Jump to content


Popular Content

Showing most liked content on 09/10/2018 in all areas

  1. 1 point
    To explicitly answer your question: Take your current volume, and place 3 "name" nodes, in each one link it to your current volume and name in the string parm "vel.x", "vel.y", "vel.z" -- place a merge, and combine your original volume, along with the 3 volumes that have been renamed. You'll now have your original volume, and 3 fields for vel. I think with more context though, there will be a better answer.
  2. 1 point
    Hey You could create a lens shader (http://mattebb.com/blog/weblog/houdini-fisheye-camera/) or then model your custom lens as an object. Here's a scene showing a sphere with a refracting material and soft edges acting as a mysterious ray bender. distortion_field.hip
  3. 1 point
    It would be great if I could select nodes with lasso selection
  4. 1 point
    A while ago .idx were ascii so you could do a lot of stuff with them, and then they made them binary... since then, the way as you describe is the only real method to copy. You can make some fancy python to wrap it up that method if you have a large library, but you still have very little control. This is certainly something SideFX needs to work on. I think they know about it, but certainly send them and RFE to of this as an example. They certainly need more poking on the subject.
  5. 1 point
    You can use the npoints vex expression, so: npoints(1)
  6. 1 point
    Cool - have to try it with Redshift as soon as the current job is done! :-) So far I always used this in the focus distance field: // Camera focus distance to a null called focus: vlength(vtorigin(".","../focus")) But it's a bit clumsy to navigate the null. Tom
  7. 1 point
    Hi. Let me chime in as this is a difficult topic but I also have first-hand experience. I´m not as experienced as Andrew in the industry, but I share with him that I was the sole Houdini instructor at FX Animation in Barcelona. I say "was" because I´m now working at MPC as FX TD (I´m leaving the Houdini program on the very capable hands of someone who has been working at MPC for the last 2 years, so it ain´t gonna stop at all). As you might know FX Animation program is also (along with Lost Boys and a few others) one of the VERY few certified by Side FX and you can check the work both in the reels and in Side Effects latest education reel where those works are very present with several projects and I have been consistently releasing Houdini reels from the school for the last 4 years. I´m going to begin stating something that Andrew and instructors from other schools might not like but it is 100% true and I have the data to back me up, and that is the country where you learn is what marks the main price difference. Of course, it would be absurd to try a debate on which program is better. And I´m 100% sure that Lost Boys Houdini program is awesome.The thing is, at our school in Barcelona I was making very similar employment numbers as those shown by Andrew just mainly in London instead of Canada or LA. (The main reason for this London placement being visas, which are difficult to get for America, while working in the EU is free for other EU citizens) Again this data is verifiable with actual names. When I got hired by MPC, 5 people working at the FX department had been my students, 2 of them the previous year so they went in directly from the school. They are now my work mates...how interesting can life get? BUT, and here comes the key difference, education in Spain is WAY cheaper than both London, Vancouver or LA, so our students payed about 20% of the numbers I´ve seen here related to Vancouver, and those London numbers look astronomical, since they are almost double to Barcelona´s program, but FX Animation program duration is 1 year (40 weeks). It´s not that those schools are overpriced. It´s that the economy of the country where you study dictates the price you pay for the education. Regarding "self-taugh vs school" I completely agree with Andrew in that the school gives you a head start and a huge support. It is perfectly possible to get into the industry being self-taught if you are organized and highly motivated, but it is harder (as with any other career choice, BTW). And above anything else and most importantly REEL REEL REEL. Your education should be deeper, but your job-hunting probabilities are as good as your reel. Before studying anywhere check the students reels. Period.
  8. 1 point
