Jump to content


  • Content count

  • Donations

    0.00 CAD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

1 Neutral

About Jaanus

  • Rank

Personal Information

  • Name
  1. Thank You! I will go through what You have suggested. I have seen the linked panel aswell, didn't remember there being a mention of using Houdini for audio in this one, but perhaps I'm just misremembering and merging two different videos in my head. The video I thought it was in, doesn't seem to be the one, so perhaps this is indeed it. Anyway thank You!
  2. Thank You! This was a very helpful response indeed. Although the size calculation doesn't work for me for some reason yet, although triple-checked the spelling (will probably give a go at finding a fix myself later), Your solution to my main question indeed was straightworward and a lot more elegant than any route I thought I would have to go through. In addition You gave me some ideas on how to tackle some other problems in the future. Thank You!
  3. Hello, I decided to have a go with this question. Anyway the basis is that in a video about learning Houdini, which for some reason I am not able to locate at the moment, it was almost casually noted that one of the talkers has used Houdini for generating music. In an imaginative fellow I sometimes tend to be, interested in weird new ways to use tools and, as perhaps Moritz from Entagma would say, abuse them, this small remark sparked huge ideas in my head about all the possibilities. I imagined an undiscovered area of Houdini, where You can do with notes, tones and audio samples similar things to what You can do with pixels, colors and points in a 3D space, in most other areas of Houdini. I imagined being able to place audio sources in 3D space, place microphones as You do cameras and run audio simulations where one sound (or a simulated band member) sends out audio waves and these react to the environment and preset material properties (audio waves reflect different from surfaces with different properties). One could make different sounding accoustic rooms, made of simulated wood, tin, or other materials, You can create sounds by making wind pass through tight areas in 3D space. Obviously I was sure that it was quite inplausible that an area this complex could have been hidden in Houdini without getting much attention. Yes, indeed, I could find almost no other mention of using Houdini to generate music, atleast outside of Houdini docs, it is sometimes taught to be used to make things happen based on audiowaves (3d objects move, things change colour), but no tutorials in sight of building great node-based procedural audio generation trees with the output designed to be audio-files, rather than images. In Houdini docs however I have found tools that seem to be precisely meant for some such use. The Beat CHOP: http://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/nodes/chop/beat.html The Record CHOP: http://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/nodes/chop/record.html The Spatial Audio CHOP: http://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/nodes/chop/spatial.html The Acoustic CHOP: http://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/nodes/chop/acoustic.html The Voice Split CHOP: http://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/nodes/chop/voicesplit.html The Voice Sync CHOP: http://www.sidefx.com/docs/houdini/nodes/chop/voicesync.html So, does anyone know of any tutorials on how to use Houdini in this way, or perhaps could hint at some programs, similar to Houdini (procedural, node-based), but aimed more specifically at dealing with audio? Admittedly I know close to nothing about generating music on computers, the traditional way. Perhaps there are a lot of people making sound effects and music this way and it is a common practice, just haven't found a right way into that area of knowledge. I have found a post on Fractal Forums about some programs similar to what I'm hoping to find, however. Music generated this way seems to be called generative music. http://www.fractalforums.com/fractal-music/fractal-and-generative-music-software-list/ So anyone share my enthusiasm for finding out ways to do something like that or have some knowledge to share on mentioned practices, other programs?
  4. Hi, I have quite a specific question. What would be a good and straightforward way to make a grid's divisions and aspect ratio depend on an image I am to use in an Attribute from Map SOP to color it? My aim at the moment is a HDA that let's the user choose an image from the hard drive, adds it's colors to the grid and calculates the divisions of that grid and the aspect ratio of that grid based on the image. Currently it seems to me I have to jump through using either Python, COPs context or VEX shader context, although it seems like something that perhaps is somehow still doable in only SOPs and VEX/VOPs. I don't have nothing against doing it in COPs, shader VOPs or Python, I just haven't thought of a straightforward way to get information from one of these areas to SOPs. Under shader VOPs there is a Resolution node that should give these numbers perhaps in the most straightforward way, and there are the COP specific VEX functions ixres and iyres and inputs in the COP VOP node, but at the moment the way VEX and VOPs work in COPs seems different enough from SOPs that I haven't found out a good way to get these numbers into SOPs. Same problem with using Python node in SOPs. Any ideas on how best to tackle this?
  5. Houdini 18 Wishlist

