Rafal123 Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 check it out: http://area.autodesk.com/custom/?id=4547 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 *cough*copycat*cough* hehe.. I mean, looks cool. Mr Stam is a smart chap, I'm sure it will be pretty good when it's out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitallysane Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 The only sad thing is that Autodesk (Alias) is again explaining what "revolutionary" stuff they came up with, and SESI who had this for one or two years (with full RBD, cloth and wire) is again going unnoticed... Dragos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Well, that's Alias for you. Softimage does the same, and both have done it for as long as I can remember. That's the benefit of having a large marketing budget I suppose. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitallysane Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 Well, that's Alias for you. Softimage does the same, and both have done it for as long as I can remember. That's the benefit of having a large marketing budget I suppose. Yep, Softimage's "nice touch" is "XSI is the first software with integrated compositing". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattd Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 yep, thats marketing for you. sidefx needs to step up the reahing out to beginning users. I would like to see a lot more HDAs for all sorts of stuff from sidefx themselves. I have been playing with nucleus, and I have to say I am impressed with the speed. I know you can do a lot of the same style effects within DOPS, but something kind of dumb like the inflatable objects would be a challenge featured here on odforce, while maya makes any turnkey 3d artist capable of such things. I say sidefx should do the same thing, release HDA's that do nifty things like paintfx and easy to use dop sop deformation. Then market the hell out of it and claim the innovation. MD *cough*copycat*cough*hehe.. I mean, looks cool. Mr Stam is a smart chap, I'm sure it will be pretty good when it's out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kumpa Posted February 28, 2007 Share Posted February 28, 2007 unifying my ass...like there is something unified in maya Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whalerider Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 aren't the folks who are already in the industry aware of all that hype? can the chest beating fool anyone? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofer Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 Don't you think the interactivity of the solver they present in the video is very impressive? You can't get that with houdini. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted March 1, 2007 Share Posted March 1, 2007 I haven't watched the videos, but which solver? Cloth? Actually it doesn't really matter anyway. Generally speaking what Maya makes up for in interactivity it loses in configurability and I'm pretty sure that's not going to change in this version. So yes, although it allows you a quicker route from point A to point B, generally speaking it's harder to go back and take a detour through point C later on in the game. Impressive demos do not equate to impressive software (not that I'm saying this isn't impressive, I'm sure it will be great... it's just hard to judge from a bunch of prepackaged videos). my 2c M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofer Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 Correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisux Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I haven't watched the videos, but which solver? Cloth? Actually it doesn't really matter anyway. Generally speaking what Maya makes up for in interactivity it loses in configurability and I'm pretty sure that's not going to change in this version. So yes, although it allows you a quicker route from point A to point B, generally speaking it's harder to go back and take a detour through point C later on in the game. Impressive demos do not equate to impressive software (not that I'm saying this isn't impressive, I'm sure it will be great... it's just hard to judge from a bunch of prepackaged videos). my 2c M I am agree with marc. All of us have seen a lot of impressive demos and videos about simulation solvers or volumetrcis renderers for example, but when you are in production you return to your particle animations and your sprites. It's not general is only an example but impressive tools in videos don't mean impressive workflow in production. This is specially noticiable with dynamics solvers, there are a lot of products that can create a couple of impressive effects, but when you need control, when the supervisor is claiming for modifications, etc ... then you can see how important is flexibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mattd Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I use maya on a daily basis, and the most frustrating workflow issue I have is the inability to change the selection that a node is performing a task on. I think if maya users saw the power of the group node laid out in terms they understand, sidefx will gain the appreciation they deserve. Make a series of 30 second basic quicktime movies (like maya's 3d 101 videos) showing these nodes. e.g.: "accidently select one extra face when you poly extruded 5 operations ago? go back and change it without having to completely start over!" "want to select every other face on an object?, here's how!" "add noise to a keyframe animation while keeping original keys?" "copy SOP!" this will go a long way to planting a basic understanding to the 3d community why houdini is differnt and how it is the same. Take a read on a forum at CGtalk (search for houdini) and see how people try to describe houdini based on what they have read in forums and cinefx. If I were in marketing at sidefx, I would want to get these people better facts to throw around than vague technical