I like that updated node look have those colorfull illustrative icons that are already memorized by so many users. (Current icons)

But having only one shape for node is IMO step backward. (I know its just mockup and in final UI more shapes can be added easilly)

Iam just thinking that more tools like shapes or custom color coding nodes can be usefull for people to manage huge node trees
I know how iam sometimes lost in this machinery of pipes and boxes in compositing apps.

I wonder what from workflow point of view can be added to node graph? Mayby somone with bigger expieriecne in H. can share some ideas?

I would add sliders. So you can expose some important parameters from node. Like fe. Morph target amount. And can create own set of parameters from all nodes (zoomable like all node view). (Somethink like HUD sliders) But without limiting to only 1 set. (Viewport)

Or mayby better HUD sliders with folders and layers for organizing those parameters for more efficient less clicking workflow 4 animators i donno

Already stated my opinion in Discord. The initial mockup, while its visible it had a lot of work and passion put in looks just like a nice Blender reskin exercise and doesn't feel like it was something that is used to labour through a daily Houdini usage, trying to improve things. I would think one of the first steps of the design engineering process would be to identify and communicate the problems first and make a prescription after.

Here are a few suggestion for UI that don't tie in with your design particularly but with some thoughts from my use.

- If one is to use the node flags (and not the shortcuts as some) I think right now the Template flag gets clicked a lot by accident and therefore I think there could be some hierarchization of the flags surface space. Isolating the display would greatly sort out this issue. In my personal estimation the display flag is used 90% of the time, the bypass 5% (people want to toggle it on and off to see how much is a node affecting the setup), the template 4% and the freeze flag 1%.




- Nodes text/name doesn't need to be visible at all times. One could just toggle them out and toggle them in when needed. If some persistent information needs to be visible, a comment can be created. Comments could also be globally toggled in or out. This should clean up A LOT of space in the network view and provide focus.



I see that in one of the latter node mockups you have these empty spaces between the flags and the node border, so functionally they do nothing and steal useful space from the flags. I don't think the thin vertical boxes make sense for node flags.
The node's context does not need to be displayed by every single node. SOP, etc.
Black node on top of dark gray space with a white contour turns the nodes into empty space.

I like the visual quality of the mockups but my overall my suggestion would be to use Houdini more so your suggestions feel like they are improving what is there and are somewhat obvious to any user, specially if you're not going to attach a diagnosis and why are you proposing these things. Title say UI needs to change but you don't support "WHY?" to begin with. So it feels like just pushing a passion project in a judgmental way.

Cheers

Is there a tool that designers use for creating demo interfaces? It would be amazing to see this "in action." For example, show a clip of some basic tasks being performed in standard Houdini, then an animated mockup showing the same done in the improved UI. I volunteer to do that for the Guide Groom interface.

BrianHanke
Is there a tool that designers use for creating demo interfaces?

Rive is impressive based on the state machine approach: https://rive.app/ [rive.app]

Check out also:

Sketch
UXPin
Invision
---
Figma
---
Juno
Penpot

Houdini is a powerful tool to build parametric UIs Designs. I was REALLY surprised when I switched from 2D Design Systems to 3D in Houdini and there was no UI systems...



What I am finding is that Houdini is a different computation structure than a 2D app. Like I referenced the "Strange Loop" and this is how I would explain the UX of Houdini but I will not "spam" the thread...

If I fast-forward the Design process I would create shaders for the UI based on USD. These are early technologies that if you are in R&D of a pipeline tool you may find informative. The reason being is that Apple has implemented new UI in shaders and USD is native on Apple platforms. One example is the new Mesh Shader and Mesh Gradient. I would use Multi-channel SDFs (https://inter-illusion.com/assets/I2SmartEdgeManual/SmartEdge.html?MultiChannelDistanceFields.html) and sparse representations with diffusion curves like in Inkscape: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XiIxra1Apa0&t=1227s. [www.youtube.com]

With the COPs refresh, it is worth building the UI in Houdini with SDFs.



There are a few reasons and the GPU-UI Team at Zed put together using Rust a explainer of their approach as a shader...something to think about as well. It is Opensource as well as Zed.

"Leveraging Rust and the GPU to render user interfaces at 120 FPS"
https://zed.dev/blog/videogame [zed.dev]

ruffemotion

Can I get some feedback on this?

You need to refine the informative aspect of the node, particularly in terms of what information is displayed on the right side and how that impacts the overall layout and Auto Layout. The spacing between nodes should be flexible, not strictly grid-based, to maintain readability, but still adhere to the principles of grid layout. Additionally, consider sharpening the node corners; the newer nodes added around version 16 have a somewhat cartoony and unprofessional feel, including the icons, but that's a minor concern.

