Although it hasn't much to do with modeling I like McNistors idea of keyframe representation in the timeline.

MartybNz
A frame represents a division of time, therefore there is information between frame 4 and 5.

I don't remember in what context I said that before (and I'm to lazy to look it up now) but I will say it again:
The design of a software shouldn't be about the most accurate definition of whatever term, it should be about easy to read information for the user. Take away the struggle of keeping track of all the informations as much as possible and give the user the space to breath and to focus on his work.
Maybe your definition is the most accurate but the visual feedback McNistor suggested is just easier to read. No one can ever misinterpret what he/she sees in the timeline then.
At the end nobody wins a price for term accuracy but for a software that is easy and fun to use.

Korny Klown2
I don't remember in what context I said that before (and I'm to lazy to look it up now) but I will say it again:
The design of a software shouldn't be about the most accurate definition of whatever term, it should be about easy to read information for the user. Take away the struggle of keeping track of all the informations as much as possible and give the user the space to breath and to focus on his work.
Maybe your definition is the most accurate but the visual feedback McNistor suggested is just easier to read. No one can ever misinterpret what he/she sees in the timeline then.
At the end nobody wins a price for term accuracy but for a software that is easy and fun to use.

Pardon my bluntness, but you said it in the context of not clearly understanding what a “group” or a “primitive” is in Houdini, and wanting to go back to other software´s name-convention…

…which is understandable, but you should also keep in mind some of us have been working with the current convention for years and not only like it, but have realized it is much better that way. (and yes, some of us also use other 3D software besides Houdini)

So let´s be positive and concentrate on improving things, not on changing those that actually are better.
And it´s quite possible because I have already witnessed many good suggestions at this very thread.

Korny Klown2
Maybe your definition is the most accurate but the visual feedback McNistor suggested is just easier to read.

MartybNz Was referring to a frame which he defined correctly as an interval, but I was in fact referring to a key which is a discrete value.
Coincidentally, the way I suggested that keys to be represented on the timeline is not only the most intuitive, but it is also an accurate representation of numbers in relation to intervals on the Rational domain axis.

@Netvudu whaaay can't we be friends, whaay can't we be friens… ?

Netvudu
So let´s be positive and concentrate on improving things, not on changing those that actually are better.

I agree with McNistors request to be friends so I will not argue about this.
If this is better or not is something we will never find the one correct answer for, so this would end up in a never ending discussions.

And the fact that you won´t argue makes you so guys so much wiser than myself.
Sorry, didn´t want to be mean but re-reading the post I understand it came out a bit too rough around the edges. :?

Back to modelling fixes!!

Just checking in that the modelling page is being updated to the latest discussion.

It might be helpful for Sesi see where we are at, as we start to divert off to animation

Yes Marty, I will update it as soon as I find the time.
We won't steer this thread into animation.

Hi

I just want to add my support for leaving the naming conventions alone it will take me a while to get used to them but all the 3d apps name things defiantly anyway I like some of the quirkiness of Houdini naming. Also when you start talking about inherent meaning in linguistics you ware on very shaky ground (for example read Derrida).

Looking at the updated lists I would also like to say that I like the brush tool as it is apart from the fact that I think the radius of the brush too and the radius of the brush select should have the same shortcut. But that I would definitely add recasting selection and I would also make it the default selection.

I am not happy with the explanations here So I will try my own (I am using a tablet so it is described in those terms)

recasting selection is essentially the most simple form of selection possible in 3d:

- where the cursor is clicked a ray is fired into the scene what the ray intersects is selected

that is it, it is actually that basic. If the cursor is moved more rays are fired shift adds to selection ctrl toggles selection.

Simon

Hi,
Before submitting RFE or something, I would like to post here and discuss about this 2 problems who I'm sure affect could affect deeply our production speed.

Extruding and Insetting
The houdini extrude tool works as expected but when it comes to insetting, none of the presented option product in my point of view the right behavior. This is just too important to be missed.

Beveling Groups of polygons/points
The number two tool not to forget.
On Softimage the bevel tool computes correctly shared/points/edges. Plus there is a “manage collision” option checked by default who deal with colliding corner.
This colliding thing happens all the times when you extrude and bevel things, this is just not to be missed ;-)
The Softimage Tool provide all the option needed avoiding heavy manual geometry fixing.

