Houdini14 Sneak Peek

[Werner]

="MauricioPC"

That's pretty cool! Is it a plugin?

In his own words..."Under the hood this is simple edit node with all it`s features", so no. More Like a hack of what is already there.

[Hirazi Blue]

In his own words..."Under the hood this is simple edit node with all it`s features", so no. More Like a hack of what is already there.

Isn't that an adequate definition of most plugins?

[McNistor]

In his own words..."Under the hood this is simple edit node with all it`s features", so no. More Like a hack of what is already there.

Isn't that an adequate definition of most plugins?

I don't think so, no. I'd slap that characterization on a "tool".
Traditionally, for plug-ins you have to write code (using the outlets provided by the SDK of course) and I think Alecsei did just that (using python).
But anyway, whatever that is, tool or plugin, it's good to see that the interest in something other than FX is growing in Houdini's user-base.

[nodeway]

But anyway, whatever that is, tool or plugin, it's good to see that the interest in something other than FX is growing in Houdini's user-base.

I wouldn't count on that . VUX is just a Maya guy that came to Houdini and never did something Houdini like in it, yet. He is just doing what he did in Maya.
Houdini will not beat Maya by being Maya. It didn't kicked ass of it in many houses by being Maya. With Zbrush and other modeling apps i don't think it makes sense anymore to follow that path.

SESI have another fight on the horizont.

Recently I had very interesting talk on Polycount, forum full of modelers. I asked them did they used/seen Houdini at their jobs. 57 people voted. The poll results wasn't that bad .

Around 77% didn't seen it.
Around 20% seen, but I'm not sure was it used only for cinematics or game development.
Around 3% said that their company have Houdini in their plans.

But the small chat I had there showed something different. Most of the guys there didn't knew why they should use Houdini. They understand that it's a powerfull app etc. But why they need it?

There was even one outscoring company (they do game and CG outscoring), and they said that they just couldn't find a way to use it in what they do, so they gave up.

I tried to explain them that not everyone of them would need full Houdini, that most of them would need only Houdini Engine and some cool tools to use it. That they could load those tools in Maya/Unity and soon UE4/3dsmax/Cinema4D. But you know what? There are no cool tools in Orbolt. So we are back in square one, why they should use Houdini Engine if there are no tools?

Making from Houdini another modeling app will not sell it. It will end up just like Softimage did. Modo gained traction and I have seen it mentioned along other big M apps. Now we got Max/Maya/Modo.
Houdini fighting those three as a modeler? No chance of surviving this.

[McNistor]

Dude, are you following me? Haha, j.k...

You have some good points and some not so good.
For example, one of those not so good is that nobody intends or expects Houdini to become a modeling app. Is Softimage or Maya a modeling app? No, they're multi-purpose and that's what Houdini needs to be to some degree. What I got from the devs is that they want to bring it in the 21st century regarding the modeling tools for traditional poly modeling (also called box modeling).
Just improve them along with the other tools in a few iterations until they will be decent, at least as decent as say Softimage and after that just update/improve a tool here and there as versions come.

Houdini will be used mainly for its procedural stuff and FX obviously in the near future, but the user-base can grow if something is done about the modeling part and the all around user friendliness. Pretty pictures tend to attract artists' attention and with numbers comes power of influence and with time Houdini will be used for modeling and character animation as well. It's just that's rough around the edges right now but within a few versions if the devs. will keep improving in this direction, it will come along nicely.
Doing this doesn't mean dropping the development in other areas that makes Houdini the best.

Here's a possible scenario: if SESI doesn't improve on what Maya is (supposedly) good at - modeling (sucks in comparison to Soft) and character animation - Autodesk surely will try to steal from Houdini's market with their Bifrost.
[putting on my tinfoil hat] I don't think it's a coincidence that SideFX started working this part at this moment when Autodesk went public with their acquisition of Naiad and consequently the intention "to go Houdini" and good for them if that's the case, they have good reaction time.
Autodesk's wet dream is to be alone in this industry, like pretty much all the soulless corporations.

[nodeway]

Dude, are you following me? Haha, j.k...

I know what you did last summer. ;)

[McNistor]

Dude, are you following me? Haha, j.k...

I know what you did last summer. ;)

nooo!!!
please, just...

[angus_davidson]

Houdini's strength has never been modelling. Most studios I know that are moving away from Autodesk are going a Modo/Houdini pipeline. The day of one application to do everything is gone. Softimage was the best at it by far, but from a commercial and educational point of view its a non starter for people going forward,. (note this excludes people who already have it , and will most likely die with it ;) ) Although realistically people will change when money = time makes it the right thing to do.

[Hirazi Blue]

The imminent death of the generalist software has been foretold numerous times in the last decade or so and yet they’re still around. Interestingly enough for example Modo is a package that is “regressing” from a pure modeler to something very akin a generalist app at every new version.
;)

[MauricioPC]

Houdini's strength has never been modelling. Most studios I know that are moving away from Autodesk are going a Modo/Houdini pipeline. The day of one application to do everything is gone. Softimage was the best at it by far, but from a commercial and educational point of view its a non starter for people going forward,. (note this excludes people who already have it , and will most likely die with it ;) ) Although realistically people will change when money = time makes it the right thing to do.

