ragupasta Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Hi people, To practice my modeling skills with Houdini, I am building the "FireFly/Serenity" ship. I am using 3DPalace's tutorial, (As I am a 3ds Max user) and I need to build some ablative plating around the mid-section of the thruster. In 3ds you can choose certain polygons, and detach them as a clone, so you can model directly from the spot you detached them from. Is there a way of doing something similar in Houdini? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevenong Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 Can't you select the Polygon & start PolyExtruding? Or am I missing something? Cheers! steven Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GallenWolf Posted May 17, 2007 Share Posted May 17, 2007 (edited) Hey, Max user here too. You will just simply need to branch off a delete sop, then merge it back. I've included a file :-) Regards, Alvin PS: Nice engine! DetachPoly.hip Edited May 17, 2007 by GallenWolf Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragupasta Posted May 18, 2007 Author Share Posted May 18, 2007 stevenong: I want to keep the plating as a separate mesh for the time being, as it will be easier to unwrap. Thats also an area of Houdini which I can see being fun to learn GallenWolf: Cheers man, I shall look over your file once I finish work! Thanks guys! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragupasta Posted May 18, 2007 Author Share Posted May 18, 2007 (edited) GallenWolf: Thanks for your effort in making the file. Not quite the effect I was looking for, but I figured a way of doing it by modifing the way you showed me. I have attached the file, for you to look at. Also another reason why I want the plating separate, is in case I animate this, and the story board requests that a piece falls off, so its really about planning early, in case of a "What if?" scenario. Thanks again guys. Ablative_Plating.hipnc Edited May 18, 2007 by ragupasta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted May 18, 2007 Share Posted May 18, 2007 how about this: Ablative_Plating2.hipnc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragupasta Posted May 18, 2007 Author Share Posted May 18, 2007 (edited) how about this:Ablative_Plating2.hipnc Ha, ha. Thats exactly the same method as I have done, but kept the plates flat to the sides. Thanks a lot guys, this forum rocks!! Can't you select the Polygon & start PolyExtruding? Or am I missing something? I hope by seeing a render, you understand a little better, what I am trying to achieve. Here is the thruster file, so If you guys want to take a look over it and weed out any area's of my workflow that can be optimised, then please do. Thanks, Ragu 009.Firefly_Thruster.hipnc Edited May 18, 2007 by ragupasta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
old school Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 I'm not a max user but did a few box up model tuts by max modellers. Because of this I built a few model tools. One of them is the old "solid" tool. I know they renamed it. Maybe I should as well... It uses bind selectors so just tab-solid, select your faces and rmb. There's an option to keep the original geometry around or not. I'd love feedback to improve it! solid.otl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sibarrick Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Maybe there should be an option not to remove the choosen faces from the original geometry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragupasta Posted May 19, 2007 Author Share Posted May 19, 2007 (edited) I'm not a max user but did a few box up model tuts by max modellers. Because of this I built a few model tools. One of them is the old "solid" tool. I know they renamed it. Maybe I should as well...It uses bind selectors so just tab-solid, select your faces and rmb. There's an option to keep the original geometry around or not. I'd love feedback to improve it! solid.otl That OTL works perfectly. The bonus to this, is that you have only the new created geometry to play with. If you do the delete sop way, you have to translate the copied geometry, if you need to polycap the rear and refine a few polysplits in there, then translate it back, so you can see what you are doing. Thanks again for this OTL, as I tend to detach polys and model directly from there, as its easier than creating new geometry, and fiddling about placing where it needs to be. Maybe there should be an option not to remove the choosen faces from the original geometry. Im not sure I follow you. The solid sop does not remove the faces it uses, as I have attached a x-form to the end, and translated it across, and the geometry is still there. However if you are talking about the thruster file, then I need to use a fuse sop, on the originally used faces to make the mesh whole again. But having said that, Im going to delete the plating, and re-make them using this solid sop, as It holds much better results. I am attaching the solid sop test file, and if you alter the transform, you will see that no faces are removed, (if you indeed are talking about the solid sop). old school: From what I have seen, I dont think there are any imrovements needed, however once I use it more and in different situations, then there might be some level of improvement. If so, I shall let you know. Thanks again. SolidSop_Test.hipnc EDIT:That solid sop, is way better, as you can see here. Much more uniform, and less tweakery.... Edited May 19, 2007 by ragupasta Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sibarrick Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Im not sure I follow you. The solid sop does not remove the faces it uses, as I have attached a x-form to the end, and translated it across, and the geometry is still there. If you look inside the otl you should see a delete sop on its own on the left side of the network - it deletes the group that you supply as input. Obviously in most cases this doesn't matter because the created solid then fills the whole - but with a polygon with a normal flip round. If you then seperate the solid from the rest of the geometry then you will see the hole. Its possible that you may need to do a cookie or something later on in the chain and having holes in the base geometry might cause issues, so having an option to bypass that delete sop might be useful. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ragupasta Posted May 19, 2007 Author Share Posted May 19, 2007 sibarrick: I didnt think to look inside the tool. Thanks for the heads-up man. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sibarrick Posted May 19, 2007 Share Posted May 19, 2007 Always check under the hood Its a great way to learn. 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.