alexeyvanzhula1984

oldteapot7
I remember that Autodesk MAYA and MAX convertion to Qt... it took whole year of working for stuff under the hood accordig to them.

I wonder how long it could take for Houdini? While its node based so i assume its easier, mayby LLM can help in converting that old code?

For Maya, it turned out great, but it took a few years. It seems that for 3ds Max, it didn’t work at all, likely due to its heavy reliance on the Windows API.

I guess they never pulled that sword from the stone...

oldteapot7
i like this kind of sliders too, way more compact wich saves sreen space. Mayby its possible to port sliders from Blender?

as long the input field remains a separate entity

oldteapot7
i like this kind of sliders too, way more compact wich saves sreen space. Mayby its possible to port sliders from Blender?

AFAIK it's not possible to change any of the controls in the parameters pane, as they are not Qt controls.

I dont even know what that Qt is exept its some low lewel programming framework that i dont even want to touch xD. But there must be some workaround for sending (Updating) value to old parameters pane and other UI elements.

My perfect workflow would be one that dont requires coding:

1) design UI element in Affinity designer and export as .SVG
2) Add animations, highligts and other states in rive.app and export as Qt
3) connect states of .Qt/.SVG new icon or slider to owerwriting parameters pane values node.
4) place vector object/icon as overlay layer on 3D viewport as HUD
5) check if prototype looks good, repeat.

.

We need to think about completely new software based on the bitter experience with Houdini. And we shouldn't think that Houdini is a unique piece of software. It's just an old program with a node-based structure but outdated in all other aspects. I believe the time of Houdini has passed, and we need something new

alexeyvanzhula1984
It's just an old program with a node-based structure but outdated in all other aspects.

Can you support those statements because I find the opposite. It is by far the most advanced software for R&D and the most upside. It can be frustrating but the software is most applicable for the immediate future.

What are you trying to do that Houdini cannot compare with?

PHENOMDESIGN

alexeyvanzhula1984
It's just an old program with a node-based structure but outdated in all other aspects.

Can you support those statements because I find the opposite. It is by far the most advanced software for R&D and the most upside. It can be frustrating but the software is most applicable for the immediate future.

What are you trying to do that Houdini cannot compare with?

Houdini is an outdated program. I've been using it since version 12, although I first launched it way back in its early versions. Why do I claim that Houdini is outdated? You can feel it in every aspect of its development. I remember what the program was like in version 13.0, and it was great. Now, it's just a collection of bugs. I say this as someone who constantly has to deal with the consequences of modern Houdini technologies. This is especially true for the viewport and the program's interactive features.

As a tool developer in Houdini, I notice how, year by year, the overall stability of its architecture is declining. For example, in version 19.5, a tool might still work fine, but in version 20.0, it behaves unpredictably. This happens constantly with each new version. That means in the next version, the behavior of my tools might change because someone decided to alter certain properties of component selection. This kind of nonsense happens all the time. I understand that the average user may not notice this, but for a programmer, it's obvious how the program is mutating. I'll say it again: this didn't happen before.

Now, when trying to draw a curve in the program, you'll almost certainly encounter a few Python errors, and if you don't, you'll get them later when you return to editing curves and press Enter. Python and Houdini development are a whole separate topic that could be discussed for hours. I can make Houdini throw Python errors in many different ways, and that's the biggest problem. And when you submit an RFE about this issue, you'll never get a fix. Even if we ignore all of that, as a developer, I constantly notice many new bugs

Ok the development and QA is not good but that is does not define the software fully.

What I am saying is that it is still the best for R&D. As a developer and designer and researcher I use Houdini for simulations. It is the best. What does simulations better that you would move to?

What will be better than Houdini for Physics-based AI?

As someone who closely follows the development of Houdini, I can explain when most of the bugs started to appear. It all began when the developers started using Python callbacks for HUD in the viewport, and overall, their attempt with HUD sliders didn’t work out. Someone wanted to make Houdini more user-friendly, but it didn’t succeed due to the many side effects that needed to be considered. Overall, it feels like something is not quite right with their Python developers...

Perhaps removing the low-quality Python developers who create a million abstractions on the fly, declaring the same functions in every file, would improve the state of the package. Honestly, if you read the Python code in Houdini, you'll find many similar functions described in each file. And that’s a clear indicator of overall code quality. This isn't dangerous in small projects, but it's embarrassing to see in Houdini.

Ok, that is fair and I see where you are coming from.

I think that there is a HUGE upside coming to Houdini. Just look at the HIVE R&D.

I mostly look at Houdini as a bunch of examples that others have made and try to create the next thing. Like a textbook for Physics and Creative R&D. I do not expect anything to be as advanced as I need it.

One thing, for the sake of all the time everyone else has put into keeping this on topic I will bring this back to the UI as a question, to what extent does the VFX Industry Standard effect the necessitating of Qt and Pyside? I believe that they are trying to align with those standards and that could be a great effect.

Python is single threaded in the viewport, I believe...

I believe that PySide is an excellent solution for interaction between the user and the program like Houdini. The essence of PySide is based on single-threading because it operates through a sequence of requests and responses in the form of interface rendering.

PySide could provide all the beauty and convenience of the interface in Houdini if it were implemented by a skilled developer.

I have done some development for a Jupyter notebook and Julia server through the Python Panel with Pyside. I will look at it a bit closer but I am looking at the next generation of technologies for interfaces. Such as the Zed IDE with the GPU UI and 2D Neural Fields for Viewport.