    I haven't read through all of the of the newer comments, but if it hasn't been mentioned, I think this new three-inputs-three-outputs node structure would be great for the rigging workflow. It would mean having to move some of the things thus far done on the object level to geometry level, but I personally imagine a single node structure with separate streams for say the geometry, bones, and capturing geometry could offer benefits compared to the workflow now.
  6. Houdini 18 Wishlist

    Thank You, Paolo for the answer and super thanks to Ben for offering the solver! I will definitely give it a go. I do sort of think I understand the nature of Houdini by now, but also think the creators' new way of offering presets and easier one-button/one-node solutions to complex ideas/workflows is positive not only in a way it makes the program easier to learn and more exciting to new users, but also by giving a speed-boost to new ideas and solutions developing inside the community. I think I have learned Houdini to a degree where, although I am far from being an expert at anything yet, I do get a somewhat superior feel and begin to feel I would benefit if the program remained somewhat inaccessible to outsiders, sort of a secret society, where to get in to, one would have to really sweat. Because I have the will to do it and I've done it to a degree already. Perhaps I'm just weird in feeling that, but I think it's somewhat normal and understandable and good for the community if it remained that way to a degree. However, scientifically speaking, whenever processes are made shorter and more intuitive, both workflows and the generation of new ideas becomes faster. The creators didn't have to give Vellum presets for hair, balloons, cloth, for the hard-core users to appreciate this new tool, but I think that by doing that they also benefited those hard-core users, same as with all the other such moves in the program (material-based fracturing system, specialised attribute noise node), by helping them do some things in a faster, more streamlined/automated way, allowed for development of new ideas and options to reach new heights. By a growth-solver, growth nodes, growth presets-tab I mean exactly that - a shorter more streamlined way of doing things that are already perfectly doable in the program. People with stronger will will still go under the hood and create systems that novice users will have to sweat for months trying to wrap their head around, but perhaps on a new level and by having gotten some fresh new ideas on the way. I don't doubt that when people start using these tools making things that mimic what Anastasia Opara, Ben Watts, Matt from CGWiki, and a few others are creating today, Anastasia, Ben and Matt will already be propelled to new heights by ideas these tools might have helped spark. Alright, as an end note I will have to admit that I am still on Houdini Apprentice (most of the free money going for tutorials) and because of the limitation of use between versions, haven't yet gotten into building my own tool set with HDAs, and am probably doing much more of the "building from scratch every time" than I would if I were actually using the program professionally. I definitely benefit from the repetition in my learning, but perhaps this request would have lost some of it's meaning to me personally once I actually get the hang of what these tools offer, however by the point of benefiting the community I would probably still stand by, same as for, say, a specialised lightning/electricity tool set.
  7. Houdini 18 Wishlist

    Ok, have read a lot of great tips on these forums, this is my first actual post. I don't know if it's a good tactic to start by wishing something new and more, but seeing people generating future possibilities always makes me want to contribute. I would second many ideas already mentioned ( reworked file browser, a faster - perhaps gpu-based renderer), but to add something new, my biggest wish would probably be a dedicated growth-solver and/or growth effects toolbar. I do think L-System and SOP-solver contain concepts and potential that hasn't seen it's fair share of attention from SideFX. The Cinema 4D particle plugin X-Particles has started to give the growth-effects side of particle effects some attention, but probably SideFX could make something truly unique and powerful to gain again some new ground in this territory and give Insydium a run for their money. I suppose a "growth solver" or a "growth effects" tab or a set of presets as such could take multiple intriguing forms, but my own over-ambitious imagination envisions a tool-set that would somehow allow the creation of both natural growths (trees and other plants, infections) and abstract shapes. The SOP-Solver is obviously really powerful and one could still do awesome things with L-Systems if he/she really took the time to learn it in depth, but to me these tools lack some of the excitement they should have. Ease of use looks like something SideFX has started to place value on and not having to make new users necessarily reinvent the wheel everytime. A dedicated button "grow inside" or "grow out of" would go a long way on that road, I'd think, especially if one could add nodes that define whether the growth attaches to a surface, avoids a surface or a force, changes it's behaviour based on the availability of light or space, or perhaps even if some simulation activity is happening inside it's vicinity, - imagine a growth slowing down or changing it's direction, based on whether something is moving, be it a character or some destruction simulation, all through some dedicated and well thought-out workflows. That is an area I'd really love to see some developments made in and it's one in which Houdini has quite a good base for reaching new ground in, compared to other packages. It atleast seems that way to me. As a second idea, I'd probably love to see something similar to Blender's Grease Pencil integrated.