The gifs are quite hard to follow due to the rather complicated nature of the problem. It might be better to show individual pictures.
Also, make sure when you make a comparison between the two, you use the same mesh and operate on the same components (edges, polys).

yearr i know, will do that tomorrow

Can't Sidefx just buy Silo, since it's pretty much dead anyway. The way they use the same hotkey for multiple operations is such a relaxed way to model.
117 http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjc7jCTgbys [http]

I know Silo is missing a lot of modeling tools and is buggy as hell.

But the tools and workflow they have would be the perfect addition to Houdini imho. Especially because it doesn't require a lot of hotkeys.

It's nice if all this can be in one superedit/classicmodel node.

Really curious if anybody has experience with Silo and what they think of it.

KAV-K
Can't Sidefx just buy Silo, since it's pretty much dead anyway. The way they use the same hotkey for multiple operations is such a relaxed way to model.
1:17 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pjc7jCTgbys [youtube.com]

I know Silo is missing a lot of modeling tools and is buggy as hell.

But the tools and workflow they have would be the perfect addition to Houdini imho. Especially because it doesn't require a lot of hotkeys.

It's nice if all this can be in one superedit/classicmodel node.

Really curious if anybody has experience with Silo and what they think of it.

i would like to see a node based (open-gl) gui creater so you can create fast custom osd interfaces for houdini and maybe houdini engine. so we can make fast concepts of interfaces and distribute it per digital asset.

to have another product means the development resources is getting split ted and the base isn't the same. for me it's makes more sense to have all in one tool. like that i have always one link on my desktop and no switching and fiddling. :-)

Yes exactly! I'm sorry I wasn't clear. wink

I ment that they could copie the workflow/tools from Silo (or any good modeling app) into a single ‘classic-model’node. So we don't have to switch between programs if we need to model for example a car or whatever non-procedural stuff.

Nice thing about Silo is that it uses little hotkeys, so the hotkeys don't have to change that much if your in the ‘classic-model’node.

Just my thoughts though. D

KAV-K
I ment that they could copie the workflow/tools from Silo (or any good modeling app) into a single ‘classic-model’node. So we don't have to switch between programs..

And as thes do so, they can also adopt the tools for laying out/ unwrapping UVs right away .
I know this is about modeling so will not go any further but I will start a specific thread on UVs in the next few days, probably in the general discussions area.

Looking forward to that UV thread I have a few notes myself…!

Yeah, would love to see some UV improvements too.

Since I wanna suggest solutions instead of just complaining I wanna take the time to do some preparatory work, like taking screenshots, slapping some gifs together to illustrate my points. I will probably do this on weekend so next week I try to have everything set and ready for the discussion.

Hi,
allow me to chime in with a suggestion for a selection feature known from 3ds max or ACAD, which I sorely missed in Softimage all the years, and which seems yet to be missing in Houdini, also:
'selection with automatic window/crossing toggle'

There's 2 aspects to it, actually:

1) when drawing a selection frame, or a lasso, I'd like to choose if only objects/edges/polygons (sorry, primitives) that are completely INSIDE the selection ‘window’ get selected, or also those that are ‘crossed’ by it.

It's called ‘surround select’ in Softimage, but there it only works on edges or polygons.
In 3ds max, it worked for all types of objects or components (except vertices, because you cannot really ‘cross’ them too well).

2) to spare ticking any checkboxes or anything for swithing between those 2 modes, this can simply be automated by looking if the selection frame was drawn from left to right (->window) or right to left (->crossing).

Once you get used to it, it's a sincere workflow boost, because selecting is what you do all the time when modelling, and not only there!


In the Softimage beta, I asked if the ‘surround select’ feature could be improved to work with objects also (not just components), and if the auto-feature could be added, but it never happened.

So I'm asking here, again… ;}


The screenshot attached is the same that I used for the SI beta.
Hope it's clear what I mean…

Thanks for considering!
Best regards,
Eugen

That is a great suggestion, I remember it from the AutoCad days (now I am talking about AutoCad version 2.5 or something)

And still miss it…