things they have to talk about. they should also do a competive pricing breakdown to show that once you consider renderfarm licenses and support that houdini is pretty much in line prising wise as the other packages. Sidefx does not seem to want to flaunt that they offer free mantra rendering that is pretty much like getting free unlimited renderman in terms of ability, as opposed to may which has free unlimited "maya software" rendering which is somewhat useless, compared to mental ray. sidefx need to be more aggresive since the competition does not hesitate to claim the innovation. Don't assume that the 3d community knows about sidefx having subdivs (e.g.) before everyone else, because they assume maya or XSI was first. MD I am agree with marc.All of us have seen a lot of impressive demos and videos about simulation solvers or volumetrcis renderers for example, but when you are in production you return to your particle animations and your sprites. It's not general is only an example but impressive tools in videos don't mean impressive workflow in production. This is specially noticiable with dynamics solvers, there are a lot of products that can create a couple of impressive effects, but when you need control, when the supervisor is claiming for modifications, etc ... then you can see how important is flexibility. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ofer Posted March 2, 2007 Share Posted March 2, 2007 I mostly agree. I have been using houdini for a little more then a year, and I really can't understand how it is posibile to work with other apps, like maya, where you have to write a script for every move you make. But, if you mentioned subdivs, I also like using modo, and I sometimes do a step-by-step modeling in modo and houdini, just to compare, and find myself not having a clue how to do some simple things in houdini. It really has a lot to improve in the modelling section. On the other hand, I really miss the ability to go back and do even the most simple history based operation in modo. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djorzgul Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 inability to change the selection that a node is performing a task on I said a lot of very bad words few days ago exactly because of this... I was pissed how stupid is that I cannot replace just a stupid polygon model with the other one but to keep all network of effects... in the end I did it, but with a lot of one programming guy's help... bah.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitallysane Posted March 13, 2007 Share Posted March 13, 2007 Don't you think the interactivity of the solver they present in the video is very impressive? You can't get that with houdini. I haven't watched the videos, but which solver? Cloth? Actually it doesn't really matter anyway. Generally speaking what Maya makes up for in interactivity it loses in configurability and I'm pretty sure that's not going to change in this version. That is very true, but speed (especially in simulation contexts) is very important and desirable. And I hope Houdini is staying competitive in this area. Dragos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Marc Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Definitely. I would love to see Houdini kick Maya's ass in both cloth and fluids. I'm tired of having convoluted pipelines only because Maya does cloth/fire/whatever better than Houdini. Hopefully 9 will at least bring it up to a par with what Maya has, if not surpass it. M Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lisux Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Definitely. I would love to see Houdini kick Maya's ass in both cloth and fluids. I'm tired of having convoluted pipelines only because Maya does cloth/fire/whatever better than Houdini. Hopefully 9 will at least bring it up to a par with what Maya has, if not surpass it. I hope so. Many people is awaiting for an alternative to Maya fluids and cloths. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
digitallysane Posted March 14, 2007 Share Posted March 14, 2007 Hopefully 9 will at least bring it up to a par with what Maya has, if not surpass it. My experience with DOPs is exactly null, so I'm asking those who know: which is the status of the cloth solver in DOPs compared with competitive offers? Is it production ready? Speed? Features? If put in a position to choose from Houdini cloth, Maya or Syflex, which one would be better in a production situation? The demos from the help cards look quite good (but simulation is kinda slow). Dragos Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rafal123 Posted March 14, 2007 Author Share Posted March 14, 2007 My experience with DOPs is exactly null, so I'm asking those who know: which is the status of the cloth solver in DOPs compared with competitive offers? Is it production ready? Speed? Features? If put in a position to choose from Houdini cloth, Maya or Syflex, which one would be better in a production situation? The demos from the help cards look quite good (but simulation is kinda slow).Dragos I have quite big experience with maya's dynamics, fluids, cloth. Now, when you wanna compare maya's rbd system to dops, there's nothin to compare, dops just eats that maya's shit for breakfast, my only complain is that dops are slower then competitor one. I know that Habbib Zargapour from ILM used maya's rbd in star wars and ILM used it in Mummy2 and Perfect Storm but they wrote many stuff for that in API, so it can't be compared. But when you wanna compare M cloth to H cloth, M cloth could be better(IMO of course), because of speed, then when you wanna compare M cloth to syflex, M cloth loose, syflex is incredible fast and gives great results. Then, H doesn't have fluids, so we're waitin for that to see what to expect. Maya's fluid are cool when you play with it, when you wanna do somethin more professional it not so fast as you expect and also needs quite a lot of scripting in mel. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.