Andy_23 I had troubles with the autorig component, it would only execute the second input graph, if the output callback was __binding__.
the name of the subnet output need to be 'output' or it bug, it default to __output__ which don't work properly (I think it was fixed on a more recent build of houdini ?)
Andy_23 I really would like to start building graphs, but even today I failed getting sop::blend shapes::2.0 to work, because the node has to be built with a dict passed to it.
If your blend shapes are embedded as the Character BlendShapes SOP workflow, then I think you want the sop::kinefx::characterblendshapescore verb. This is what the SOP uses.
In the meantime, I dissected the blend shape example for the pillow .hip and came up with this. It's a bit different as it uses packed prims. And the weights are build into the packed prims themselves. Not sure which way is the most appropriate.
Anyway, progress… and many thank yous to all of you contributing.
Have you ever opened the node editor in maya ? what do you see ? node, node with connection, that all you see, there nothing else, it just a bunch of node with a bunch of connection, similar to apex, maya core is the dependancy graph, maya is also a input-output engine.
Yes, and the reason I chose Houdini over Maya from the first place is that SOP network is clean, easy to ready, unlike Maya. I'm not the only one who thinks this is Houdini's advantage over Maya:
Image Not Found
Perhaps for rigging/animating this kind of evaluation engine is necessary, but I absolutely don't want it to be "the new SOP". If it's the future of Houdini, I hope SideFX makes it clear, so I can cut the loss and completely stop using it now. As I said, the cleanness of SOP is the main reason I chose Houdini. If it's gone then I'm gone. I fully understand people have different mileages, and those who like Houdini for other reasons can continue using it, just not me.
All you said is technically true, and that's what made I concerned about Houdini's future.
I'm seeing this as all positive observations here. Certainly Maya is the central standard for many reasons, and should be acknowledged as the current popular state of the art.
Having the idea of a non-contextual execution nodegraph "airlifted" into Houdini could be seen as a good sign, but I believe APEX can be way more than that. SideFX have a very different and well evolved approach to editing and managing graphs, which I hope will mature well in APEX as we go forward. Also, much of the architecture is new and GPU-enabled. So I'd think it'll well worth experimenting with some characters using APEX and sticking with it over the next couple of years and build up your knowledge and your toolset as you go.
What's up with the automatically renamed thing? is this some weird bug? i don't think it was present before..
So to be honnest, i am really trying to like apex, but every single bits of it makes me hate it.. i have been doing many autorigs systems, over the last 20 years , in maya, in houdini, and i have seen many as well, but this is completely ridiculus to have to create so many nodes for simply making a connection.. whoever built this is completetly disconnected from the planet or production.. as most software try to make rigging more an automatic thing and or at least a fun thing, with this aproach not only you over complicate everything.. its so much complicated and long, that you did'nt even been able provide a complete exemple anywhere, all you have is half made exemples, and nothing as complex or a huge as we often have to do in production, like now i'm trying to rig simply a human skeleton on a an animation skeleton, and i am pulling my hairs out.. i can send a picture i got proofs of it... something that would have taken me less then a day in maya.. put it the way you want.. there are not mathematical equation thats gonna make this system look good.who on this planet wants to work this way? it's not that i don't understand how it works, but i am totally disgusted how it works.. it does'nt even feel like its houdini, it feels like its something you have bought and connected in..and beleive me i am still there working on this only because i really love houdini and i want the place where im startin to use houdini for animation... if you want to make a scripting language or an api.. make this.. but this... hahahahah.... i'm sure going to complete the rig, but as a long time professionnal rigger and a long time houdini user i totally hate it this is'nt even houdini. Also you keep saying this is more a procedural aproach but where is it more procerual then general houdini like kinefx...its not i really don't see it.. when you're dealing with names you can always hook them to a parameter and that makes it procedural..i could script this rig procedurally easilly in a day in maya.. now you can't really script it.. apart from create those nodes by script and connect the thing.. so you still have to do the networks in a way..beurk..
I'm really sorry but this is my opinion, good try but this is not it. i'm sure a cascadeur live link connection is easier to build then just a rig.
ffortin What's up with the automatically renamed thing? is this some weird bug? i don't think it was present before..
APEX doesn't allow any special symbol except underscores in the nodes' names. So if you use any symbol it will be renamed to underscore (_). It's a really weird constraint tho, espeically dashes (-) and dots (.) are allowed in SOP node names and KineFX skeleton joint names. Just one of the one hundred bad design decisions made for APEX.
Yeah I know there must be some reasons internally. No I don't care and no one should. The obviously correct behavior is to keep it consistent with SOPs. Comically, Houdini itself knows that:
