vinyvince
Urgency

chrism
Lots of good feedback here but just a reminder to log RFE's and BUGs for the issues you care about so that they go into a bug database, get tracked, and assigned to programmers.
https://www.sidefx.com/forum/topic/25347/ [www.sidefx.com]

Some urgency for me is not into making Houdini a modeler like Zbrush or blender, battle is already lost. But concentrate on his strength. A *BIG* weakness for myself is how much, long complex and wacky to build user interface for tools. It's pretty much the same weakness like for realtime viewport feedback where houdini looks really outdated compared to sexy blender Eeve which day after day is gaining charming more and more people.

Sidefx needs to recognize this and react quickly is they don't want to lose a large part of their market...
Houdini is still my favorite software i tried in 30 years, but you have also to convince my clients in a world where things move very fast and you have no choice to be fast and sharp too.

There are special points i will really like to emphasize because im worried if you miss this next move, @chrism

lost? exactly the opposite !
procedural modeling in games/movies industry are growing every single day and today using houdini in open worlds environments its must.


and for houdini 20 my only hope that sidefx switch to AMD HIP from the old opencl and also support HIP in XPU .

Yes, just like Houdini has long lost the war of character animation to Maya. Guess it's time to halt KineFX's development completely.

Have a very old perpetual license for ZBrush, and Blender is simply free to use. Although 3DCoat look great in the demo it just feel hard to buy yet another license when not absolutely needed.

There are different type of modeling needs, cases and styles and nothing should really hinder us from using any suitable tool available for each moment.

In these times new techniques seem to be popping up rapidly especially AI-related. If underdog companies are trying to have a share in the market I just wish them good luck.

Who knows what content creation will look like in 10 years?

Some courtesy does not hurt in this forum. It’s hard enough already for some people.

raincole
First of all I do think 3DCoat is a good software. While I'm quite proficient with Blender now, I have to admit Blender's texture painting is hardly usable if you 1. need 4K resolution 2. need PBR workflow. 3DCoat is a much better choice. (Substance Painter is another one, but in my opinion 3DCoat is better if you don't need Designer's procedural capability)

Second, please read this:

We can not (and don't want and are not going to) control your activity (our EULA do not have such limitations). This is our appeal and not a legal demand.

(from https://pilgway.com/page/our_voice)

And stop spreading outdated information.

This is an absolutely bizarre thing for a company to come out with. There's nothing actually wrong with it as long as it's not impacting the EULA, but wow! Especially the bit about not promoting witchcraft and violence, that's like 90% of video game dev!

councilofevil
This is an absolutely bizarre thing for a company to come out with. There's nothing actually wrong with it as long as it's not impacting the EULA, but wow! Especially the bit about not promoting witchcraft and violence, that's like 90% of video game dev!

They are entitled to their opinions, like everyone else, the important thing is that the EULA doesn't prevent artists from doing anything they want with it, and the fact remains, the software is great and deserves more attention, but it is still lacking in tutorials, but it is getting there, slowly, I just might do some in the future!

fix the damn flipbook and make it painless to save videos to disk.

SideFX at Siggraph starts today, so we should be getting some new info soon.
https://www.sidefx.com/houdini-hive/siggraph-2023/ [www.sidefx.com]

volodXYZ
SideFX at Siggraph starts today, so we should be getting some new info soon.
https://www.sidefx.com/houdini-hive/siggraph-2023/ [www.sidefx.com]

doesn’t look like anything exciting has been announced by SideFX…

"New capabilities include subsurface scattering, demand-loaded sparse textures, nested dielectrics, uniform volumes, and more."
They are certainly exciting.

The karma XPU in Houdini 20
presentation was a few hours ago soo anyone that was in this presentation can share what did sidefx show?

Am I Really the only person that does all the modelling in Houdini and thinks that it lacks nothing ?

I think Houdini is a great modeller once you set up keyboard shortcuts.
And the way i c things is that people are probably just reluctant to replace key bindings.

