivalent of Kais Power Tools. >> >> It is however not very straightforward to use for the average 3D artist, >> no matter how experienced, nor is it easy to pick up. You need to be good >> at math and know syntax well, and that is plain and simply taking >> ressources away from the purely artistic part of the work which is why I do >> this. I want to make great work, not need a science degree to do it. >> >> I used to think that 3D software would evolve to become extremely user >> friendly so it would at some point be fairly easy for almost any user to do >> even very advanced stuff, so the real difference in output would be how >> skilled an artist you are. >> >> Obviously this is not the path SideFX has taken. It may be my future is >> not with Houdini, but Soft is parked at the roadside, Maya is a mess still, >> and the other competitors don't really come close to the level of these >> anyway, so naturally I am looking in the direction which is developing >> rapidly and outside of the dark side of AD. >> >> It is just that using Houdini seems like driving a car without a steering >> wheel but having a graphical UI with trigonometry controls to do the >> steering, and if you want more speed, no gas pedal, but go write an >> expression that provides the proper mix of gas and air and change the >> ignition timing. It is hardly intuitive and perhaps the goal is not to be >> that, but imagine if this solid core architecture was given a better >> interface, I am sure many more artists out there would jump the wagon >> straight away and we would see even more fantastic stuff created with >> Houdini plus make a lot of people more happy. >> >> I am guessing growing userbase and popularity is not a problem for >> SideFX, and making their software more accessible is probably very hard, >> and takes ressources away from developing new and better tools, but I >> really wish. >> >> Have a nice weekend all :) >> >> Morten >> >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > Den 31. marts 2017 klokken 10:26 skrev Dan Yargici < >> [email protected]>: >> > >> > >> > I think people need to accept that just as they understandably expect >> > SideFX to push the software to be more approachable for themselves they >> > really ought to try and push themselves in the opposite direction also. >> > >> > If there was a theoretical race to DCC dominance, I'd really favour >> Houdini >> > right now. I think starting with so many of the hard things solved and >> > working 'creative' workflows into the software is a far more enviable >> > position to be in than having to go in the opposite direction. >> > >> > Really exciting times ahead as far as I'm concerned! >> > >> > DAN >> > >> > >> > On Thu, Mar 30, 2017 at 8:34 PM, Jonathan Moore < >> [email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > >> > > I hate to sound inflexible in my views but Houdini is such a powerful >> > > application because of its technical approach. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Just because Softimage is no longer available and Maya is >> ‘problematic’ >> > > (to say the least) shouldn’t mean that SideFX should have to change >> their >> > > development strategy. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > I believe that SideFX have in fact done a fantastic job of listening >> to >> > > customers that have moved to Houdini from other packages including >> > > Softimage. The speed with which they implemented a suggested change >> ref >> > > dropping VOP nodes over wires the other day is a fine example of >> that. But >> > > there‘s a danger of allowing the ‘tail to wag the dog’ so that Houdini >> > > gets changed for the worse rather than the better. I think SideFX >> have the >> > > balance of things pretty much spot on. There’s still huge >> improvements that >> > > can be made to the approachability of certain aspects of the user >> > > experience but I it’s never going to transform into something >> radically >> > > different to what’s available today. If anything, with so much of >> Houdini >> > > moving away from Hscript style expressions to VEX expressions (for >> very >> > > good reason - multithreaded performance) certain aspects of the >> Houdini >> > > user experience are in fact getting more technical. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > The best way to learn how to adapt to Houdini is first to accept it >> for >> > > what it is. And part of the Houdini user experience has always been >> > > scripting and programming. That’s why it’s so often described as a 3d >> > > operating system rather than a DCC. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > Apologies for spelling things out so bluntly but I can’t see Houdini >> > > evolving into something less technical. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > *From:* [email protected] [mailto: >> softimage-bounces@ >> > > listproc.autodesk.com] *On Behalf Of *Nicole Beeckmans-Jacqmain >> > > *Sent:* 30 March 2017 19:57 >> > > *To:* Official Softimage Users Mailing List. >> https://groups.google.com/ >> > > forum/#!forum/xsi_list <[email protected]> >> > > *Subject:* Re: Houdini Digital Assets for Softies >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > hi. yes, was forced to stop following this week's entagma taurus >> tutorial. >> > > >> > > again, these monthes i spend most of my time to write & storyboard. >> > > >> > > got recently interested by _computer_ 2d possibilities, new for me. >> > > >> > > but as discussion advances here, i am getting discouraged to be able >> to >> > > talk in the future, about a project with a Houdinist. >> > > >> > > (i don't want to just supervize) because i am foremost a visual >> artist, >> > > isn't it that Houdini should evolve upside down, >> > > >> > > so that Visual controls Math Thinking, and not the other way around. >> > > >> > > Procedural Innovation looked nice, so far, i guess? >> > > >> > > so, in a way i donot opt if a new community shift occurs between >> > > >> > > Maya artists and Houdini vop sop artists. or do you think it >> necessary, >> > > and why? >> > > >> > > thanks >> > > >> > > Nicole. >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > 2017-03-30 18:04 GMT+02:00 Morten Bartholdy <[email protected]>: >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > > I just also wish Houdini would be made more accessible for less >> > > technically inclined artists like myself. >> > > >> > > >> > > ------ >> > > Softimage Mailing List. >> > > To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >> odesk.com >> > > with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >> > > >> > ------ >> > Softimage Mailing List. >> > To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >> >> ------ >> Softimage Mailing List. >> To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] >> with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >> > > > ------------------------------ > ------ > Softimage Mailing List. > To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] > with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. > > > ------ > Softimage Mailing List. > To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] > with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm. >
------ Softimage Mailing List. To unsubscribe, send a mail to [email protected] with "unsubscribe" in the subject, and reply to confirm.
