Houdini transition pdf by Jordi Bares

[Bullit]

I'll continue with Softimage untill something better appears, but i'll check Houdini. Jordi Bares put some PDF's here to help understand

http://www.sidefx.com/index.php?option= ... 2&start=25

[Pooby]

If anyone is considering learning Houdini, Id suggest getting in there now and doing it with the rest of us whilst we all ask questions.
It makes it feel less intimidating when there's lots of others in the same boat.

[jamination]

It would be great if they would come up with a competitive upgrade, that is how I wound up getting sofimage back in 2003 (10,000 for advance, and that was with the 3dmax competive upgrade). I would be very interested in jumping on board the program that truly has a strong animation system, but I really don't want to downgrade or bet on the wrong horse.

[Pooby]

You can download houdini apprentice for free to learn on. I'm not buying a full licence until Im 100% sure it does what I expect it to.

[Tekano]

I got the $99 HD render version as wanted to go through different package features and try lighting and rendering too.

its pretty overwhelmingly complex but I think its just (lots) of repeated exposure now. man hours behind the wheel etc. could go the hardcore option and not open soft, but I dont think thats going to happen for a while yet. houdini could be a companion for soft so far. we have ptc vdb and alembic so can share stuff ok

plus a nice warm reception from halfy over there. I missed him!

[MauricioPC]

Modo + Houdini I guess it'll be a solid combo.

[Pooby]

For me, there's no way im dropping Softimage until there is a clear, compelling and complete replacement. Houdini is software I've always been interested in learning and now seems like the best time.
I think a complete replacement is most likely to come in a combo of Houdini and Fabric Engine, with zbrush, as it's starting to become increasingly important to my workflow. ( talking about 3- 6 years development/ transition time . Even then, ill still probably use ice, even if it's just to sketch out ideas)
Im in no immediate rush.. And I'm also going to upgrade my old Modo , simply for Mesh Fusion..

[Nizar]

If you have zbrush, why use Modo mesh fusion? Mesh fusion is procedural, but zbrush dynamesh work well and better in many cases, also I found it more fast (about mesh fusion I only watched the video.

[Pooby]

Because whilst dynamesh is great, (Amazing in fact. )for hard surface clean models, zremesher which you need to get a smallish mesh, let's it down a little.
Also, dynamesh doesn't have control over the smoothness of the mesh Boolean transitions as mesh fusion does. and it is destructive whereas MF allows change after the fact.
Dynamesh and zremesher can get a good result but not an astoundingly good result. Sometimes you want that.

[Nizar]

I see your point, but I assuming a mesh remeshed (through dynamesh or meshfusion) need in any cases a retopo.

However, I very interested in what you will found in Houdini. As many others, I will not follow ADSK (even they cage they caged the absurd migration), and as I'm interested in evolve in animation I see an alternative.
keep us informed of your progress Master Pooby

[Pooby]

I don't see why you'd need to retopo a mesh fusion mesh if it's hard surface and non deforming. They don't seem that bad You just need it to have decent UVs and not be an enormous poly count.

[Nizar]

agree, but are usually messed topology, it make hard to do a good UV

[origin]

Im pretty impressed by Houdini so far.
As usual you need a day or two to get used to some things and relearn few shortcuts.
Selection model is really weird. I barely scratched the houdini surface but first impression is that it isnt as visual as ICe, lots of expressions/attributes.


and meshfusion and uvs...

auto-uvs -> mari -> profit!

[Pooby]

Im pretty impressed by Houdini so far.
As usual you need a day or two to get used to some things and relearn few shortcuts.
Selection model is really weird. I barely scratched the houdini surface but first impression is that it isnt as visual as ICe, lots of expressions/attributes.

My impression too and slightly disappointed about that part. I guess it's just a different way of working.

[mc_axe]

[dirtydog]

Because whilst dynamesh is great, (Amazing in fact. )for hard surface clean models, zremesher which you need to get a smallish mesh, let's it down a little.
Also, dynamesh doesn't have control over the smoothness of the mesh Boolean transitions as mesh fusion does. and it is destructive whereas MF allows change after the fact.
Dynamesh and zremesher can get a good result but not an astoundingly good result. Sometimes you want that.

I seen a webcast by Paul Gadbury of Pixolpgic, who said they are working on a hard surface zremesher in future releases.