Better sculpting would be great, but maybe not the best place to focus their time and energy.
Since at 20 they’ll probably start having to support a full texture painting workflow.

NicTanghe
Am I Really the only person that does all the modelling in Houdini and thinks that it lacks nothing ?

I think Houdini is a great modeller once you set up keyboard shortcuts.
And the way i c things is that people are probably just reluctant to replace key bindings.

Better sculpting would be great, but maybe not the best place to focus their time and energy.
Since at 20 they’ll probably start having to support a full texture painting workflow.

I also do a lot of modeling in houdini; the tools are great, but quite a few UX issues with node viewport states etc. It’s just a UX problem for me! Not a UI but a UX problem. Things just malfunction too often!

** Am I Really the only person that does all the modelling in Houdini and thinks that it lacks nothing ? **




I do almost all modelling in houdini when you get used to be able to change things 2 weeks later with minimal effort, it saves time in the end. particulary good blendshapes manupulating when you have many characters. as always second similar item/character 10 to 100 times faster when you have set upp your pipe.

just give us some hints about H20 to dream abut so we sleep better.

For people who use Houdini as their main modeling tool, how about sharing your workflow? Or make it a premium tutorial. I think quite a lot people will buy it.

I mean manual box modeling, not a super-procedural one. I mean things like Extrude/LoopCut/Slide and more importantly, when the topology is "generally right but not exactly right" how do you manually fix it? (don't say "if you planned topology beforehand you'll never need to manually fix things". It's like saying if you write code carefully you'll never need a debugger.)

I know Houdini can do all of these. My question is how people exactly do these, like the literal shortcut keyboard strokes they press or the radial menus they use.

raincole
For people who use Houdini as their main modeling tool, how about sharing your workflow? Or make it a premium tutorial. I think quite a lot people will buy it.

I mean manual box modeling, not a super-procedural one. I mean things like Extrude/LoopCut/Slide and more importantly, when the topology is "generally right but not exactly right" how do you manually fix it? (don't say "if you planned topology beforehand you'll never need to manually fix things". It's like saying if you write code carefully you'll never need a debugger.)

I know Houdini can do all of these. My question is how people exactly do these, like the literal shortcut keyboard strokes they press or the radial menus they use.

I only use Houdini for modeling, I used to use Maya, but now I have adapted to Houdini's work flow, once you know the equivalents you can then use Maya or any other modeling tutorials.
Houdini web site has tutorials on every modeling node there is, I use Polydraw a lot for non procedural modeling, also google will help you out a lot, it did for me.
T.

raincole
For people who use Houdini as their main modeling tool, how about sharing your workflow? Or make it a premium tutorial. I think quite a lot people will buy it.

I mean manual box modeling, not a super-procedural one. I mean things like Extrude/LoopCut/Slide and more importantly, when the topology is "generally right but not exactly right" how do you manually fix it? (don't say "if you planned topology beforehand you'll never need to manually fix things". It's like saying if you write code carefully you'll never need a debugger.)

I know Houdini can do all of these. My question is how people exactly do these, like the literal shortcut keyboard strokes they press or the radial menus they use.

Uploaded a run through of my node network for a nice Harman Kardon speaker I modeled recently on linkedin, but for some reason sidefx doesn't seem to allow linkedin links, so I just uploaded to youtube (I'm a youtuber know hahah) Hard Surface Modeling Harman Kardon speakers in Houdini [youtu.be]

I have many more models done in Houdini this way as well as procedural stuff. I'll structure some time and actually start posting on youtube about box and spline modeling in Houdini.

