Jump to content

Mikal

Members
  • Content count

    31
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

4 Neutral

About Mikal

  • Rank
    Peon

Personal Information

  • Name
    Michael
  • Location
    London
  1. centroid in pointWrangle

    The min and max vectors are returned by the getbbox() function. In H16... you can get the same result with getbbox_center().
  2. Do you mean the transform handles when you're looking through the camera? You're probably best splitting the viewport into two panes. Have one looking through the camera and then you can manipulate the camera through the perspective view in the other window and still see what you're doing. If I understood that right.
  3. How to displace geometry curly?

    Hi.. It's a tricky effect to achieve by displacing a mesh. I'd suggest trying to achieve it by converting your seed to an SDF and advecting it by a velocity field. Attached is a basic example of the method I'm referring too, you should be able to sculpt/create the velocity field to achieve the shape you need. You'll probably need to tweak the SDF compositing to get it closer to the reference. Not sure if this is the best way, but probably the first method i'd try. gd luck. VDBAdvectSDF.hipnc
  4. Hi... I'm looking to attempt some image manipulation using CHOP nodes. Having used the Image CHOP to access the individual pixel data I'm lost on the best way to Export it back to COP context. I'm guessing I could do it with the VopCop2Gen COP, but thought their might be a better (easier) way? Cheers!
  5. Dynamically adding RBD Objects to sim

    Yup... that's great. Thanks!
  6. Sooo... I was wondering if anyone knew how to add RBD objects into a sim dynamically. I assume it's possible but probably difficult - as using the Fracture Configure Object DOP creates new rbd objects upon impact within the existing framework. Basically I have a sop solver that creates new geo that I partition into new objects over 100 frames. I'd like to introduce those objects into the sim as they're created. Who's clever?.. Cheers!
  7. Autodesk aquires Naiad

    Yeah, I think SESI has a challenge in understanding where it wants to go next - whether they continue to refine and introduce FX components or they try and sell Houdini to other aspects of the biz, and especially to early adoptees - get them building procedural tanks in Houdini instead of low-poly robots in Maya. To be fair SESI has been attempting to push Houdini as more than an FX Tool for a while, and it looks like the recent price cut is a further move in that direction. I think the biggest barriers to getting into Houdini for a beginner are some limitations around the poly tool set and the shading methodology. I would love to see a Hypershade style graph with predicted rendered swatches. Most people diving into the vex context of a shading network for the first time.. go 'what the... $!'... and back out. FEM would be greaaaat, but I wonder as Houdini has the best RBS system available they'd wanna go down that route just yet. I agree about the speed, and most users are willing to forego the extra speed for the functionality Houdini offers. SESI just had their best year apparently, so I think they should go all guns blazing and keep going after modelling/lighting/animation as well as FX.
  8. Autodesk aquires Naiad

    I think this is pretty bad news for Houdini - but really bad news for Realflow and other 3rd party FX plug-in shelves like Thinking Particles/Fume FX who were looking to expand capability. I think you could expect a Naiad FX shelf in the Autodesk packages in coming releases - with water, smoke, fire, soft and rigid bodies - maybe more? Realflow should be pretty worried - as Naiad by most measures offers superior performance and results, and if it came bundled with a core package it would be difficult/impossible to compete on price. Fume FX - should also be worried, but currently I don't think Naiad/Autodesk have a production quality volumetric renderer, but only a matter of time, surely? Arguably Houdini has increased it's market share since Houdini 9, for a number of reasons - but an important one was the poor FX capabilities of the core packages. I think what's worrying is that most studios are built upon a Maya/Max/Softimage backbone - and then using Houdini as the FX component. I think it's fair to say less people will be willing/or need to make the jump to Houdini from Maya/Max if a Naiad FX shelf could offer very decent FX results in a native package. Houdini luckily retains the advantage of it's procedural approach, which will keep loyalists - and people will still convert because of the functionality you just can't get in the other packages. But for the industry in general it's pretty sad to see Autodesk just acquire another competitor. Anyway... some ramblings..
  9. Thought I would include an alternate example that uses the Dop Import Records SOP to access Impact Point Data to birth particles. Might help. Debris_study_mpp.hipnc
  10. Sticking Particles & Dops

    Hi David Not quite sure what you want to do here. Do you want the particles to be emitted as it fractures? At the moment you're emitting on Frame 1, and the behaviour of the particles are set to 'Stick on Collision'... so not sure if you want the particles just left behind as the object falls, or you want the standard emission on fracture?
  11. RBD Object keeps moving/bouncing!

    There is a difference, couldn't tell you exactly what thou. In general: Bullet can be considerably quicker - especially when using implicit volumes. But with more complex pre-shattered geo, especially when using clustering I find RBD is more stable and is easier to direct. If you swap the bullet solver back in it will work and you'll see the difference
  12. RBD Object keeps moving/bouncing!

    Hi Amit This might help - I changed the dopnet around a bit. The sphere doesn't currently stop dead - on it's collision it picks up some angular velocity and rolls away. If you want that THUD effect, it might be worth pre-simming/animating the sphere and feeding it back into the dopnet as a deforming non-active object. ground_shatter6.hipnc
  13. H.11 RBD Problem

    Here's the file ref_RBD_01.hipnc
  14. H.11 RBD Problem

    So. a few things I changed... For roughly spherical objects like that you might as well use an implicit sphere as the collision object - it'll be quicker and depending how close you are to the object it's unlikely you'll notice the penetration. I think the popping comes largely from including 'resolve penetration' in the solver - it's not normally turned on by default - basically when the solver finds two penetrating objects it will physically move one or both on that frame to resolve the intersection, and you end up with that popping. You can reduce the impact the objects are having within the group by reducing 'shock propogation'... otherwise collisions can reverberate around the box and they'll take longer to settle. Finally increase substeps, it's slower but you'll get a smoother result. Hope that helps
  15. H.11 RBD Problem

    Don't think you attached the scene file?
×