Angus, how are those studios doing on the "rendering side"? I ask this because you read a lot on the Modo forums that Modo is a PITA to import simulated stuff from Realflow or Houdini. So would Modo be used only for modeling or even maybe animation and lighting and rendering be done in Houdini?

Now with Octane and Arnold coming to Houdini makes sense, but before there was only Mantra.

[Mathaeus]

I ask this because you read a lot on the Modo forums that Modo is a PITA to import simulated stuff from Realflow or Houdini. So would Modo be used only for modeling or even maybe animation and lighting and rendering be done in Houdini?

Now with Octane and Arnold coming to Houdini makes sense, but before there was only Mantra.

Obviously I'm not Angus, but anyway. I'd say, *everything* is PITA if you're using the open source format (Alembic..), which has to be supported by two apps, in same way, just in order to get something usable. Three different players.... Real problem is, imho, that there is no dedicated Real Flow export for Modo, at least not anything more than Alemebic. After all, if someone is able to set the simulation in Houdini, no big deal to get it to render with Mantra, which is by the way, from my tests, much stronger than Modo renderer when it comes to water or smoke. But, there is Real Flow export for Max, Maya, Softimage, Cinema and what else not. Houdini Engine too, for some, but not for Modo, at least not for now. Also, Modo renderer is still CPU only. We will see what 901 will do, but for now, I don't see the bright future for Modo, especially for those of us who are not "born" in Lightwave environment and related emotions.

[MauricioPC]

My doubts go similar to what you say Mathaeus ... I don't see what the bright future of Modo as well.

If I want to get away from Autodesk ... Cinema 4D + Houdini would make sense. Or I just should accept the fact and use Maya.

[McNistor]

The imminent death of the generalist software has been foretold numerous times in the last decade or so and yet they’re still around. Interestingly enough for example Modo is a package that is “regressing” from a pure modeler to something very akin a generalist app at every new version.
;)

That's a very good argument and observation.
There's absolutely no reason to not have poly modeling tools in a 3d program in which you manipulate polygons. You don't have to "go Zbrush" (not that there's a natural law that forbids that), but traditional poly modeling, why not?

The reason studios went "pipeline way" is because they lacked what they needed in the program that they started with. IF there was such a program that could do them all in the best possible way do you think they'd be using lots of other apps? There are inherent benefits of using one app to do everything.
Of course that's not (yet?) possible, hence the pipelines, but one doesn't have to stop trying. ;)

Moderator edit: removed the apparent "double post", judging that one to be a "draft" for this one - HB

[Bullit]

Halfdan said recently in Houdini forum that the objective is to get Houdini to the level of Softimage modeling capability.

[MauricioPC]

Halfdan said recently in Houdini forum that the objective is to get Houdini to the level of Softimage modeling capability.

That is very good news. I hope they succeed.

[angus_davidson]

I ask this because you read a lot on the Modo forums that Modo is a PITA to import simulated stuff from Realflow or Houdini. So would Modo be used only for modeling or even maybe animation and lighting and rendering be done in Houdini?

Now with Octane and Arnold coming to Houdini makes sense, but before there was only Mantra.

Obviously I'm not Angus, but anyway. I'd say, *everything* is PITA if you're using the open source format (Alembic..), which has to be supported by two apps, in same way, just in order to get something usable. Three different players.... Real problem is, imho, that there is no dedicated Real Flow export for Modo, at least not anything more than Alemebic. After all, if someone is able to set the simulation in Houdini, no big deal to get it to render with Mantra, which is by the way, from my tests, much stronger than Modo renderer when it comes to water or smoke. But, there is Real Flow export for Max, Maya, Softimage, Cinema and what else not. Houdini Engine too, for some, but not for Modo, at least not for now. Also, Modo renderer is still CPU only. We will see what 901 will do, but for now, I don't see the bright future for Modo, especially for those of us who are not "born" in Lightwave environment and related emotions.

Apologies for the late reply but our courses start on Monday so setting up labs has been pretty much all I have been doing for the last 3 weeks.

For now those combo pipeline are using modo as the modelling / texturing and pre viz. Houdini for the rest. Currently that is the most logical split

Modo aside from its modelling isnt there yet. Its still maturing. Its Alembic support still needs a bit of work, although it seems to like the Exocortex Crate alembics the best. Modo on the render side is also far better at doing non particle renders. It still suffers from a particular look at feel and you really need to push it to get good results for things that fall outside of that . However there are a host of renderers you can now use with Modo , including the one I like most at the moment Octane. Vrrrroooossshhhhh ;)

Richard Harris has just finished his animation / rigging master course for modo 801, so once that gets released it will be interesting to see how it affects peoples abilities to make use of the power behind Modo's rigging. Its exceptionally powerful albeit a requirement to think very differently.