Everyone who says that modeling is done in Houdini doesn't mention that it's challenging and time-consuming. Houdini lacks many fundamental tools for proper modeling. Simply moving points is already a pain, and it's the most crucial operation in modeling. I won't even mention proper tools for connecting components or the responsiveness of the tools, etc. These are just a small fraction of the drawbacks that prevent "normal" modeling. Of course, if you revel in nodes and the unhurried structuring of them into containers, you can model in this way. But we need to call things by their names. Modeling in Houdini is slow and uncomfortable, regardless of how you've set up hotkeys and marking menus and even your own workflow.

alexeyvanzhula1984
Everyone who says that modeling is done in Houdini doesn't mention that it's challenging and time-consuming. Houdini lacks many fundamental tools for proper modeling. Simply moving points is already a pain, and it's the most crucial operation in modeling. I won't even mention proper tools for connecting components or the responsiveness of the tools, etc. These are just a small fraction of the drawbacks that prevent "normal" modeling. Of course, if you revel in nodes and the unhurried structuring of them into containers, you can model in this way. But we need to call things by their names. Modeling in Houdini is slow and uncomfortable, regardless of how you've set up hotkeys and marking menus and even your own workflow.

For me, it's no harder than modeling in Maya, certainly not slow and uncomfortable, I was modeling in Maya for many years, I would still be modeling in Maya if Houdini didn't do the job. I personally love the degree of depth that the Houdini sops give.
T.

Tser

alexeyvanzhula1984
Everyone who says that modeling is done in Houdini doesn't mention that it's challenging and time-consuming. Houdini lacks many fundamental tools for proper modeling. Simply moving points is already a pain, and it's the most crucial operation in modeling. I won't even mention proper tools for connecting components or the responsiveness of the tools, etc. These are just a small fraction of the drawbacks that prevent "normal" modeling. Of course, if you revel in nodes and the unhurried structuring of them into containers, you can model in this way. But we need to call things by their names. Modeling in Houdini is slow and uncomfortable, regardless of how you've set up hotkeys and marking menus and even your own workflow.

For me, it's no harder than modeling in Maya, certainly not slow and uncomfortable, I was modeling in Maya for many years, I would still be modeling in Maya if Houdini didn't do the job. I personally love the degree of depth that the Houdini sops give.
T.

I'm not talking about the advantages of Houdini. Houdini's data handling is top-notch. But I will never believe that modeling in Houdini is comparable to Maya. I'll ask the first things that come to mind:

1. Don't you notice viewport glitches?
2. Haven't you noticed that initiating tools makes Houdini's viewport flicker?
3. Do you actually find it convenient to move points as implemented in Maya with manipulators and especially in Tweak mode? I know that Houdini has Tweak mode, but it's so pitiful.
4. How about simply moving the pivot? Is it really as convenient as in Maya with the 'D' key?
5. Do you really enjoy switching from one object to another? In Maya, you just need to click in the viewport.
6. Do you enjoy moving points of two objects simultaneously?
7. Do you like that ugly display of materials in the viewport?
8. Do you truly believe PolySplit and EdgeLoop can replace Multicut?
9. Do you have any analog to the Connect tool, which simply connects selected components?
10. Can TopoBuild be compared to QuadDraw?
11. Are you familiar with viewport crashes?
12. Do you know the feeling of having an open error log window in the bottom right corner?

This is just what came to mind. The main reason there aren't direct modeling videos in Houdini is that it's genuinely inconvenient and time-consuming. And the few videos that do exist are insufficient.

Tser
Houdini web site has tutorials on every modeling node there is, I use Polydraw a lot for non procedural modeling, also google will help you out a lot, it did for me.

Yes, this is why I emphasized on "how people exactly do these". Because I actually know, well, quite a lot of SOP nodes. Of course I know PolyDraw (TopoBuild). I checked this (https://www.sidefx.com/learn/collections/modeling-tools/) and there is no node that I haven't used.

But I just can't use them efficiently like in Blender. This is why I kept emphasizing the word *exactly*. For Maya and Blender you can find hundreds of videos where you can see how exactly people use their modeling tools quickly, efficiently, almost naturally. You can see them press E for extrude and J to cut between to vertices, like the literal keystrokes. For Houdini there is effectively none. If there is any, google is doing a very bad job indexing them.