You might also want to remove the freeze button, as it tends to cause more problems than it solves. Moving the view and template buttons to the left and the bypass button to the right could improve readability of the node name and other information. However, since this is a frequently used feature, it might not be well-received by the community

oldteapot7
But having only one shape for node is IMO step backward. (I know its just mockup and in final UI more shapes can be added easilly)
I would add sliders. So you can expose some important parameters from node. Like fe. Morph target amount. And can create own set of parameters from all nodes (zoomable like all node view). (Somethink like HUD sliders) But without limiting to only 1 set. (Viewport)

Not one, just the default one.
That sounds like a good idea, although it would need to be a separate/special node where you can build your own params, essentially a param pane that lives in the node view, something like using a null with params only instead of using params in the param panel they would be exposed in the node view. having that on each node would create a lot of noise and hinder the readability of the node tree ie something like blender shader nodes... although it would work for vops esp if there was a vop level gradient/ramp node.

probiner
clicked a lot by accident

If you often accidentally click on the wrong flag, then my solution would look something like this:

This is a good technical demo. Thank you for sticking with it and keep going you are doing well.

The SOP is not needed because the network only contains one node context. It may be something that could be noted if it is a Context Manager but other than that it is redundant.

The animation is well done. I am not sure it is the best application.

The reason being that there is too much "surprise" in one small micro-interaction. Then think about this small "shuffling" and "flashing" all the time. It would burden the mental attention. Then combine it with the intent of clicking on a small target and that target moves.

I keep imagining how to communicate this but imagine trying to click on something and your mouse button shifted every time you moved it over the target.

So this comes down to the Interaction Design layer, not the UI. At this layer there should be a clear description of intentions and barriers, then interface signaling behaviors addressing that.

From Microinteractions by Dan Saffer

PHENOMDESIGN is incredibly smart.
I feel my IQ dropping just by reading his replies.
The guy's hardcore, and I like it!

Nice work on the prototypes — its sparked a pretty interesting conversation. Also really highlights how tricky it’s going to be for SideFx to update the interface, given the fairly strong opinions (and this is just on the forum; pretty sure every Houdini artist is probably going have strong opinions on what needs to be improved). Having said that, I definitely have some opinions

In terms of the general direction of the design changes:

• Node colours are key for artists being able to telegraph certain nodes in their network and can be easily seen when zoomed out. Removing colours would just make networks bland and unreadable.
  
• Node shapes serve a similar function. While there was initially some criticism of them as being a bit Fischer Price, you can turn them off if they offend you, but they also serve to document the node network and are part of many artists workflows.
  
• Skeuomorphic icons: are not bad in themselves; they offer more cues than monochrome icons as to what they (shape, outline, colour and depth) as well and being far more memorable. The occasionally whimsical nature of the designs helps with making it memorable.
  
• Design Direction: A lot of the suggestions here focus on making the interface more like blender (or Modo) rather than improving the usability or functionality in a way that works with Houdini. As someone who uses blender now and then I find the interface ok but unmemorable and far less clear than Houdini’s. It appears for a lot of people flat icons = modern for no other reason than that is the current thing.
  
• Aesthetics vs Functionality By and large these changes are largely aesthetic; they don’t really improve the usability of Houdini, just give it a bit of a Blender reskin, ignoring much of the functionality of the existing design for the sake of it looking flat.
  

There are some neat ideas in this thread that chime with what I’ve like to see in terms of Houdini’s UI, particularly:

• Overlay Nodes in the Viewport Always liked the idea of being able to overlay nodes on the viewport (think I even put in a ticket ages back). I’d love to be able to easily work fullscreen for modelling and animation and quickly hide / show elements as needed (the stow tools bars kinda does this but clunkily)
  
• Desktop Tabs: Having desktop environments (e.g. build, LOPs, Apex) live in tabs across the top would be pretty handy (as in the original concept). Integrating desktops more directly into Houdini would definitely help, particularly as the different desktop environment multiply).
  
• Node Flags: Not sure why the lock and freeze icons are visible in the ring menu mockup above. With regards to the flag layout on nodes, would strongly suggest that it stays the same, both in terms of clickable area and layout (unless there’s a compelling reason for changing it - the muscle memory is strong). Animating them looks cool, but just makes it busier and a significant amount of people will hate any animation, even if it doesn’t slow down the interactivity (I guess that’s the reason the Node Info popup has minimal animation setting).
  

And a couple of areas that could use some attention:

• Node Badges: A better interface for the node badges (time dependant is crucial to working in Houdini, and the compilable one is pretty useful too). So many badges.
  
• Memory Toolbar: The UI for this is very Houdini 8.0 - it’s useful and would be great to have something more usable and more prominent.
  
• Node Groups: The node group pane is really useful in terms of functionality as well, and really hidden away (shift+z in the network editor). Could also do with a bit of a spit and polish and prominence.
  
• Animation Editor: Making this more animator friendly and (sadly) more Maya like would probably help get animators in Houdini - at the moment it’s nested menus and obscure functionality all over the shop. I’m sure some off the ex XSI people would have interesting opinions on this)
  

jujoje
its sparked a pretty interesting conversation

That's all I could hope for.

jujoje
I definitely have some opinions

Thanks, you gave me a lot to think about!

jujoje
Skeuomorphic icons: are not bad in themselves; they offer more cues than monochrome icons

I'm working on V2 nodes right now and here's what I have at the moment [www.sidefx.com].

