dyei nightmare Posted February 21, 2010 Share Posted February 21, 2010 is not that i were a deserter, i love houdini, but, softimages ice system, make the whole houdini package in a nervous shiver... or shakes... i dunno... start to fear autodesk. for your eye candy pleasure... amazing fire like liquid: liquid flame: http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/6484086 not bad rdb: respect for emfluid: http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/7680337 exelent particle control: http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/3394211 http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/6126378 http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/7014340 poligonizer: http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/7014340 http://vimeo.com/groups/ice/videos/5798346 but the most worrying thing about this, is that ice particles are pretty damn fast to solve... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxrod Posted February 21, 2010 Share Posted February 21, 2010 It's pretty darn fast from what I understand, as well. Side FX can step it up, though! It has to! Speed, speed, speed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jason Posted February 21, 2010 Share Posted February 21, 2010 From what I understand, one of SESI's main goals for the future is to get Houdini as fast as possible. I looked at some of those ICE movies and yup, it's fast to solve -- but the a lot of the functionality is right there in Houdini, just spread out amongst many contexts-- rather than being integrated into a single context like ICE is. A couple of HDAs could duplicate many of those ICE Compounds very very easily -- the particle control, the treetastic, particle flame, easy peasy. I believe anyone keen of experimentation could emulate many of these ICE movies in Houdini without too much hassle. There are, of course, differences in the solvers and such but much of this could be done "easily". We should try it! Anyone keen on making some attempts? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Macha Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 They are good but mostly because of design not because some special feature Houdini is lacking. I'm sure most of these can be done straighforwardly in Houdini. In fact, I'm gonna have a go at it myself now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanostol Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 i don't fear autodesk, as long as they don't pull their wallet ice is good, but it compares quite well to vex. of course it is fast as hell, but sometime You struggle with very nasty things. for example there are no subframes in ice simulations. it makes some simulation stuff quite messy, when You have to play with framerates to compensate. I don't want to compare as You can not compare them, both packages have pros and cons. but houdini offers a very mature and robust system and I think, I can remember some statements, that speed is one of sidefx next main targets. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratman Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 Guilluame already did a pretty good comparison: http://frenchdog.wordpress.com/2009/09/12/ice-vs-vop/ As for ICE vs Houdini shenanigans. The main issue from this is that ICE was developed in the last 3 years or so, built from the ground up to be fast and very well optimised. While I'm sure a lot of the same libraries and headers for this in Houdini are much older and very much single threaded. I know there is a big push in SESI for working on the speed of Houdini, so it's going to be interesting to see what speed ups they can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
0rr Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 [...], that speed is one of sidefx next main targets. I really hope so. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
symek Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 (edited) is not that i were a deserter, i love houdini, but, softimages ice system, make the whole houdini package in a nervous shiver... or shakes... i dunno... start to fear autodesk. for your eye candy pleasure... Why say deserting? Use it, stop watching funboy movies. Fill the difference . Nicer, prettier, faster, easier, fully documented, mulithreaded, less controllable, less renderable, less versatile, non-multiparform, unrenderfarmable, unmanagable, hardly bakable, damn hard scriptable, faster, much faster..., tons of users and examples. Xsi has always attracted lots of fine artists, while Houdini is chosen mostly by Tds with minor and glorious exceptions. This also makes a difference. Besides that, I don't see anything that can't be done in vanilla Houdini easily (unlike ICE which still needs plugins, em*?). ps I really like Softimage Edited February 22, 2010 by SYmek Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abvfx Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 ...unrenderfarmable That's my new favourite word. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fxrod Posted February 22, 2010 Share Posted February 22, 2010 I think Houdini's strength lies in the open and low-level functionality that it allows access to. This is analogous to giving the user subatomic particles that have to then be combined to form molecules. Although many other packages make it easier to ramp up by providing molecules already prebuilt, access to the subatomic areas is much more cumbersome. It's not just speed. It's also the way that ICE is presented. Houdini has a way of dumping a toolbox in front of it's users and letting them sort it out. Much more freedom, but a more limited set of users that are willing to work it out. Toolshelves are a good start, but they have a long way to go. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward Posted March 2, 2010 Share Posted March 2, 2010 BTW, can you create new geometry in ICE? If so, how do you do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanostol Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 right now ice does not allow You to create new geometry. You can only create new points. BTW, can you create new geometry in ICE? If so, how do you do that? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyei nightmare Posted March 7, 2010 Author Share Posted March 7, 2010 BTW, can you create new geometry in ICE? If so, how do you do that? with emPoligonizer... but nothing like the houdini-s polywire, skin, and such. but maybe in a near future they will make an aproach. http://www.mootzoid.com/html/XsiCorner/emPolygonizer.html#LayerTextExample6 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
edward Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 with emPoligonizer... but nothing like the houdini-s polywire, skin, and such. but maybe in a near future they will make an aproach. AFAICT, that's not an ICE operator. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ratman Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Yep, it's an operator, not an ICE operator. Right now ICE only supports the "creation" of points and ICE strands. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dyei nightmare Posted March 8, 2010 Author Share Posted March 8, 2010 Yep, it's an operator, not an ICE operator. Right now ICE only supports the "creation" of points and ICE strands. yes, in that aspect, ice is just for dinamics and particles, not surfaces, but it is doing pretty well in its own area. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.png.c5f1b40d5989833a9ee35bf4ef1155b4.png)
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.