If there was a dedicated python development environment in Houdini others could contribute. A Jupyter Notebook type experience would be invaluable. For example this is a Jupyter notebook an Animation Prof put together on Python USD foot contact classification example:

alexeyvanzhula1984
Now, when trying to draw a curve in the program, you'll almost certainly encounter a few Python errors, and if you don't, you'll get them later when you return to editing curves and press Enter.

So, your response when asked to support your (incredible) statement

alexeyvanzhula1984
I believe the time of Houdini has passed, and we need something new

is basically "There are some Python-related redundancies in Houdini's code base, and you will sometimes get some non-critical Python errors when using certain tools"?

No. I have a large number of unresolved issues. Some of them are:

1. Constant problems with curve states since the beginning when they first appeared.
2. Random camera rotation around its pivot when holding a key. It can be amusing during work in Houdini.
3. HUD slider bugs. For example, when I switch to a browser in Linux, the slider doesn’t hide along with Houdini.
4. Crashes when dragging shelf tools.
5. Crashes when interacting with the Type Properties window.
6. File corruption during a crash.
7. Geometry flickering when using hotkeys.
8. Unexplained disappearance of some parameter types in the Type Properties window.
9. A huge drop in viewport performance when there are intersecting polygons in the scene. The same geometry in other programs doesn't affect the viewport at all.
10. Bugs in the Python States system that have not been resolved since the system was added to Houdini.

And much more...

All the bugs were caught in the latest daily builds.

It amuses me how some people love to defend Houdini, accusing me of complaining and saying that such posts don’t belong on the forum. Don’t remind me about bug reports. Tons of them have already been sent...

The message that we need a new program instead of Houdini was sarcasm

Yes, the crash when dragging from the shelf is of course a subtle mockery. And this is precisely the interface with which we interact. What is the use of the color of the icons if you either do not get the necessary information when looking at the screen, or the program crashes when interacting with the interface. This is the problem of the interface, not the color of the icons.

alexeyvanzhula1984
No. I have a large number of unresolved issues. Some of them are:

1. Constant problems with curve states since the beginning when they first appeared.
2. Random camera rotation around its pivot when holding a key. It can be amusing during work in Houdini.
3. HUD slider bugs. For example, when I switch to a browser in Linux, the slider doesn’t hide along with Houdini.
4. Crashes when dragging shelf tools.
5. Crashes when interacting with the Type Properties window.
6. File corruption during a crash.
7. Geometry flickering when using hotkeys.
8. Unexplained disappearance of some parameter types in the Type Properties window.
9. A huge drop in viewport performance when there are intersecting polygons in the scene. The same geometry in other programs doesn't affect the viewport at all.
10. Bugs in the Python States system that have not been resolved since the system was added to Houdini.

And much more...

All the bugs were caught in the latest daily builds.

This is a good list of issues, and hopefully they're being addressed with the support of detailed bug reports, despite your non-belief that they are being given any attention.

Despite all that, it still does not address your statement that was of the sentiment that Houdini is a lost cause that needs to be rewritten from scratch. That is not a light statement, and not one to be taken lightly.

Your claim that it was sarcasm does not track. It was not stated with any sense of irony or context and will be read at face value by pretty much anyone. I'm not the first person to challenge it, even in this thread.

I can appreciate your frustration with the myriad of bugs of Houdini, but you need to start appreciating how much random and negative noise you're adding to these forums lately. If you find yourself in an emotional state when writing your posts here, maybe it's a sign that you should probably not send those messages until you have calmed down. Keep those bug reports going though, please.

It's not about defending Houdini. I will gladly participate in its criticism where deserved, but several of your recent posts have not been productive, have been seemingly deliberately inflammatory, and almost always tinged with deep personal anger, as if you have been personally slighted by SideFX themselves.

I am not a coder, but as a long-time user of various software packages, I have learned following about software development:

Alpha and Beta stages are closed, and these are the phases where the fastest growth of new features occurs. Then there is the release day of the new version, where all users begin testing it in their weird and unexpected ways (those are the real beta testers).

So, for production environments where a team of artists is working, it's better to choose previous version (H20 in this case), because it has been tested by a large number of people.

And never switch versions during production. It’s the Technical Director's (TD) responsibility to choose the appropriate version of the software for the project. Of coure you should play with newest versions for fun at home (and send bug reports)

Thanks to rapid evolution of Houdini (which I love!), changes must be made, and with those changes, new bugs are introduced. This is why developing plugins for Houdini that will work with new versions must be frustrating, which explains why there are so few plugins (also because you can create anything in Houdini yourself).

Alexey is a hardcore user who is stress testing Houdini in the modeling area. I hope it stays that way because it's the best method for improving the software as a whole. But his reports should be given the highest priority.

In Houdini, as far as I know, for bug fix, you have to send an RFE (Request for Enhancement) where you have to recreate the issue. During production, there's no time for that. I never sent those automatic bug reports from Autodesk DCCs because I was so frustrated at losing work time (though I save very often using incremental numbers, so my files don’t get corrupted).

So, maybe there should be system in Houdini for sending bugs related to Python and UI that wouldn’t require recreating the entire scene? (and I’m not allowed to send any original scene files anyway). It’s TD’s job to recreate bugs and send them to software developers.

Maybe, in future, users will send bug reports with a small amount of cryptocurrency, like Ethereum, and bugs with higher stakes (more money) will be fixed faster automatically by some LLM with trillions of parameters... or by a more skilled human?

I wonder how AI will impact software development.

Anyway, is Python fused with Houdini’s code (VEX), or is it a separate layer (node)? And how are those problems fixed from a developer's perspective? It's very interesting to me. How should i imagine this under the hood underlying software layers or something it will help me awoid potential crushes during work.

Saying that Houdini is the only software that have future thanks to its modullar node besed structure wich is the best model compared with other 3D softwares.

.