    Hi all! I've been alerted to this thread and suggested that I weigh in .. I've read the comments and everyone brings up great points, so it's not my intention to get in the middle of a vfx industry wage / tuition / rate war; but I'll try to be as unbiased and realistic as possible here. As some know I'm the sole Houdini / FX instructor at Lost Boys. I designed the curriculum about three years ago and it's taken off. I'm self taught personally, so I fully agree that it's possible to learn everything on your own and do well at less cost. I do believe the number Lost Boys asks is a fair amount and below is my reasoning. I'm welcome to debate and disagreement and if need be lets come up with some alternatives that work for the majority of people out there. 1. Self taught vs. school. Even though I did quite well being self taught .. my demo reel was all over the place. I didn't know what areas to focus on, my own strengths/weaknesses, industry norms and techniques, or have a set routine. I didn't have a strong mentor. I had to maintain all of my own hardware, and I had no support from peers. In my FX program the student has a completely immersive and supportive environment to learn in. We have highly regimented projects. We have dailies; personalised lectures, and the pupil is told how to hone shots for maximum effectiveness. The hours are FULL TIME .. from 10am-5:30pm every day. Not a night class twice a week .. it's like studying a foreign language in it's own country. I firmly believe that a year of immersive study in a supportive and structured environment like this saves lots of time. It pushes a student's skills farther than they realistically could on their own. In general our demographic is about half students, and half up-skilling professionals. They will generally up thier level in a year; and this could take years on the job or at home .. meaning; Student to Junior .. Junior to Mid ... Mid to Senior. You'll notice a consistency in the projects from our FX Demo and the industry has responded very well to them. 2. Cost of tuition. a. $41 is a lot of money. However, check out our competitors .. I'd assert that our tuition is below average. If you look at the instruction hours, it's reasonable. This is simply the cost of doing business and staying competitive. My classes are only 7 students maximum with one group overlap; and they have myself, and my assistant full time for a full year. If a student is successfully placed as a Junior they both have a profitable career after only a year, and if frugal can probably make back the tuition soon. I know that my university education was far more, and I had way less job potential at the end of it. Took me years to justify the cost of it. Going to a low end tech school might have us pay almost as much money, waste time, and then have zero useful skills at the end of it. $41 Gives our students an incredible year, a job at the end if they work hard, and full time instruction providing a strong technical and artistic base for their rest of their career. b. What is the real value of school? It's true that there's now an almost unlimited set of resources available to learn the software. I don't teach the software. I take my students camping to study fire and water. We break stuff to study fractures. I teach low level vector and matrix math, and often give physical or drawn examples of how these principals work. We work on group projects in tandem with plates and the compositing students to develop real studio skills. I have one on one conversations with my students as they struggle, ask questions, try to understand advanced artistic and shotwork concepts. I teach problem solving, and develop their eyes .. Houdini is great; but it's a tool to get there .. not a means in and of itself. The students will develop their own styles that will let them be seniors someday learning it the traditional way (from Senior to Junior) on real projects .. a case by case basis, just like at a studio. I firmly believe I give my students a better education than I've ever had; My education was from seniors at the studios I worked with and it was in a stressful environment, under the gun, production .. not a supportive school. I would have gotten farther faster if I'd have gone to a school like this for it. c. Honesty is crucial here guys. I'll admit that I make decent money teaching the program. Not as much as I'd be making if I would have chosen to stay in the industry as a senior FX artist or lead. But, close .. and this is a lifestyle choice I've made to better myself artistically. Many schools would choose to put profit into marketing and phony ads. Our two person ownership team (yes, only two people) put it into getting the best instructors, the best equipment and facilities, and the coolest projects. We shoot our own plates, we do many outdoor activities to further our learning, and we often have industry lectures as well. Our marketing is our alumni and testimonials. 3. Placement. This is generally a scam at many schools. At my program it isn't. Anyone who would disagree should do their homework and reach out to the full listing of alumni on this page. My alumni will probably say as they have told me that they were satisfied with their investment, and are successfully working on the job. So far out of my students I've had one that was not placed as an FX TD. The other 22 students were placed .. not as runners, two month gigs, or render wranglers .. but as FX TD's more often than not working on major movies with Houdini. Here's the facts: (63%) Juniors (14%) Mids (4%) Seniors (4%) Placed in an equivalent job, then career change (4%) Unplaced To add to this, once placed they have generally progressed quicker than most people in no small part due to their solid foundations in the art and science of FX work. Thanks for reading, that was my completely biased opinion and I'd welcome discussion .. ok gotta get back and teach