That last 'design' makes Houdini looking like a toy for kids, like a lot of phone UI apps, big round buttons and layers of outlines. I don't feel the need for a complete UI overall really, and if it happens, it should continue to stay as "boring" as it is.

The only thing I believe could be looked after as far as "stock aesthetics"...

Is that I would like to share Houdini's interface with others not familiar with Houdini and they will not think it is "silly". There is a lot of very advanced work and when I try to get other researchers on-board they do not take it seriously.

Aesthetics is a small part but that is the level I think we are referencing right now.

Many are/will be interested in 3D UIs as XR experiences get distributed through consumer devices more and more.

Houdini is already an infinitely variable interface but artist/developer/designer will need UI toolkits baked into Houdini to be successful in delivering future experiences.

Any "major" change should happen as a measured transition without too much surprise to the visual language. Stages or Phases of a transition toward a desired state in the future.

The Design should account for the need of QA and evolution through releases as well as keeping the 'OG' vibe in Desktop or Theme for legacy.

I watched this video yesterday where they measured surprise to an LLM by next token. The more surprised, the less it understood. I thought this was interesting as a metaphor.

Image ref: Mission: Impossible Language Models [aclanthology.org]

Flow-state is an ideal experience for creative tools and tool-making so optimize for that.
With the UI transitions as moving through a visual dialogue with real syncopations and emotion, you want to work with that creative energy not surprise or startle it.

Many UI Design's in "the wild" do not have these same needs for expression and understanding. Much of UI on the web is about obfuscation, time-sinks, and misinformation. Such as Adobe and the Dark Patterns of which they are being sued for by the DOJ.

Can the title change to something less clickbaity? Every time i see "Houdini UI Needs to Change" I cringe.

mestela
Every time i see "Houdini UI Needs to Change" I cringe.

Is that because no "NEEDS" have been addressed, you do not think this is a technical and topical discussion on Houdini Changing the UI, or just don't care?

mestela
Can the title change to something less clickbaity? Every time i see "Houdini UI Needs to Change" I cringe.

Sorry, I forgot to make sure it doesn't make you cringe.

I'm exactly the same. When I learn new things, I take them apart, I experiment with them. And I make mistakes and learn by mistakes. I have made many silly experiments for the sake of learning.

I am really glad, that you are learning Houdini, that you are disassembling it.

You have found an experiment (a project) that's enjoyable for you, and you've learned a lot of things. I believe that now is the time to find another project, to explore other dimensions of Houdini. I believe that you will enjoy the next project and you can certainly come back to your previous projects with new knowledge that you will learn.


Good luck! Best regards!

ikoon
I'm exactly the same. When I learn new things, I take them apart, I experiment with them. And I make mistakes and learn by mistakes. I have made many silly experiments for the sake of learning.

I am really glad, that you are learning Houdini, that you are disassembling it.

You have found an experiment (a project) that's enjoyable for you, and you've learned a lot of things. I believe that now is the time to find another project, to explore other dimensions of Houdini. I believe that you will enjoy the next project and you can certainly come back to your previous projects with new knowledge that you will learn.


Good luck! Best regards!

Thanks for this condescending passage!

I wish the discussion was focused more on things related to functionality instead of how icons look.
Not saying that icons and other UI elements' looks don't matter, just that it contributes much less to one's productivity.

For example adding RMB context sensitive menus. I click on a gizmo, I want to see options related to transformations instead of going into a sub-menu to change transformation space or pressing M like a maniac to cycle through them. Or if I click on geometry, only the the relevant options. The list is longer, but I'll mention just this.

mestela
Can the title change to something less clickbaity? Every time i see "Houdini UI Needs to Change" I cringe.

Thread title is clickbait for sure, but no more cringe than videos condescendingly titled "You're doing it wrong", Matt. Someone new is entering the scene with some perky audacity, but one can still separate the chaff from the wheat; remark the uninteresting and then focus on the worthwhile content.

ruffemotion

probiner
clicked a lot by accident

If you often accidentally click on the wrong flag, then my solution would look something like this:

Animation looks cute but doesn't address the issue at all. The hit surface for the flags is still the same, it just animates them to show more of them as each is hovered. And the empty padding to the node border persists, but you didn't specify if it's a hitbox thing.



More over adding animations to something that is on the realm of high frequency interactions is prone to fail when there are slow downs if not contribute to them.

Here's a challenge; go to Matt's wiki and try to cover some of the topics there to get further familiarized with Houdini common routines, contexts and use cases, and report back what were the biggest pitfalls you found in the UI while at it. What annoyed you, what pleased you, etc. Like I said previously; I love mockups and while these are slick and fun, "I just want to talk" doesn't cut it when you're dealing with a crowd of daily users invested in the progress of the application and you come with a hammer for nails that don't exist, and ignore cracked wooden parts. There's no blank slate here and like I mentioned before if you follow the design-engineering process this "talk" becomes more meaningful, as we can address diagnosis and prescriptions more clearly, and not just for visuals but probably even more for functionality.

Cheers